|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
A free mode (not interfered with main campaign though you can choose to have the original campaign on as an opinion)with an open isometric world (like storm of zephir but with more realism instead of monsters spawing out of air, no real population growth/loss so caravans don't really matter, etc.) which player creates a character (or a party) and there would be random events happening to the world.
It would be great if it's moddable so all kinds of ideas could contribute to the (modded) gameplay. Adding festivals, adventure hooks, disaster, dynamic events that you or even npc (depending on the npc's strength or a country's national power, etc.) may have an impact on.
Samurai Champeloo? The main character is pretty much a *commoner,* of course a fighter has no problems simulating it...
But then, in most anime fighters are crap. The hero (yussha) usually has some form of magic while being able to weild sword like magus, charismatic personalities like the bard, utilities spells like the wizard (except the most powerful spell so wizzies still got a place in the party while "regular fighters" just don't exist there), or super power like the barbarian... sometimes they even get healing spells, and let's ignore the "protagonist plot armor that grants bloodline heritage powers" that could be from a sorcerer
Unless you mean some less popular manga like Sengoku Tenshouki or Hawkwood which pretty much has the main character as a fighter (or samurai/cavalier in more specific terms), or some old anime that are based on DnD like Record of lodoss where a fighter is a fighter, no more no less. Popular anime/manga tends to grant protagonist special power like guyver (can be emulated by synthesist), shapeshifting in Terra formars (could be done by beastmorph alchemist.. though they lack the mean to turn into insectoid despite the fluff ), blood heritage that grants phenomenal skills / spells / shifting, etc.
Casting spells may also cause subdual damage. Iirc some of DnD fictions like dragonlance described spellcasters as drained after casting spells, but in the actual game this mechanic doesn't exist. It can also take extra exp drain as spell level increase & use exp to craft like it used to be so resource (exp) management would be important, rather than exceeding other classes' skills/talent/feat/power with a single low/mid level spell or two for no cost.
Is working homicide? By working, you take away another human being's possibility to have that job, and (s)he may desperately require that income to survive.
Is not helping the starving people homicide? Should provide inadequate help (from donating to encountering fatal situations) also be treated as homicide?
Using tabletop as an example, if you're a level one commoner seeing a group of poors being chased by a cannibal monster, does not helping make you commit homicide? If you're a level one warrior in the king's army and the king orders all the babies in town to be killed, does following the order make you a murderer? Does fighting back and kill your ex-fellow till you fall also make you a murderer? Would protest against the king and have you hung be self-murder? If you see someone going to be executed for unknown reasons, would not helping be murder?
Well, while the story structure may not work if the protagonist perishes, I felt sidekicks having more scenes is more interesting than the protagonist being Mary Sue. (?) For example, from Hong Kong comics to Adventures of Tintin, the main characters' "adventures" most of time involve no risks because they're set to be immortal.
Last two Hong Kong comics I read, one was about a protagonist who would have his skull getting smashed by all kinds of weapons during fights. For about 100 episodes or more, he still got hit all over, but none of the bruises ever turned into a scar. Another Hong Kong comic simply took most of the fight scenes from the main character's part to the sidekicks and suddenly the reading sucked me in. Since side kicks are none-primary characters and may suffer from all kinds of misfortune, their scenes felt more closer to risk and reward scenes than the protagonist being treated favorably.
Hi, in fictions/novels/movies and many other media, the main character usually has an extraordinary fortune which prevents him from getting seriously injured (fatal injuries that cause permanent death or permanent disability with no other ways for the protagonist to revive/recover), unless the story wants to introduce a new protagonist, is near the end, or wants to explore the world after death, etc.
I've been searching around google but cannot find any term similar. While I know it is a plot device (like deu ex machina), I cannot seem to find the adjective for this. Does such term exist?
English is not my first language; that's reason I've trouble trying to find the word for this setup. Thanks in advance.
Since I've heard about mmorpgs with faction wars like Aion in Asia server which led to only one huge faction pwning the rest two, I agree with the nobody will store any goodies (if they aren't in the most powerful faction). The powerful will be more powerful with all utilities available, the weak will be in constant danger and if they want the game to be bearable they'll need to join the most powerful faction or having their all goodies robbed at any moment.
I think I've read about EVE also having similar situation (though not as severe)on this forum before?
1. It's about "your" story. Lots of games (either single player or mmorpg) claim this but most if not all of them are stories of a set character (a general's side kick, a prisoner who is destined to be the savior of said kingdom, someone who is going to save a certain village but always failed, etc.)
2. Climb, swim, fly, levitation, and lots of none(necessary) combat utilities.
3. Rarely spawned npcs like patrols, travelling caravans, lost travellers, doppelgangers' traps, etc.
4. Since there are no driuds on the release, I hope there will be animals' taming skills at least.
5. Mounted combat.
Thanks, guess I didn't read create pit descriptions thoroughly.
For the falling question, what I meant is if character A fell from a cliff and accidentally hit creature B who is under the cliff, does creature B take the same falling object damage as character A, share the damage with A, or has another way for calculating damage he takes (assume creature B gets damaged if he occupies on the square character A fell unto)
Hi, I'm just wondering does a character damage another if he falls and "hits" the other guy. If it does, how would it be calculated?
Also, when you cast create pit that can be 30 feet deep into a space where a creature is 25 feet underneath ground (by abilities such as burrow), do you force it into the pit or compressed it further downward?
Sorry for bumping the thread. I was wondering about this so I searched around internet and found this on wizard's website.
Q: Is Open Game Content limited to just "the game mechanic"?
A: No. The definition of Open Game Content also provides for "any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content." You can use the Open Game License for any kind of material you wish to distribute using the terms of the License, including fiction, artwork, maps, computer software, etc.
Wizards, however, rarely releases Open Content that is not just mechanics.
Jacobs spoke of all monsters being open content here, therefore I assume monster names can be used for fictions? Dunno if monsters' traits and behaviours from Bestiary / revisited lines are OGL or setting specific though.
There is the chaotic evil anti-paladin in APHB.
I kind understand what you're referring to, the fluff. When I gave a read to 4e rulebook (monster manual especially), I found there were so little fluff, most texts were about game mechanics, which made me unable to feel attached to it.
Saying cleric + fighter = paladin is simply cold, hard game mechanics without the flavor... feels rather like elder scroll system, then in skyrim where the mage guild master doesn't even need to be able to cast a a single spell, there will be a magic tome by the location where magic is required, so quest line progression wouldn't be discontinued.
Then it reminds me of Hero of might and magic 4, which has a game mechanic that determines "classes" by combing skills. Taking nature & necromancy would make the character a demonologist, taking healing and fighting (or was it tactics) make a character paladin, for example. At least the game recognizes the combination skills, then grant a bonus and a title.
Have food as basic rations that have no buffs but can be auto consumed and specially prepared food that require more resource to create but grant minor buff?
Hunger level can be used to determine the regen of spells(since the game isn't using x spells per day)/etc. Too full stomach may hinder character abilities however.
Thanks, I found these descriptions now. Glad I haven't sold my 3.5 books. =)
Odd, I never read hero builder guidebook but felt I've read similar material somewhere.
From my understanding (English is not my first language), classes are not simply gained abilities, but somewhat a resemblance of what a character is. For example in the Council of thieves player's guidebook, the fluff says barbarians' treatment as bodyguard is worse when compared to a fighter due to local employers don't trust barbarians' chaotic nature.
And since there is a list of general views on different classes for each race instead of based on culture, local residents from different places, or per head, it wouldn't seem to surprising if there is said list imo.
Hi, I think I've read this somewhere but can no longer find it.
For example, if I remember correctly, the barbarian distrust wizard due to wiz draw power from words which the barb is not familiar with. There are views on classes from different race's perspective from APHB and general views on the classes in the campaign book and adventure path player guide, but I cannot find the opinions on each other.
69. An unofficial police who is looking for a mass murderer in silver living armor(Tsuguri). The man also owns a suit of living armor, although it's cursed and the bound between him and the armor (eidolon) enforce to him to follow the tenet of counterbalance of good and evil.
If he kills someone evil, he's required to kill someone good. If he murderers someone he loves, he'll have to slay one he loves.
Hi, I've thought through this puzzle for a long time and changed the situation a bit to describe my question about it.
Instead of the guest vs host, there are three people choosing from the door.
A choose 1st B choose 2nd C choose 3rd
Each of the guest has 33.33% of winning.
B and C are friends so they decide to team up.
Their team has the probability of winning raised to 66.66%. No problems yet.
B checked the door but found goat. C decides to betray his friend
Now what is the chance of C winning? Is it the initial 33.33% (which turns into 50 50 against A), or 66.66% from the previous alliance he had with B?
Will A get a better chance winning if he exchange the door with C?
If B and C didn't team up from start, would A get a better chance winning if he exchange the door with C after B got it wrong?
Milo Goodfellow wrote:
Back in NWN, one of the RP server require "roleplay points" from DM to have characters rolling a d20 to get the special race template. Once, I was roleplaying a poor beggar in the sewer who had lost all his gears asking for mercy and would flee in any second when the tide turns to enemies.
After a few hours I went to the city, there was another player who just passed by me used the same idea as beggar and earned some rp points from GM while other players praising the player to be innovative... kind discourages players from roleplaying something different since only the selected few would benefit from the system.
Like Fallout New Vegas--we all know somebody shot the Courier in the head and that the Courier hunted his or her attempted murderer down, we all know that the Courier will go certain places and do certain things in his or her search for justice, and we all know the Courier gets caught up in the war for New Vegas and whatever side the Courier chooses will win, but who wins, who loses, who dies, who survives, who lives successfully, who lives but in general misery... that all depends on you.
I've played through all 4 endings in NV and the linearity would become more apparent after each play through, due to the nature of events in game are triggered by player only.
Without the player triggering the event, the powder ganger would never begin its attack on goodspring, for example. I've done all three quests (you only need one) for the seer in the brotherhood of steel at first playthrough and it became clear that many "fetch quests" are simply linear dungeon crawls.
After I bought the DLC, I had trouble going back to the game due to I need to do identically the same things to reach the required level (which was also a problem in Skyrim, although NV offered more "real choices that have consequences" than ES5, there were less npc with minor quests available. Quality over quantity I guess). Even the spawn points of roaming monsters are the same, so further playing became more about its system than for the story after a few runs, and NV wasn't really good at the gameplay department. Modding may also make it buggy, the game was nearly unplayable at its early stage...
How many characters will be there for an account? If we can have multiple characters (but still one toon under full training when log off), the special race can be added later with a requirement of one character at least obtaining enough capstones in order to be chosen from in creation screen. Other templates such as lich, werewolf/vampire affliction can be ingame contents introduced later.
Lots of video games with multiple paths feel rather like choose your own adventure books, you got the choices through the adventure but the outcomes are still determined by the writer (dev).
There was the D&D greyhawk adventure movie - scourge worlds that rather feel like the recent big rpg titles without the gameplay. Both of them got multiple choices the player get to choose from and offer different paths. It made me realize that choose your own adventure books, visual novels, and multiple paths games minus the combats are in the same vein.
That's why I enjoy games that are semi-sandbox like Taikou Rishhiden. While the historical events are scripted, they don't get triggered unless the conditions are met, and playing a different character can have a different view on the event. Some character may have the player as participant in said event, while other characters may just hear it as news talked by npcs, and it's possible to change multiple historical events by player's actions.
A sandbox with no player/npc triggered events makes me uninterested due to I find no reasons spending time in it. Unlike tabletop, there are little interactions if any with other players in a single player game, which made up the lack of stories/events in a sandbox game. While some people enjoy games for their gameplay, people like me may need to look for a reason in playing a said game. There may be simply no motivations for people who share the same thoughts as me when there are no likable stories / characters in a game once the player pass the new toy syndrome. Why would I want to spend time to dominate the game if there are no stories (events) or anyone I like.
I still read visual novels time to time due to the same reasons, found myself having little to no interest in most influential novels, movies, and other mediums. Les Miserable no longer felt that depressing when I grew up and see the real world around me, for example. If I want dark and gloomy, gritty natures for thoughts, I can just turn on TV or read news (local television programs prefer to broadcast ill events or brainwashing political viewpoints, especially when 90% of television sponsors are by corporations that are under China government's control in my country, despite I ain't even in China).
Escapism and depth don't click on each other in such situation, so I would choose materials that resonate with me. These may be treated as inferior creations by the majority but I'm happy with them as long as the companies can manage to survive and produce them within the M-shaped society I'm in.
Civilization 4 got memory problems though, and it's a mod. Cannot remember but did it have victory conditions equivalent to space / culture / diplomatic victory?
I would argue that romance of three kingdom & king arthur are grand strategy games, the prior is focused on combat especially in later installment. The only thing you did in 11 was build up resources then going into war using a similar setup like Nobugana's ambition 12. Nobugana's ambition 10th installment was the only one in koei's "recent" games that don't require much wars, and that's like 10 years ago.
King arthur (well, 2 at least from my memory)was a railroaded rpg style of game that use RTS combat like total war, and it failed hard in the combat department despite that's what the title focused on.
Haven't had my hands on elemental / warlock so cannot tell, hope they're what I'm looking for.
I took the quiz and got this.
You Are A:
Chaotic Neutral Human Barbarian (4th Level)
Seriously, a high WIS barbarian with all other stats falling in the range of average or below? Require professional assistance in customizing a variable build for real life challenge!!!
Heroes of might and magic felt rather RPGish and railroaded from my experience. I remember in 3, many if not most stages require rushing of some form.
> from wiki >
Grand strategy expanded on the traditional idea of strategy in three ways: first, expanding strategy beyond military means to also include diplomatic, financial, economic, informational, etc; second, examining internal in addition to external forces - taking to account both the various instruments of power and the internal policies necessary for their implementation (conscription, for example); third, including periods of peacetime in addition to wartime.