MicMan's page

I am describing my judging process to help you understand what goes on during the minute that you have my attention.

Hopefully this will allow you to compare this to your own and likely discover how different people can be.

I fully expect others to chime in sharing their own methods which would help setting priorities especially to novice submitters.

So without further delay:

Phase A: First Contact
There they are, two shiny new creations, but which to skim over first?

This is actually an important question because the first item I skim over is the one with a head start. If that item wins me somehow (more on this later), the second one must be better to regain momentum.

But what can you do to let me read your item first? Well, that much is easy. I read the titles of both and the title that seems more promising in an evocative and slightly mysterious way usually gets me. The exception is the very concise title that promises something thematically fitting, yet still interesting.

If none of this can be applied to both titles I skim over the shorter entry first.

Phase B: the skimming
Well, I have to admit I do NOT read new entries, I skim the text to find out the EFFECT as I am an effect junkie!

And now for the SHOCKING TRUTH:
The effects of almost all items can be described in one sentence. Period.

If you are using more than one sentence, think WHY. Do you use your precious words because you want to cover every single if and when? If yes, you risk cloaking an uninteresting effect in explanations, which is bad. Your effect must stand alone and be cool. Identify the absolutely necessary specifics and nothing else. I don't want to read that your boots only work when being worn.

The best effects are the ones that let me think "oh, I ALSO could use this to do that" even after I thought about the effect the third time your item came up.

Phase C: skim deep
OK, your item won me over once or twice against bad items on its effect alone but now its up against some serious competition. So I now look after not only what your items does but also how it does it!

And, yes, up to this time I don't care whether your item confuses your opponents with butterflies or with cucumbers. This comes now.

Be evocative and, above all, use fitting fluff. "Arrows of healing" that you must fire at your allies make for some nice very long range healing effect, but here the fluff simply does not fit, regardless of any wordy explanation you tack on.

Also don't be too obvious. Candles that shed light are fitting but are also boring. Some types of items are limited, such like scabbards, scroll tubes and quivers, and thus my attitude towards another "Scabbard of Storing" is usually very bad.

This also is the place to judge the balancing. This is a funny one. During the first contests the trend was to under balance items, many were very powerful and even game breaking. Now the opposite is true more often than not. Either the effect is underwhelming or it is overbalanced. Imho it is much better to shoot for the stars than to play it safe here. Playing it safe will 100% not get you anywhere, shooting for the stars, if done right, will.

Phase D: you really got me now
Congratulations, your item is good (imho). It has a crisp description of an exciting effect that offers something to the reader even on the second or third pass. It is balanced and the fluff fits and isn't overdone.

I will now, and only now, read it word by word. Only now will I pay attention to the pricing, aura, caster level and to other details. This is (imho) superstar level, the only question left is just how superstar it is.

Disclaimer
As already mentioned, this is how I judge. It is NOT how everyone should judge, it is not even the best way to judge, it is just the way that I like best.

I am a recent WoT addict. Being interested in WW2 stuff since I was 10 I checked the game over a year ago but wasn't hooked. They pimped it since then and also added fairer matchmaking (you can't be paired with much more powerful/weaker tanks now) and this got me hooked, to say the least.

Finding a game in random is very fast (usually under 5s), random is often chaotic, sometimes your team has an unspoken coordination that makes you grin and waste the opponents like no tomorrow, and sometimes you just get rolled. The various tanks are quite different to play and even similar tanks have enough differences to like one and hate the other. The difficulty level raises steadily from tier 1 to tier 10, just as it should be. The balance is pretty good, mostly.

So how does MWO compare to WoT?

We play Minecraft on and off since Beta and it is always the same: When you start a new world you struggle to get you little base going but as soon as this has been accomplished after a few days and you build your first few vanity structures the game looses it's appeal.

So does anyone know a game that is like minecraft (multiplayer) only with a little bit more long time engagement?

PFO is compared to EvE a lot and not without reason.

An integral part of EvEs legend are massive battle between alliances in which hundreds of players take part.

Now in EvE this works because what you see of the opponents are mostly just little white dots because most of the battles are fought at very long ranges and thus your video card hasn't all that much to render.

But in a classical fantasy MMO you will usually have a lot of people in all their splendid gear up close and personal.

Will that work without lag/slow down?

My wive always plays Rogues, always for now over 15 years.

She also always complains when I (the GM) do more than one encounter every few gamedays because "Rogues suck in combat".

So I proposed to her a Fighter/Rogue and she has been pleased so far with the results, being able to do Rogueish things like Stealth and Disable Device and still pack a good punch in combat.

So now there seems to be the time to add a little extra and this leads me to my question:

Apart from the options presented in Core and APG, are there any clever archetypes or prestige classes from sources like Ultimate Combat for a Human Rogue 4 / Fighter 4 that expand the "tough Rogue" kind of play? Because I am the GM and my wive hardly ever optimizes all the characters powers and abilities, I have no problems to add on features that, going by the rules, would have to be added from the beginning.

Thanks for your answers, I simply do not have time at the moment to look over all the sources and thus I appreciate all feedback.

...of item types.

Most of the items can be grouped into various item types. Only a select few stand out, though not always in a good way.

So here are my personal top3 lists of item types:

A) "LoL, wut" items

B) Fotm items

C) Imagine

D) Stars will show

...are the ones that actually start with a novel and well presented idea only to deteriorate because of a single badly thought out aspect near the end (most often by being horridly OPed or wholly unusable).

I now had my third item of this sort in over 10 hours of voting and it drives me nuts every time.

How will this be handled in PFO?

Will only very few classes be able to heal "well" and do these classes need to skill deep into the corresponding trees for this to balance the power of the heals?

Will most PvE encounters suppose that there is powerful in combat healing available?

Will a dedicated healer be able to counter the damage of two dedicated damage dealers?

Forgive me for being sentimental.

I watched the trailer and the scene with the carshing tower reminded me of the best days I had in the MMO DAoC in which PvP played a central role.

For all who care:
Youtube footage of a PvP fight on our Server Lyonesse/Germany back in 2004
(ps: the music is from the old german power metal band Freedom Call)

Old Trailer

My search fu has so far failed. Does anybody know if there is such thing as an Adventure Path (or a single Module) that has been written for eeeeeevil PCs?

Thanks for the info.

Hello,

we are a group of 5 male and female gamers in the fourties who game together for over 20 years.

We play roughly every two weeks. Our style is a little bit on the roll-playing side, which means we don't do in character roleplay all that much.

We seek two likeminded players (a couple would be nice but not mandatory) in the area because RL prevents two of out members from participating regulary.

Please PM me if you are interested.

Thanks a lot.

-----------------------------
Hallo,

wir sind eine Fünfer-Gruppe aus Spielern und Spielerinnen im Alter von um die 40 jahre, die nun seit über 20 Jahren zusammen spielt.

Zur Zeit spielen wir ungefähr alle zwei Wochen. Unser Stil ist etwas mehr "roll-playing", was bedeutet, dass wir weniger Wert auf das in-character Rollenspiel legen.

Da zur Zeit zwei Mitspieler nur sehr unregelmäßig teilnehmen können, würden wir zwei neue Mitspieler/Innen suchen (idealerweise ein Paar, muss aber nicht sein).

Bei Interesse schickt mir einfach eine PM, ich antworte dann umgehend.

Vielen Dank.

This has been discussed at other boards for other games (even for D&D 3e-4e) so it is nothing new except that it seems to be not common knowledge on these boards.

There is a huge difference about the two fundamental types of PvP interaction being called PvP as War and PvP as Sports.

So whats the difference and what could this mean for PFO?

PvP as Sports
This mode is in use in almost all of the current classic fantasy MMOs. Examples are WoW, SW:TOR, Guildwars and also Rifts and Aion to a high degree.

PvP as sports means that PvP should be "fair" and the outcome of the battle should be decided mainly through the "skill" of the participants with "gear" be only a second factor and "level" and especially "numbers" being none. Arenas and Battlegrounds are the main locations where this type of PvP is found and it is currently widely accepted that this is the "best" (sometimes even the "only") mode of PvP.

PvP as War
In love and in war anything goes.
Yes, indeed. PvP as War was the prime methode of PvP back in the old days. Prime Examples are Ultima and Dark Age of Camelot. The idea is that, just as life, PvP isn't "fair". The outcome is often (but not always) decided beforehand. Sun Tzu is credited with many quotations that say just that: In war you should always try to win the battle before the first blows are traded.

In an MMO this usually means that you try to win through superior skill, numbers, gear and/or organisation/communication.

If you confront someone (especially someone from the western hemisphere) with both concepts for a game, then the vast majority is in favor of PvP as Sports. This is because "fairness" is highly valued despite the fact that it is ultimately delusional!

Delusional?! What does that mean?

Well, PvP as Sports was mainly integrated to avoid frustration, but it also ment that much of the thrill was lost as well!

You can do about 20 arena matches a day in WoW easily. Will each match be something to be remembered? Surely not, but will even ONE be memorable? Alas the answer is no as well (unless you are in the e-sports cycles and compete for the world championship or the like).

War as Sports is an endless series of flatlined fun and as such, ultimately shallow.

So what style will PFO have?

I guess that PFO will have the guts to actually bring back PvP as War. This means that there will be people that will complain about how unfair this all is. On the other hand there will be people who are exhilarated by a battle well fought, by an seemingly unsurmountable opposition being overcome - sometimes.

A good example from my times in DAoC:

I hope you see that there is a place for this mode of PvP and that without risk there is no reward.

Back in the times when Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMO) where called Massively Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Games (MMORPG) this moniker had a meaning that is, sadly, now completely lost.

Back then playing with and against other people from possibly all over the world was a radically new form of online entertainment and was hailed as the future of electronic gaming.

This has certainly come true, but not in the sense of how it was ment back then.

Why is that, you may ask.

Well, as MMORPGs started to get popular many people flocked to them in the hopes of experiencing new levels of interesting entertainment. A game that not only is gamey but that is also social.

This dream was often put to a harsh test by a fact that Scott Adams described in words better than I ever could:

"People are idiots."

That was a huuuge let down for players and sales figure analysts alike.

The solution was simple: games would be soloable and player interaction heavily restricted or downright unnecessary.

So welcome to the age where the term MMO really has no meaning any more as Diablo III and Minecraft are just as much MMOs as WoW or SW:TOR or Guildwars.

I dearly hope that PFO will bring the MMO feeling back by:
- giving reasons to interact with many different people
- giving reasons to build a strong community with many people
- refraining from fracturing this community out of purely technical reasons (instancing)
- refraining from fracturing the community by allowing "casual solo play" to be nearly as viable in all aspects as group/guild play

"maritime wealth redistribution experts"

That just made my day, thank you :)

Now it's hard to decide what AP to start after we finish Kingmaker, Pirates or Samurai?

Seriously, I very much like most of Monte Cooks work. I see the possibility that 5e will be something that I like (old school, as you migth have guessed).

But as far as I read, 5e will, again, not be backwards compatible to 4e so WoTC now has 2 editions in a row that leaves their fans with a bunch of useless stuff and I will not buy a game from a company that does that repeatedly, even if it is a good game.

So unless 5e turns out to be the best thing since sliced bread I will wait till 6e releases as a streamlined cooler backwards compatible version of 5e.

Are there any Pathfinder Rules for adventuring in the Ethereal Plane and if yes, which books have them?

MMOs have been hailed as THE new play experience a few years ago when WoW had been released and been a smash hit. But now the market has been flooded with a plethora of look alike clones and is in steep decline.

Soo, what are the problems of MMOs today that PFO should strive to overcome and thus create the next milestone in MMO history?

1. The new vs the tried and tested
There have been very few milestones in (western) MMO history. Ultima Online for most of it, Everyquest for raids and instancing, Dark Age of Camelot for Realm vs Realm combat and thats about it.

Back then these games were made by people with a vision but now, that MMOs have become the most expensive way to create a game, all that seems left is to try and mimize risks by producing another WoW clone.

This will not fly any more. Even titanic licensing brands like Star Wars seem unable to create enough buzz when it is obvious that the game will be same old, same old.

So Pathfinder should take the risk and really tread new ways. The market seems ripe for it.

2. I want to have an impact
If you share the world with thousands of other players, how can you have an impact in any way?

This is the crux of MMOs, you can't really influence your world. Pathfinder seems to go in a bold direction here where at least groups of individuals can build something lasting and needed.

3. This is an MMO - as in Massively Multiplayer
One word - instancing and auction houses. Ok, two words. And random group finders - ok, ok, three words...

The modern MMOs try to avoid MM more and more and grow into MSO, as in Multiplayer Solitaire. If you do not want it, you can play the game and never know more than maybe 5 people in it.

What sounds like a cool option is actually crippling to THE one thing the MMOs have before every other game, a community.

An MMO is only a true MMO when it has the guts to support the building of a great community aka realm pride. Even if this comes at the price of not being very solo friendly - which would only fit, because D&D is not very solo friendly either.

4. Time is cash, time is money
A great problem that plagues all existing MMOs - how do you combine players that play 4 hours a week with players that play 12 hours a day in a game where playing time > all?

Want that cool Sword? Well, drop chance is 0.01% and each run takes about 4 hours - unless you wait till next patch when everything is nerfed down and each run takes only 15 minutes, but then the cool Sword is actually weak against the new cool Sword.

Whats epic today is worthless tomorrow and the only challenge is how often someone can stand the ordeal to do the same things over and over and over in the shortest period of time to receive the reward to show off.

This one is hard to solve. Servers, where everything takes much less time but playing excessively is impossible seems a solution.

5. Bring me 5 rat tails
Yeah, it's famous and astounding what people will do to satisfy their sense of archievement.

The basics of each and every MMO today are: go there, kill/find NPC/material x and hope you are lucky and the things you want drop/are created. If not, do it again, and again, and again, and again. End of game.

Pen and paper is (usually) so much richer than that. How do you transport this into an MMO?

Well, instead of fixed quests there could be some sort of scripted events. Maybe even a script module for third party publishers to create "adventures" with. If PFO could make something like this work, it would be a truely unique game.

6. Level > all
You found a guild and some friends to play with - but you are away for three weeks. Alas your friends are all 10th Level while you are Level 5 and thus you can't play with them any more.

Will PFO will be the game where Levels and Equipment doesn't matter that much? Where Level isn't greater all and the "real" game only starts at maximum level leaving the "low level zones" a barren wasteland after a few months?

7. And finally: world (and community) death aka avoid the hype!
Many new MMOs suffer from a very strong start and a fast decline in players. This causes all sorts of problems and the biggest is empty "worlds" that need to be merged with other worlds which in turn creates all kind of imbalances and shatters the very important community on these worlds.

Will PFO be the game that avoids some, most or even all the things that plague MMOs today? Well, we'll probably see in a few years.

Let's take a look at Paizos own Adventures. Skills that do not offer themselves from a rules pov (such as the allmighty Perception but also UMD, Swimming and other "mechanic skills") are seldom mentioned in their adventures and it is also never mandatory to pass such a skill to suceed in the adventure.

Also if faced with the dilemma that your players all rolled low on their knowledge xyz rolls - do you withhold crucial information, do you hide an elaborate plot that you wanted to tell them? Do you find it easy to break up information they need in order to justify telling them at least something on a mediocre roll?

So isn't it detrimental to the game if you rely on fluff skill rolls instead of actually playing out the discovery of informations or simply giving it away if it is ment to be known?

There has been an outburst of topics using the terms "Optimiser", "Min-maxer", "Roleplayer" and "Rollplayer" regarding their various behavior during character generation and development and wether they are mutually exclusive or not.

However many people seem to use these terms rather differently and thus some fruitless discussions have cropped out.

So should we try and define the terms?

Like:

The Optimiser
The Optimiser tries to create a character that can fulfill it's role as best as possible when considering the game mechanics in dependancy to the characters historiy and standing. Will usually not use meta-gaming.

Example:
Creates a barbarian prince because it fits the story. Doesn't care if the GM seems to favor spellcasters before melee characters. Sells down Wisdom to gain high Strength but does not sell down Charisma as it wouldn't fit the concept.

The Min-maxer
Tries to create the best possible character considering the game mechanics and the meta-game. Stops at nothing to archieve this.

Example:
Would create a Wizard because he knows that the GM favors spell casters. Sells down Charisma because is isn't needed (someone else is the party face) and also sells down Strength because he knows the GM will not play with encumbrance rules. Nevertheless plays the Wizard as a charming, well build, good looking guy if the GM lets him.

The Roleplayer
Tries to capture the concept he envisions for the character as closely as possible without caring a lot for game mechanics powerwise. This *may* result in a sub-optimal character which the roleplayer may or may not be aware of.

Example:
May create a Barbarian Prince with average Strength and high Charisma because he has been "spoiled" by an elven mother that was abducted and later married by his father, so he still "suffers" the wild primal outburst of rage of his father but longs to become something more sophisticated some day (ie will take 3 Levels of Barbarian before the Adventure holds an opportunity for him to switch to Sorcerer).

The Rollplayer
Tries to build a character that is very good when it comes to producing high numbers in relevant situations (mostly combat) because that is what he likes best. This character may be very lopsided and has some weak, even crippling spots but absolutely rocks the table when it comes to his speciality.

Example:
A Wizard with extremely high Spellpenetration and Save DCs owning all the sos and sod spells from even the most obscure sources that the GM allows but that has low Strength and Charisma to pull this off despite the fact that the GM is penalizing this quite accurately.

---

Note that it is rare to find a player that lives one of these archetypes 100%. As with alignment (gasp, I said it) there are many grey areas and in between cases but stating "he is an optimiser so he can never be a roleplayer" is clearly not the case when using these definitions.

Your take on this?

During character generation for our next campaign a player switched from the long intended Human Witch to Human Oracle of Battle and thus caught me unprepared.

I proposed:
- Revelation: Skill at arms
- Feat: Extra Revelation: Weapon Mastery (Greatsword)

as I think these are pretty much no brainers for any close combat orientated Oracle of Battle.

But what comes now? I can't really decide between a few options (Battlecry, Improved Ini or the feat that noone mentioned so far)?

I am excited by a new group/campaign that I am GM'ing soon.

But there are problems:

1. Rules, what rules?
My group consists of 3 females that simply do not care much for the rules (and don't like long fights) because they "want to roleplay". The 3 males and another female have a good grip on the rules and are more or less ruleplayers (aka when does the next fight start and what magic items do we get).

2. Time, flowing like a river!
We meet once a week for about 4 hours and thats all the time that most of the players can/will spare. So while I have ample time to prepare adventures our actual playtime is pretty short awith 6-7 players.

3. Up, up and away!
Interestingly all 7 players care a lot for the progression of their characters. So E6 like systems won't fly as most would feel that their chars simply are not getting stronger in a meaningful way.

4. Thats just the way it is!
Splitting the group is out of question.

So I thought that maybe a system that is easier on the rules would be worth a try. As an avid D&D player and GM for almost 25 years i am a bit rusty on anything outside D&D/Pathfinder.

So here's my question:
Can you recommend a system that would work well with such a group?

Perception seems to outshine any other skill.

My assesment could be clouded by my own GM-style, but in all the adventure paths and all the rules outside crafting, Perception also is the most used/mentioned skill.

So while all of the other skills which are only used in very special circumstances (swim, fly) or as a users choice (Profession, Craft) are usually deemed optional almost everyone grabs Perception, class skill or not, because they know that this is where they will roll the dice most often.

So shouldn't Perception be handled like Initiative with an enhancing Feat and maybe a class inherent bonus for Rogues and Rangers instead of siphoning skill points away from more interesting "true" skills?

For anyone interested, a good read imo about the reasons why apparently some (many?) 3rdPP leave 4th for Pathfinder:

OpenLetter on Livindice

Superstar wrote:
Our Top 32 contestants have submitted their Round 2 alternate class concepts for use with Paizo's Pathfinder Roleplaying Game and judges Ryan Dancey, Sean K Reynolds, Mark Moreland and Neil Spicer have commented on each contestant's submission. Now you can read and critique the top 32, and then vote for your four favorites! The 16 designers garnering the most votes will continue on to Round 3 and the ultimate winner will earn a paid commission to write one of Paizo's upcoming Pathfinder Modules!

Emphasis mine.

Did I miss something because I thougth it was 8 votes in Round 2 or is the text a mixture of Round 2 and Round 3 informations?

I disallowed Druids for ages because I considered them horribly OPed.

Now, with Pathfinder, one player beseeched me into letting her play a Druid and (foolishly) I agreed.

With 25 point buy I feel that at Level 8 with slightly sub average equipment, the Druid is overshadowing the other chars at almost everything they do.

The great cat animal companion alone is doing more damage than the Rogue flanking or the Paladin. When she is in bear form the damage between her and her cat is even higher than that of the dedicated two-handed Fighter who really can't do anything else.

Now my experience with Druids is zero, so my question is:

how does this scale as the party progresses?

I can see us playing to about level 15 and I am inclined to put some restriction on the companion at least.

I am trying to sell to my wive a Bestial Totem Warrior Barbarian who works with the classic claw/claw/bite routine for a one shot adventure of 10th Level.

1/2 orc is quite perfect for this, but me suggesting to my wive to play an 1/2 orc will result in a dead me!

Tiefling could do it as well, but the vibes aren't much better on that.

So is there a more naturish race with a primary bite attack for pathfinder somewhere or am I am doomed to buy a secondary bite attack with a precious rage power?

shameless bump

The PHB states just before the list of possible animal companions that

The animal companions listed here are by no means

the only ones available—additional animal companion
types can be found in the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary. Some
of the special attacks and qualities possessed by animals
are covered in more detail there as well.

In our campaign there is a druid 6th that choose to take the Tiger (CR4 I think) straight out of the Bestiary and then applied the advancement track...

Needless to say that was quite powerful for level 6 (although I guess it would be only marginally stronger that an advanced level 7 great cat).

I now told her that she could take the Tiger but would not be allowed to advance him.

How have you handled that?

It seems to be a trend that developed lately - the inclusion of certain "as handwritten" fonts.

Examples are the genealogy on the front and back pages of Council of Thieves, the front and back pages of Kingmaker and last not least, the front and back pages of Smugglers Shiv.

These fonts are very hard to read - when viewing the PDF versions on an ereader "very hard" becomes "impossible".

So please, Paizo, stop using these fonts for something that can be easily read.

Thank you for your attention.

I would like to ask wether the Kobold Quarterly "Yearbooks" are obtainable through Paizo as PDFs.

Thanks a lot for your kind answer.

Whenever I see a Fighter build, Cleave / Great Cleave are listed as "must haves" and Vital Strike is sometimes also considered vital :)

However, as normal combat goes, I almost never have the chance to use either!

First Round is usually charge - so no Cleave and no Vital Strike.

Rounds after that are usually full attack actions which does more damage than Vital Strike (unless against very very high AC monsters that should be very rare) considering the fact that it is almost always better to kill one opponent instead of hurting two. If the opponent flees from me he usually is faster, so move + Vital Strike are not going to cut it, another charge must do.

The only situation in which both are good (and then only one or the other) is when I face many weak opponents that I can onehit with Cleave or onehit with Vital Strike - and in this case I would usually step aside to let the Wizard shine for once.

Grapple is in the same boat as Cleave and Vital Strike but it seems much stronger if you can pull it off and as such is much more useful to spend a Feat (Improved Grapple) for.

But Cleave and Vital Strike seem newbie traps - only really good if you violate some rules (Cleave+iterative attacks, charge+Vital Strike).

So what am I missing here?

I have a question regarding Reach Weapons (like the Glaive) and Attacks of Opportunity.

Let's say I did a charge and stopped 5' before the opponent and hit him with my Glaive.

Now, at his turn, he decides to move up to me.

Do I get an AoO with my Glaive?

He moves out of a square that I threaten but by doing so he enters a square that I can't attack with the Glaive. However I reckon I can because the AoO interrupts his movement.

So now he is adjacent to me and attcks me.

On my next turn I want to use Flyby Attack (feat from Bestiary). Can I take a 5' step and then fly by him in 5' distance to use my Glaive with flyby attack?

Thanks for your comments on this.

We are doing our anual D&D fun and crazy weekend and have switched to pathfinder for it.

This year it's Mephits from Pathfinder bestiary as Pc Races + ONE level of a class (even playtest classes would be ok).

Given the Mephits adjusts to attributes (-4 Int, +4 Dex, +2 Str/Con/Chr) a Wizard does not seem viable. Mephits are rather tough and usually can fly and have other nifty abilities that seem to go along well with some classes.

Sooo, what class would you play and why? I am especially interested in you assesment of the PHB2 playtest classes for this.

Thanks for your input.