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

Nicos's page

RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter, 8 Season Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 10,651 posts (16,874 including aliases). 14 reviews. No lists. 2 wishlists. 31 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 10,651 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?501800-One-Step-Beyond-OOC-Pa thfinder


Deadmanwalking wrote:

Nah. That's kind of a load of crap. As thejeff notes it's eminently possible to pay attention to what behavior offends people and try to minimize it.

Will everyone ever be happy? No, but you can minimize the number who are unhappy if you try.

That will offend somebody somewhere, I'm kidding I'm kidding :p


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Nicos wrote:

- More mesmorable characters you have played

- most memorable characters you have seen when DMing.

- least memorable characters you have played

- least memorable characters you have seen when GMing

>.>

Heh.

if he can remember them then they were not so un-memorable.


Like with a lot of slangs, different people in different situations interpret "gamer girl" in different ways .

If the intention of the speaker is to be derogatory then chances are that the woman in question will not feel good with the term. While for other people they could be a non-offensive words.

Of course, if somebody doesn't like to be called by it you don't go around calling her that way. Specially if you want to keep playing with that person.


Spastic Puma wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Spastic Puma wrote:

I talked with about 40+ female gamers for my thesis and none of them seemed very fond of the term. Most of them just wanted to be seen like any other gamer.

Sounds like an interesting thesis.
Definitely more fun than poring over NIBRS or the UCR. At least for me.

No idea what's is a NIBRS, so I will just take our word on it.


Spastic Puma wrote:

I talked with about 40+ female gamers for my thesis and none of them seemed very fond of the term. Most of them just wanted to be seen like any other gamer.

Sounds like an interesting thesis.


I find it unnecessary.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's just case by case. Somebody here ask for a rule and it happens that there is no rule at all that covers the situation, they will have to ask their DM or if they are the Dm they will have to make a rule by themselves.


Coming for an even crazier country than the US I'm not sure my opinion is worth something, but it seems that the thing with the police in the US (besides the racist component) is not in vacuum but symptomatic of some culture that permeates the country. There is a culture of violence that is absent on other 1st world countries.

While the mindset exists the problems of violence, and in particular the problems of violences by cops will remain.


ok, ok.


I guess, you can report here

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?500933-Talk-to-Ashiel-About-A nything-Mark-II&p=21235609#post21235609

since lemmy is posting there.


Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:
Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?
Not well developed yet. The continent of Arcadia is the Americas analog. There was a bit about it in Distant Shores and some hints elsewhere.
The lack of development then could be argued as a lack of inclusive ty to the fan base. There are members of these groups which play the game as well.

And those members could very well understand that no fantasy world can possibly cover all world cultures not it should be demanded to do it. As an Hispanic I know I do.

Moreover, what Paizo choose to put or not in their setting is irrelevant for my games. It could be nice to see their take on arcadia, but I don't be offended if they never publish about it.


John Robey wrote:
Nicos wrote:
John Robey wrote:


3) I don't particularly like adventure paths or megadungeons, and that's all the Big Names do these days. -.-

Uhm, what do you like?

I like single-adventure modules ("Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth" sized, for ex), smaller adventures, and sidetreks that I can easily string together myself. (Hence item #4, that Dungeon magazine doesn't exist. Before the emergence of adventure paths, it was far and away the best value in gaming.)

-TG

I see. Though I can think of a couple of few great not-that big adventures in 3pp.


Scavion wrote:
Lemmy said he'd be game to play on the Giants in the Playground forums if yall wanna keep this going.

So, what do you guys say?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

- More mesmorable characters you have played
- most memorable characters you have seen when DMing.


John Robey wrote:


3) I don't particularly like adventure paths or megadungeons, and that's all the Big Names do these days. -.-

Uhm, what do you like?


Steve Geddes wrote:

I much prefer playing in a game where the DM is comfortable making a judgement on the fly. That's partly due to watching people argue with some things for ages and noting that once we go to the effort of digging out what the rulebook actually says, it turns out the success chance is within 5-10 percent of the off-the-cuff ruling anyhow.

In my view, the benefit from speed of play outweighs the occasional inconsistency since the DC is generally set by the DM anyhow. So if the ruling is out, just think of it as following the rules with a slightly different DC.

My original group of players greatly prefered the time we basically played bookless, they got bored with the rules once we managed to get the 2e player guide.


HeHateMe wrote:


I guess she wasn't looking to collect on the "alive" bounty, just the "dead" one?

That's correct.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ascalaphus wrote:
In general we all agree that nowadays, manifestations exist. And they should, because they keep psychic casters from dominating people without any warning whatsoever. They also clarify why you can use spellcraft on component-less spells and SLAs.

I don't know if all will agree that they "should" exist. Not everyone use the occult stuff, and having a new book messing with 6 years of released material could displease quite a few.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Of people that I know that DM: DMG, Ravingdork, TOZ Grimmy (I miss his pbp Dming), Kobold cleaver, Hmm, mosts of the grognards from the grognard thread, all the people who convert AD&D adventures to PF or 5e, Stefa hill (gods I had to check 15 pages of "my favorites" to remember this name).

A special one is creighton broadhurst, because godam the adventures he writes.


Crystal Frasier wrote:
I think recent events have shown just how terrible the general public's concept of moderation practices is.

Not necessarily. One can be pleased enough with the moderation in general and still disagree with some cases.


wraithstrike wrote:


You can be out of their line of sight, while the illusion is in it,

Yes, but being out of their line of sight means they are also out of your line of sight. But ok, I can live with it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Women and gays and trans folk can internalize self-hateful bullsh!t just like everyone else. Being trans (or whatever) isn't an automatic defense against repeated tired old debunked anti-trans rhetoric.

So, the trans that were ok with the posts were just wrong because they are internalizing self-hateful bull#%&#?, good there are other people in the world to correct them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Nicos wrote:

Exactly. Nobody knew that talking about the things they were talking was bad. In fact it's pretty much arguable that it was not.

The other poster and I have butted heads on these same points before, and she was informed by more than me that her conclusions on those points were problematic and hurtful at best.

But again, thanks for the summary dismissal.

You are dismissing the ones that think the opposite, so we are equal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
knightnday wrote:
Nicos wrote:
knightnday wrote:

Moreover .. and this is just me pondering aloud .. if you know that doing X (in this case engaging in being critical of LGBT characters) would provoke a post or ten to be removed, why would you continue on that track?

If you know that taking a certain action will cause a certain response, then doing it over and over again is either being provocative or trying to what, make a point about the evils of censorship? Or am I am just going crazier?

Exactly. Nobody knew that talking about the things they were talking was bad. In fact it's pretty much arguable that it was not.

Really?

yes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Rysky speaks up, three posters get defensive and try to gaslight and dismiss him. Rysky is the target for blame because he tried to engage in good faith

...


wraithstrike wrote:

If the guards have line of sight to you they should see you casting just due to that. The manisfestion is not even needed. There is also the issue of casting being done in a strong voice so they will also hear you.

Since you need line of sight/effect to create the illusion that greatly reduces the utility of illusions out of combat, but ok.


The discussion of casting illusions in combat is all cool and that, but I was thinking more of casting illusions out-of combat while enemies are around but initiative have not been rolled.

I guess, my real question is that if spellcasting (even, without somatic, or verbal components) breaks stealth.


knightnday wrote:

Moreover .. and this is just me pondering aloud .. if you know that doing X (in this case engaging in being critical of LGBT characters) would provoke a post or ten to be removed, why would you continue on that track?

If you know that taking a certain action will cause a certain response, then doing it over and over again is either being provocative or trying to what, make a point about the evils of censorship? Or am I am just going crazier?

Exactly. Nobody knew that talking about the things they were talking was bad. In fact it's pretty much arguable that it was not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:

If a mod finds a post "upsetting", then odds are other posters and silent readers do to. And since usually a mod isn't aware of specific posts until someone flags them, then the odds that more than one person was upset seems increasingly likely. And unlike posters who can just close a thread and ignore, Paizo's staff are stuck with being exposed to it. Why should Paizo staff have to tolerate insensitive and abusive posts in their work environment, especially when they have warned these same posters repeatedly to desist?

Why are some of the banned posters' defenders so adamant on defending them, urging for extra consideration and tolerance of repeated bad behavior, but are perfectly willing to throw someone else under the bus--in this case, Rysky--simply because he happened to be the only one to openly probe the poster's thoughts and attempt to engage in a discussion with the problematic conclusions in those posts? Is it because Rysky is a SJW, something he (and I) consider a badge of honor, but is considered an abusive/dismissive epithet on "friendly" places where free speech is more valuable than community and inclusion?

There were more than one trans thinking that the posts were ok, but I guess it was the right of non-trans persons to be insulted in the name of all-trans people of the world.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
noretoc wrote:

I'll add an opinion. What is the point of this discussion. Someone got banned. If that person has an issue, then they should discuss it with the mods. Why should I care, it has nothing to do with me. His rights weren't violated. He doesn't have a "right" to state his opinion on this forum in any way he wants. This isn't a street corner. His Ban doesn't affect me, and it doesn't really affect anyone else here that wasn't involved in the situation. If I have a post deleted, or I am banned and I have an issue with it I will contact the mods to find out why.

The whole purpose of this public display seems like it is an to rile some people up into making some bad decisions. My opinion, is to see to your own house. If you have an issue take it up with the mods. If they don't listen, find another playground, this is the internet, there are plenty our there. It is not like you are getting kicked out of your house. Stop trying to gather the peasants to grab pitchforks and go after you perceived adversaries. Be an adult, handle your business, let people handle theirs.

And here you are posting your opinion, as everyone else.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
EileenProphetofIstus wrote:
I have been greatly criticized here on Paizo for creating these types of characters.

Well, no matter how one create a character, somebody here on paizo will feel the urge to criticize.


Setting based background/information and just background/information are very different thing. An artifact without the latter is dull, and artifact without the former is perfectly ok for the DM to plug into whatever setting he is using.


Ravingdork wrote:
Nicos wrote:
In the beginning I was more interested in the mechanics of your characters, but now, after some rereading, I came to enjoy more the background you have for some of them. You have talent with words, I wonder if you have participated in any of the villain codex contests?
I've not heard of the Villain Codex contest. What is that?

A shame,

It's not the Paizo book but 3pp books

http://paizo.com/products/btpy9iqu?The-Villain-Codex-I-Foes-for-Fledgling-H eroes

http://paizo.com/products/btpy9k85/discuss?Villain-Codex-II-Adversaries-for -Advanced-Heroes

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2stdn?Swords-for-Hire-Contest-Villain-Codex-II

Even I managed to publish a Villain.


but...but...that would take away all the fun of paizo forum


In the beginning I was more interested in the mechanics of your characters, but now, after some rereading, I came to enjoy more the background you have for some of them. You have talent with words, I wonder if you have participated in any of the villain codex contests?


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

I wonder if Illusion spells would even work taking into account the FAQ on spellcraft and manifestations.

"Bob the Arcane tricksters is successfully stealthing and wants to cast a silent minor image to distract some guards, but Bob start shining like a christmas tree and the guards charge him next turn"


Bandw2 wrote:
Boomerang Nebula wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:

SO...

question.

is anyone BESIDES N N 959 on the side that you can pinpoint the caster if he casts a spell?

I prefer the explanation that N N 959 has put forward. The rules for invisibility are poorly constructed, it seems to me that you could support almost any position by selecting quoting the rules. The interpretation given by N N 959 provides better game balance than the contrary position, that is my main reason for supporting it.
this is the wishful thinking fallacy, just like to point it out. Not that there's anything wrong about it. It's just desired balance has no direct effect on what is actually the rules or not.

I think he is saying that there is no actual rules, and only expressing a personal preference so no fallacy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Trekkie90909 wrote:


Nicos; I would ask you to consider your tone carefully. I recently started a discussion here with much the same tone as you are now, and while several members of this forum helped me to see things from their point of view, I hurt them in their efforts to help me understand.

Ok, I will.

I know I sometimes sounds blunt because I try to say things as direct as I can. For the record, It's not my intention to question the people but the soundness of the argument


KSF wrote:
What I would hope, however, is that such a person would understand the context of the discussion or statement, understand that if they don't do the things being criticized, they themselves are not being criticized.

That's some double standard that I personally don't like much. Perhaps is because I see myself as very neutral, but I have the same standard for everyone and the responsibility of not being offensive (in their generalization in this case) is on the speaker whoever the speaker is and to whoever the speaker is talking to.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sissyl wrote:
Americans obviously have no clue about pizza toppings. Pineapple is wonderful, objectively the best possible match on a pizza with peperoni (both kinds, pepper and sausage), piri-piri sauce, ground meat, tomato and cheese.

I do like pineapple in my pizzas, though I have taste some pineapple pizzas in europe and the pineapple was very low quality, I wonder why.


DungeonmasterCal wrote:
I'd play 1e again if I had my very first group together, but alas, I only know where one of those guys is and he no longer plays. But aside from that I really don't have any desire to go back to those days. Now one of my guys occasionally brings up how much better he liked 1e than Pathfinder, but he's a 47 year old guy going on 85, anyway.

85?


Zedth wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Zedth wrote:
Nicos wrote:

Or the less classic

"It's a dark and stormy night. You're in a tavern, when you're approached by a mysterious woman, who throws a fireball at you."

I laughed way too loudly at this. Thank you for that.
I have actually used openings like that. It helps to hasted things when the time is short.

You've got a table filled with energetic players and their freshly-rolled level 1 characters, no smudges on their HP box, dice all lined up nicely...

GM -
"It's a dark and stormy night. You're in a tavern, when you're approached by a mysterious woman, who throws a fireball at you. Roll reflex saves, DC 16."

[dice=Fireball damage]8d6

Player 1: ...
Player 2: I saved! counts on fingers for a moment, Oh, I'm still dead.
Player 3: Bro, wtf...
GM: Tee hee hee! Okay, now its your turn to GM!

one example went like this

DM: It's a dark and stormy night. You're in a tavern, when you're approached by panicking man. He reaches you while screaming "she is coming, she is coming. Help me!"
PC: "calm down man and tells what happens"
DM: A mysterious woman enter the tavern...and throws a fireball at you. Roll reflex.
PC: "wha?"

The lady in questions was a fire based sorceress who happened to be a bounty hunter and the panicked guy was the bounty. She didn't care about colateral damage as long as she could collect her money.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

You guys have here like 500 years of collective game anecdotes.


Gark the Goblin wrote:
Nicos wrote:
I Have only played one gay character. Jo, a lesbian sorceress. But she was full of defects so not the best example.

The character I played in that game, the halfling cleric named Chimon, was also gay, but I can't remember if it ever came up?

Not that I remember, we had little time for personal life in between our evildoings.


CBDunkerson wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Controversial topics are the topics that cause controversy, you know. Nothing more, nothing less. And it's clear that the inclusion of trans character created controversy.

Try to think of it this way;

If you go to a group of climate scientists and talk about the 'global warming controversy' you are going to get a cold reaction. Ditto if you're trying to tell biologists that evolution isn't real.

The communities in question view these as 'fake controversies'. They have seen and lived the evidence and know that the 'controversy' is completely manufactured and unjustified.

So, no... you aren't just 'noting the existence of controversy'. You're 'promoting a false narrative' that there is / should be anything controversial about the topic. LGBT individuals exist. Thus, any 'controversy' about the inclusion of such a character is inherently an assault on the validity of LGBT individuals.

What you see as 'just noting the existence of controversy' becomes from another perspective 'validating the false dichotomy of whether LGBT people should exist or not'.

If you or Crystal or whoever tells me that my choice of words is unfortunate, I can accept that that view can exist, and we can have a discussion about it.

But I think my word where straightforward and extrapolating them to mean other things is just wrong.

Perhaps is like what happen in Ashiel's posts, coincidentally. Where somebody saw bad intentions and malice to the other posters words, where there was none.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jessica Price wrote:
Crystal Frasier wrote:
Nicos wrote:

f - There seems to be a correlation of the banhammer with the lgtb topics. Paizo choose to include controversial topics in their published materials but it seems that it can't handle discussions about it (And I'm not talking about the occasional jerk that rant about how a trans character in WoTR will send everyone to hell or something), specially if the poster opinion doesn't align with the moderator at hand. You are free of course to not want some topic to be discussed, but if that is the case make it a rule and make it clear for everyone.

Quick side note: LGBT people are not "controversial topics." LGBT people are human being we ask be treated with respect and humanity in our company spaces, especially considering that we have many employees who fall within that community and are required to participate in the forums as part of our jobs
This.

I will reply because it seems it might hve been a misunderstanding.

Controversial topics are the topics that cause controversy, you know. Nothing more, nothing less. And it's clear that the inclusion of trans character created controversy. Not that I disagree with the inclusion of such characters, mind you, I'm completely neutral to it.

I never said or hinted that trans people don't deserve to be treated with respect and humanity.


Crystal Frasier wrote:


So, what's everybody's favorite class for playing gay characters? Trans characters?

I Have only played one gay character. Jo, a lesbian sorceress. But she was full of defects so not the best example.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

And that's everything I wanted to say. I think the moderation guys made a mistake. I doubt the mistake can be corrected as the banned posters will likely not return. But well mistakes happens, I still like Paizo forum and will remaing in here (unless I get banned, that I hoped don't happen).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
Now that that is out of the way, what on God's green Earth does that have to do with an SJW...
Annnnd you lost me.

That was what happened even if you don't like that term. There was one poster being morally offended and trying to defend trans people's right where in reality nobody was attacking trans people.

In the end, there was only one poster starting and propagating the flames and that posters is still here.

1 to 50 of 10,651 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.