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

Odraude's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Society Member. 6,475 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 2 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 1,360 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can't look at Scarlet Pimpernel and not think of the exotico luchador of the same name (though in Spanish).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, teaching war orphans to not go raiding and pillaging other peoples is a far cry to what the Indian schools were. It's a comparison of generalities (kids being educated against a previous culture) without looking at the specifics, which make both a complex and much more unrelated case.

Also, we are missing an important point in Mikaze's post (at least about the orcs I haven't read all of them). They aren't being forced into compliance against their natural tendancies of aggression. In fact, it recognizes their predisposition and shows venues to channeling that in a positive manner. They aren't stripping down what it means to be an orc or hobgoblin. Rather, they are helping them take their natural predispositions and using them for positive means. And not to become a slave race or second class citizen, but to become aware of what their culture does and to be given the tools to choose a path other than mindless violence. In Mikaze's case, it'd be a half-orc paladin of Sarenrae :p


2 people marked this as a favorite.
kestral287 wrote:
They beat off these ninjas...

*chuckles*


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's never too late to add more ideas. I've always wanted a copy of the older Deities and Demigods, and always wanted Paizo to make one. I can share some gods in my setting that uses Native inspired deities. One thing I tried to keep is that many of these gods have alternate forms and names, or are primarily not humanoid. It give them a good difference from classic Western European gods. Also, many have the Animal domain and all gods in my setting have tonalli, animal spirits for the Nahual priests.

Ahmuzencab
LG Goddess of community, family, & medicine

Domain: Animal, Community, Good, Healing, Law
Weapon: Longbow
Tonalli: Bee

Based on the cryptic Mayan bee demons of the same name. I took a lot of liberties with her, taking the name and mixing in properties I saw in bees and honey (as a natural remedy). In one game I had an awakened bear cleric of Ahmuzencab.

Maketaori
N God of birth, death, time, and reincarnation

Domain: Animal, Death, Healing, Magic, Repose
Weapon: Scythe
Tonalli: Dog

Maketaori is based on the Taino death god of the same name. I largely kept him how he was from what I've read and learned about him. There was also a paper I read that talks about bats and reincarnation and the hupia bat undead. I used what I read about that to add a reincarnation cycle to this death god, and have an interesting dichotomy between bats for the death god and bats for the evil bat demon god Camazotz. Maketaori is the only god I have written up that has an actual herald, Opiyel Guabiran, a dog shaped creature that hunts down spirits and brings them back to Coabey, the land of the dead. I made him interesting because he has a penchant for gambling and betting and can be duped into betting for a person to come back to life. Though he himself is a smart and clever outsider.

Camazotz
CE God of blood, caverns, darkness and gluttony

Domain: Animal, Chaos, Darkness, Earth, Evil
Weapon: Sickle
Tonalli: Bat

Camazotz is the Mayan bat god, meaning Death Bat in the K'iche language. I made him a full-fledged demon god in a similar vein to Lamashtu. A slayer of gods and heroes that places the decapitated heads of those he has slain on pikes surrounding his ball court. Creation myths play a big part in my setting and I have some allusions of Camazotz being the first proto-hupia (Taino undead bat zombie/ghost of people who refuse to move on after becoming petitioners), who later became the first man, then ran away from death because of his evil ways to become a true hupia. I've definitely made him evil with a capital E and a patron god of vampires, cannibals, and other voracious creatures.

That's all I have time for this morning. Got a long work day then school. I wish I had more time to do stuff like this, but life is a pain.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm very worried about the classes that aren't the Kineticist or Medium. Those two got a great deal of dev comments compared to the other ones. In particular, I fear the Psychic and Spiritualist will suffer the most. Psychic was very bland and boring and had nothing that made it pop with me. Spiritualist was weak and seemed like they were too worried about making a Summoner 2.0 to give it anything cool and unique. With the lack of dev responses for those two class, I fear they will be left to mediocrity.

There will have to be a lot done to the Occult classes to make them unique and fun. Only the Kineticist, Medium, and Occultist seemed to fit that. The other classes just felt boring and uncompelling. I hope that the playtest data will reflect this and we can give the classes (especially the Psychic and Spiritualist) more of a creative oomph. As it stands, though , without some kind of post-playtest summary for each class, I'm not really holding my breath for good mechanics. The fluff, however, should be awesome and probably the main reason I would get a copy of OA.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd probably allow it, with it being a save or go unconscious. I do a similar thing, but with cutting off limbs. I wouldn't say you were wrong, but I think you could have facilitated something with the player. Still no reason for them to lose their s@*! at you.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Looks like my homestate of SC has officially made marriage equality legal. Good to see them joining the charge for civil rights for once.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Home made kale chips are easy to make, delicious, and good for you.

Kale Chips

Ingredients

  • One bunch of kale (Dino is preferable)
  • 2 tbsp olive oil
  • Salt, pepper, and whatever seasonings you like. I like cajun spices

Directions

  • Preheat oven to 300 F
  • Rip the kale leaves off of the steams and spread them onto a sheet pan
  • Drizzle oil onto it and toss, making sure it's covered all of it.
  • Bake for 8-12 minutes, or until the kale is crispy. If the leaves begin to brown on the edges, it's ready.
  • Take it out and immediately season it. Salt, garlic, whatever. It's good. Try some condiments too. Go f+*$ing crazy with it!!

Like most health foods, kale gets a bad rap because people assume it's only for pretentious hipsters. But honestly, it's delicious and good for you to boot. You can trust me. I'm no hipster, I'm a fat Latino chef-in-training :D


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, lemme dig through my culinary repertoire and post some stuff I like to make. I've got my Culinary Foundations textbook with some good dip recipes.

Guacamole

Ingredients

  • 3 Hass Avocados (or one big Florida Avocado)
  • 2 Roma Tomatoes
  • some cilantro
  • 1 red onion
  • some serrano peppers. Or if you're a badass like me, throw a habanero/scotch bonnet in there
  • 1 lime
  • Salt, pepper, cumin to taste. Cayenne is good too. Do it! Also ground coriander and garlic powder are winners.
  • Queso fresco or feta cheese as an optional topping are pretty awesome.

Directions

  • Cut the avocados into cubes.
  • Cut your lime and squeeze half of the lime in there. PROTIP: Squeeze the lime with the cut side facing your palm, so the seeds don't drop in.
  • Mix a bit so the lime juice gets everywhere
  • Mash them with a masher, but leave them a little lumpy. You can mash two of the avocados into a paste, then add the third and mash lightly to keep some lumps.
  • Dice all of the veggies with the amounts you want. I personally go light on the red onions since it is a pungent taste.
  • Mix in the veggies, herbs, and spices. Taste as you add and mix so the flavor balances right. Save some veggies and cilantro to garnish the top and make it look appetizing.
  • You can serve as is, or let the flavors marinade for an hour in the fridge. Your choice.
  • Optional: Top with feta or queso fresco.

Serve this with corn tortillas, blue corn tortillas (my favorite), or other chips. S$+&'s pretty easy and works well. The garnish and lumpiness of the guacamole gives it a rustic look, helps with the looks of the dip (so it looks like a salsa rather than green paste), and the mouth-feel of the crunch is awesome. Enjoy.

Might post a chowder recipe next. Or shrimp and grits, my personal hometown favorite. Although currently I'm enjoying Squid n grits more :)


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Many thanks. Once marriage equality is allowed here and things progress on the trans* front for legal documents and such, we plan on tying the knot. Just gotta defeat Voldemort Rick Scott and his neverending quest to oppress the LGBT community.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

So Wednesday has marked a year since my girlfriend and I have been dating. Went to an Italian place that's between where we live and Wilton Manors, which is a huge LGBT city down here in Florida.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gwiber wrote:
Odraude wrote:

Arcane is magic of reality

Divine is magic of the gods
Psychic is magic of the inner self

Magic, is magic. The source of where it comes from is the issue with magic. Some magic is granted to you (Clerics) Some people learn how to manipulate its flows and channel it into spells (Wizards), and some people internalize it into powers they can project (Sorcerers).

Psychic Energy is, Psychic, it shouldn't be magic. Otherwise a Psychic is nothing but a trumped up archetype of a Sorcerer, they are just channeling it differently, through things like emotions.

On a side note entirely: Gary Gygax mention, Psionic is entirely the wrong term and is being misused by the games industry at large. Psionics actually is the use of machinery to cause and use mental powers. He goes into a massively long diatribe on it (which he is typical of doing) in His Dangerous Journeys game setting.

Psychic shouldn't be magic according to you, not the rest of us psionics fans. Paizo is going with a different take where psychic powers are magic. They are using a classic approach via mysticism, ki and chakra, and esotericism as the sources, rather than the Psionics. They have already said that the classes in Occult Adventures will be magic and honestly, from a game design point of view, it makes sense to have the three big magics having similar mechanics that are balanced with each other. The idea that psionics should be more powerful, rare, and break SR is something I can't get behind. You may want psychics to be rare, but what about those that want a more balanced quantity of casters to psychics, or simple more psionics than mages and priests? We can't exactly do that because psychics have been made more unbalancing and clearly the better choice. That's why I'm more for psychics being balanced with the other options in Pathfinder. Making it overpowered but rare is poor game design.

Psionics is magic, just a magic of the mind, the several subtle bodies, and other esoteric things (ki, chakra, prana, the ethereal plane). This is made to appeal to a broader audience while allowing a place for DSP's psionics. Your version is too niche, unbalanced, and poor game design honestly. I'd prefer Paizo stick with what they are doing and allow DMs to decide what to do about SR.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Arcane is magic of reality
Divine is magic of the gods
Psychic is magic of the inner self

The former two have spell resistance, despite their different sources. I don't see why Psychic magic has to have a special resistance when Divine magic doesn't. There isn't a Faith Resistance stat, so I don't see the reason why there should be a Psychic Resistance stat. I'm a fan of psionics, but I don't see any need for it to be different than Arcane and Divine magic, nor do I feel it should be superior to Arcane or Divine magic.

I think the disconnect here is you are seeing this Psychic magic as not spells, but the intent that Paizo has for Occult Adventures is that these psychic abilities are spells. At this point, it is a matter of taste and something that isn't going to be changed in the playtest. If you are looking for something different, there is still DSP's Psionics which can certain fit the bill for what you are looking for.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I gotta agree with the sorcerer comment. Compared to the other classes presented, the psychic feels like it needs something more. Something that really makes it stand out. Right now, it feels like a sorcerer archetype with a phrenic pool. I'm not sure what it needs exactly, but something to make it interesting. Right now, it's kind of bland.

Also not a lot of dev commenting on this one compared to the other topics. Kind of has me worried about the Psychic here.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Still doesn't stop me from doing it fairly successfully.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Aside from WotR, there is another published way of doing it.

Council of Thieves Spoiler:
The main bad guy is the tiefling son of a man who swallowed a coin from Mammon's vault. This caused his progeny to become a tiefling

So something like that can definitely create an aasimar or tiefling.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Nope


1 person marked this as a favorite.

No problem. Feel free to post it here for everyone to see.

Tomorrow I'll actually have a day off! So I'm going to do some writing that I haven't done in ages.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
@Emotion components, you could carry around a cheap 50 gp potion of remove fear or rely on getaway spells like dimension door to remaneuver. Remember, if it would have a somatic component, it has an emotion component, so you can cast those getaway no-somatic spells to reposition for better tactical position. The good thing that way is that most forms of easy and reliable access to shaken work in a 30 foot range, so if you get farther than that, you're less likely to be in trouble.

I don't really like the idea of being required to have remove fear on you just so you don't get shut down by being shaken.

Like I said, the idea that emotional status effects are detrimental to psychics are fine. But I think shutting down the majority of their spells because they are only shaken is a very harsh punishment. I like giving PCs (and NPCs) a way to try and overcome issues like this and this style of game design really doesn't sit well with me.

I'm not saying you should remove this, but I really honestly think it could be toned down a little bit. If I can playtest this on the weekend, I'll try to.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Also this is a playtest. Of course the classes won't be the right power level compared to established classes. Expecting perfect classes in a playtest would defeat the whole purpose of the playtest.

I like 3PPs as much as the next guy, but this just sounds like petty complaining that does little to help with the playtest and rather seems more like ranting from someone with an axe to grind.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ElementalXX wrote:
Odraude wrote:

Archetypes are just exchanging a class feature for another. Spirits are adding more and more that will be interlocking and working in tandem with each other. It's really not comparable, except that some archetypes can work with others of the same class. But that's minor (at most I've seen three archetypes combined) compared to the 54 spirits right out of the box. And most players don't go out of their way to combine as many archetypes as they can. While that style of combining is a part of the Medium

I just want some streamlining. Options are great, but Christ, 54 class ability packages is a bit insane. Make it easier to digest with better explanations or even a table that gives a brief description, like the Feat Tables.

The point is that you dont have to use /care about them all. I agree however they could use simpler language/format

And my point is that you can't compare the two. Archetypes are options that you don't need. You can play the game without archetypes. the Spirits are compulsory. Spirit usage of 4 spirits is built into the class, so you're going to have to scour the 54 spirits to find four that work well with your character concept. You're essentially forced into grabbing up to four archetypes and using them for your character. It's a bit much and you only really can compare it to the cross-blooded sorcerer (and oracle version) archetypes. And even then, you choose the class abilities from the blood lines and at the end of the day, that archetype is your choice.

Options are great, but complexity without any form of streamlining is a waste.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't have access to a computer (on phone) or DSP's Psionics. So can someone give me, in 100 words or less, what Attraction and Shapers do?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
I would still like to know why there isn't any law or chaos spirits?

There are going to be, but they only put some spirits as examples. There will be spirits for each ability score and alignment combination. ie 54 spirits.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think when a class requires a flowchart to understand it, there may be an issue.

Never thought I'd say this, as I'm a fan of complex classes, but I think this class needs some simplification. Or at least, keep the complexity but streamline it more.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't like low magic because in my experience, it has always ended terribly from either GM malice or GM ignorance.

However, I hate it when people want something in a game and the only response is "Play a different game." The game has room for guns and asian setting and psionics. So it'll have plenty of room for low magic gaming. It may take some work, but it's doable. I've been contemplating it some myself. Thought about running a no magic campaign in Pathfinder, where the PCs unlock magic in the world at a certain point. If someone wants to play low magic in Pathfinder, then they should (preferably with some advice). And if you don't like that, well, play a different game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kryzbyn wrote:
ORA ORA ORA?

MUDA :)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I agree with lemmy. The all-or-nothing nature of the emotion component is too harsh. Allowing a concentration check or forcing the caster to, perhaps, increase the casting time by one step to get in the right emotional state would be better. As it stands, the emotion part is thematic but too crippling.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

54 spirits? Christ almighty I like complex rules and even I think that's way too much. Trying to read the medium class but it literally hurts my head trying to figure it out.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Athansor wrote:
Odraude wrote:
True, but I think an ability to extinguish other or opposite elements would be a good idea. Quenching fire or eroding earth or drying water would be appropriate. Maybe just a universal Extinguish talent that can be fluffed for any of the elements.

I really like that idea. I've seen a large number of games where it's necessary to put out fires quickly and you'd think a hydrokineticist would be able to do such things easily.

Exactly! An Extinguish wild talent could be fluffed as the following:

For Fire:

Fire: innate ability to control fire extinguishes it.
Water: Water quells the flame.
Air: Wind blows the fire out, or alternatively, air leaves the fire to starve it of oxygen.
Earth: Sand and dirt on the flame to put it out.

For Water:

Fire: Heat evaporates the water.
Water: Innate ability to control it dries it up.
Air: Air blows it away?
Earth: Dirt and sand absorb the water or dam it.

For Air:

Fire: A bit tougher to figure out. Maybe create a backdraft that reverses the flow of wind?
Water: Water and ice weight down cyclones to slow wind
Air: Innate ability reverses it.
Earth: Rocks and dirt weigh down cyclones to slow the wind.

For Earth:

Fire: Melts the oncoming rock into specks of lava or glass
Water: Erodes oncoming rock mass
Air: Erodes oncoming rock mass
Earth: Innate ability reverses it.

Extinguishing air powers would be the more difficult sell, but I think this could work well.


35 people marked this as a favorite.

I have to agree. We really need to abolish 2 + Int Skill Points. It's really hindering for doing things outside of combat. 4 + Int should be the minimum.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
AlgaeNymph wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
xavier c wrote:
5)What don't you like about Iomedae
5) She's fine, but I'm frustrated that so many people misunderstood her lawful good alignment to be the same as lawful friendly.

I think our main complaint is that you seemed to misunderstand lawful good as mean good.

Oh, right, a question! Okay... What's your reply to the above notion?

No change. There are only 9 alignments, but the number of different personalities each can have is limitless. You can have a friendly lawful good person as much as you can have a stern one. Iomedae's a stern one. And furthermore, as written in that adventure, it's only the troublemaker PCs who really see that side of her.

Actually, as written, anyone that doesn't answer her questions the way she wants gets attacked, in addition to attacking trouble makers. I ran that encounter unchanged and my players failed the second question. The game ground to a halt when they were attacked by, to their understanding, a lawful good god asking for help. I ended up retconning it because no one liked the idea of a lawful good god attacking the people she asked for help, especially since they were all cooperative with her and respectful of her. But it was ten minutes of "Why is a lawful good goddess attacking us, the people who she asked to help, when we answer a question wrong?"

I wouldn't have written this, but honestly I am frustrated with the fact that our issues and feedback with Iomedae keep getting misunderstood or dismissed as "not getting it" by you. We didn't get this much push back about Erastil's misogyny or Torag's genocidal paladin code. Makes it feel like our feedback isn't being taken seriously or is just worthless. It's why I've generally dropped it till now, since it was obvious that no one was going to take our criticism seriously.

No one is asking for a Disney princess paladin goddess. We just think that the idea that a good god attacking her allies when they get a question wrong is not a good thing to do, both from a story stand point and from a GM/Player relationship standpoint.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigDTBone wrote:
Papa-DRB wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Papa-DRB wrote:
Jessica Price wrote:
Orthos wrote:
We'll have to agree to disagree then, DMD. Nothing pisses me off and strikes me as completely wrong more than that "All art is political" tripe.
The idea that reinforcing the status quo isn't political -- that those who want to change it are acting from an agenda (and therefore, it's implied, biased, self-serving, and ideologically driven) while those who uphold it are not (and therefore objective, unselfish, and neutral) -- is generally one insisted upon by people who believe they benefit from the status quo not changing.
No, you certainly do not have to look for or experience political meaning in anything. That doesn't mean it isn't there, nor does it make others strange to find it.

If others find political meaning in it, fine with me. Just don't make me out to be a bad person according to Jessica, since I allegedly "am one who believe that they benefit from the status quo not changing".

-- david

Added bold tags to the relevant part of her quote.

Benefiting doesn't make you a bad person, but whats interesting about your example is that Avatar doesn't promote the status quo. The underlying political message is against argi-business which is very much in opposition to the status quo.

Jessica is talking about works that actually purport to offer no political view by design but do so by process. So, to me, as a straight white guy, I go to see Gravity in the theater and it's a visually interesting spectacle that offers no real political message beyond the fact the Russians need to do a better job at keeping their space stuffs maintained. But they lady I was with immediately noticed that Sandra Bullock needed the ghost of George Clooney to calm her down so she could get her bearings in the soyuz.

She was right, that is a stupid scene that perpetuates a gender stereotype of a white knight figure charging in to save the damsel in...

Actually, I'd find that as an example of finding a political agenda that may or may not necessarily there. I've seen the same movie, with my girlfriend, and we both though it was a provocative film about someone in a tight spot and some of the things your mind does to cope with it. We didn't see a white knight helping a defenseless damsel in distress, but a person in distress using a coping mechanism to get through a terrible time. If it would a man in an astronaut suit with a woman ghost helping him, I would have thought the same thing. Same if it was a black man getting help from a ghostly white dude, or reversed. This doesn't mean you're wrong, but it doesn't mean you're right. I just think people will take different things from different films, no matter what the intent of the director is.

And I can absolutely tell you that I'm not invested in perpetuating the stereotype of a weak woman being saved by a man.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Da'ath wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Face it.. the only reason you and many others care about the place, is because an American discovered it. If it was yet another European discovery, there wouldn't be all the foofarah.

I'd be willing to wager it has more to do with the fact many Americans were taught in early childhood that it was a planet, and with most things, are resistant to change (particularly as we get older).

You're "average American" likely doesn't remember who discovered it or cares.

Considering there are many Europeans I've met that feel the same way, it isn't just a proud Merica thing. The fact LazarX thinks it is is very unusual.

It's all a matter of nostalgia, not nationalism. Magic School Bus and Bill Nye taught me there were nine planets and g%+ d**mit, there will always be nine planets :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Papa-DRB wrote:
Odraude wrote:

Well, to their credit, they did discuss the issues coming into the ACG, which actually wasn't rushing the book. Between losing SKR, doing the ES Kickstarter,...

I'm happy the devs were able to comment on it and reveal their insight. I do wish it was more public, but you can't win them all.

Could you please provide a link to that thread.

-- david

It's here for your viewing pleasure.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
... that's really what a lot of this thread is: some DMs hate their players and think of them as bratty, spoiled children who have to be punished and controlled (makes you wonder why they all hang out together). ...

Completely untrue as well as thoroughly and needlessly obnoxious.

I like the players and GM's in my groups or I would be in the group. I do not punish or control them. We talk about what we want to see in a campaign and all of us strive to provide that for everyone.

The majority of the group prefers nearly perfect accessibility to magic items so that is how we play. That doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer significantly less perfect accessibility, both as a player and a GM.

Your reaction to Kirth's response of "GMs punishing the players" is the same response I have when people cry entitlement for players.

No one likes assumptions being made about their play style. If players like more magic items, it may not even be because they are entitled spoiled brats. Which seems to be the idea coming from some of the GMs here. Magic items = entitlement, you can't min/max and roleplay... all bunk ideas spread by GMs that I feel have become so far disconnected from what it's like to be a player that it somehow becomes an us vs them, instead of a cooperative gaming style.

Now, if everyone wants magic to be rare and is told ahead of time, then that's awesome. Kudos to them. Despite my poor experiences with low magic settings, I'd even run a setting like that. I'd probably do a good job because I know what NOT to do with it. But this idea that players are entitled s!+! birds that want all the magic items RIGHT NOW is as absurd as saying that all GMs that want magic to be rare are ego-fueled sadists punishing their players.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:

I love the classic X-Men storyline where Magneto steals Xavier's spell component pouch.

:P

Still a better storyline than Magneto pretending to be a Chinese mutant child, then getting hopped up on drugs and trying to reverse the Earth's magnetic pole ;)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I love how people assume the GM is being a passive aggressive douche and not just finding the rules and allowing the player to play it according to the rules. Especially without the actual GM here in question to explain their side of the story.

Always staying classy here at Paizo I see.

Personally, I like the Young Characters rules, but generally allow players to be PC classes. It's honestly been fine and I have not had terrible issues with my games with it. Honestly the penalties aren't even that bad.

But please, continuing bashing the GM. Clearly they must be a terrible person with evil intentions bent on controlling the PCs for their own amusement. Clearly, without knowing the person or hearing their side, they must be bad and punishing the player.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The "entitlement" predates 3.0. It was the same way in 2nd edition and, according to my dad, the same way back in his day. Only difference is that WPL is more codified into 3.X games. Though it isn't hard to work around honestly.

Course, is it the player that is entitled because they want rewards, or the GM that is entitled for wanting less magic? ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Wiggz wrote:
Ummmm... what does any of that have to do with the characters being motivated solely by financial reward, as stated in the post I quoted and responded to?
That's not what was stated. They were motivated by survival.
Quote:
Because risking our lives for no money wasn't worth it and wasn't fun.
Perhaps not solely, but money seems to have been a big part of it.

Lack of meaningful progress was the largest issue. We were playing soldiers in an Imperial army and for eight levels, never got to see any progress. No rewards, no promotions, no people for us to command. Just a "fight the good fight, you scumbags" and a pat on the back for our troubles.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Wiggz wrote:
Odraude wrote:

I remember playing in a game where we were all 8th level and the GM was trying to go for the no Magic Marts-Magic is special route. After doing a long dungeon that culimanted with a battle between us and some golems and a purple worm, all we got for our troubles were.... a silver masterwork dagger, some coins (about 100 gp) and some silver horseshoes. Oh and a "Good Job" from our commander (we were employed by the army).

Next session, we all levelled. So we all took leadership, got some followers, and said that we were retiring from the adventurer life and buying farmland to live our days. Because risking our lives for no money wasn't worth it and wasn't fun.

Thank goodness Luke Skywalker, Indiana Jones, Frodo and Bilbo Baggins, Robin Hood and pretty much every great character from fiction didn't feel that way, eh?

As I recall, Frodo really didn't want anything to do with the ring. But we was pretty much pressured into it. And didn't Robin Hood end up marrying the noble woman and getting rewarded at the end? In fact generally, most heroes in fiction get rewarded in some fashion at the end of the story. And of course there are examples of heroes who continue to fight the good fight with no progress and get weary of it. Of course, I prefer my heroes more like Conan and The Gray Mouser than Superman and Gandalf anyways so...

And you're making the same mistake that a lot of GMs make when they want to make magic items rare and unique and special snowflakes. You are thinking of the game world as a novel, in a vaccuum without the PCs in consideration. There are things that work great in novels that don't translate well into games. Granted, giving PCs great stories to latch onto and become invested in is awesome and a great thing to do. But ultimately, this is a game. And in a game, the average player likes to do cool things with their character and their character's story. The PCs will like your world and your NPCs, but ultimately want to build up their PC's story, notoriety, and legend. Because to them, it's a game. A fun one. One that combines the immersion of books with the interaction of video games. They want to make their mark on the world and make their character awesome.

In general, PCs like to see progress. Progress is, of course, an open-ended term. It could be anything, and thanks to Ultimate Campaign , there are rules for more than just magic items, levels, and money. Farmland, a bar, a temple, a fort, followers.... these are all great for progress, get PCs invested in your story world, and you have potential story hooks for your players. But if your players see no progress, then after awhile, some may just not have fun with gaming. I know if I play a game that's the same thing over again with nothing to show for it at the end, I eventually get bored. That's what I see in the "make magic special" crowd. Usually a "red flag" (so to speak) to a larger issue of building and running a world without the PCs' consideration of it. That's admittedly based on my own anecdotal evidence of playing in games where GMs wanted magic items to be rare and special.

Now, if your players are cool with no rewards and doing good for good's sake, then by all means, go for it. Different strokes and such. But I'm talking in general, and from what I've encountered of GMs and PCs.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:
Quote:
Paizo sells fiction. There is no such thing as fiction that does not have a social agenda of some sort.
Eh, on this we'll have to disagree. I've read plenty of books whose only "agenda" was to tell an entertaining story, with no intent nor result to challenge any perceptions or status-quo. Doesn't make them any less entertaining IMO. So I can't say I agree with the idea that all fiction has an agenda, social or otherwise, beyond telling a tale.

Spoiler:

Either way, what's one person's backstory is another person's agenda pushing. I didn't find any of the LGBT NPCs to be agenda pushing and felt that their romance backstories are no different than, say, Ameiko's about her dead boyfriend.

It's all backstory that rounds out the characters. Why do we need to know that Shalelu has an estranged step-father? Why do we need to know that Ameiko's dad is a huge douche? Why do we need to know that Koya has always wanted to travel and leave Varisia? for all the same reason. Backstory. At the end of the day, it's all unimportant. But it makes the characters relatable and more real than saying "This is Hass Delgado, the elven blacksmith that's only here to craft your items.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I remember playing in a game where we were all 8th level and the GM was trying to go for the no Magic Marts-Magic is special route. After doing a long dungeon that culimanted with a battle between us and some golems and a purple worm, all we got for our troubles were.... a silver masterwork dagger, some coins (about 100 gp) and some silver horseshoes. Oh and a "Good Job" from our commander (we were employed by the army).

Next session, we all levelled. So we all took leadership, got some followers, and said that we were retiring from the adventurer life and buying farmland to live our days. Because risking our lives for no money wasn't worth it and wasn't fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Mark Hoover wrote:
For folks that say magic items = rare and precious why not just houserule: no magic items can be bought, period? I'm not being snarky it's an honest question. Sure there are still crafting feats out there and everyone's free to craft on their own but literally no one in the entire game world will sell them, not even the consumables. The only way magic items then change hands are by gift or force. ...
I actually asked about that in a topic, and making them harder to get did not make them more special. ...

I have known a couple of GM's that do that. It actually was not a horrible game. Of course after a few levels everyone was building up a basement stock of +1 value items that were no longer of use.

But in my personal opinion that is too far on the other end of the spectrum. Both the Magic Mart anything-conceivable-is-always-in-stock and the opposite of nothing-is-ever-sold are both about evenly implausible.

I used to do the "you can buy everything" market also, but the book's 75% and cities with spending limits is a better way. I do however allow for items to be commissioned but sometimes that means the players have to continue the mission and come back later to pick it up.

I generally do this as well. My players have honestly always prefer making their magic items instead of buying them. We love that customization and naming it. We don't care about, say, Sir Archibald's rapier that we find, but love the swords and stuff we create and name. Because ultimately, we are building our own legend, not so much living in the shadow of another.

The magic mart is primarily a GM problem. I rarely see players complain and have found that more often than not, you'll never make magic feel special. Fantasy is too mainstream right now, with video games and movies and books flooding the market. Generally, people of the current generation aren't going to really be wow'd by magic if you just take it away from them and make it rare. Trust me, making a bunch of 8th level adventurers beg for a +1 dagger isn't very fun.

Course, this doesn't mean I have Magi-Mart Superstores everywhere. I generally have magic items available to buy from collectors, or have items the players craft. And if there is a magic mart, I generally do cool stuff with it. Like, I once had a dimensional-floating magic mart with a mummy oracle in it that would sell items to the players. They could summon him with a special feather token that would allow any door in a city to turn into an entrance into his store. And they ended up doing some cool planar adventures with him, since he had a sarcophagus that was pretty much a TARDIS. So I don't get lazy and just remove magic marts. I make them spare, but I also make them fun and engaging for the players. Pretty much everything I do ends up being a story hook for the players.

And one thing I've noticed with the current generation of gamers is that story and making magic cool is all about engaging both their mechanical side and their roleplaying side. If you just talk about Sir Archibald's rapier, most people will shrug it off. Especially if they don't use rapiers. But if you give them a quest where they learn about him, maybe because they need his weapon, and even tailor it to one of the party member's weapons, you'll find your players much more immersed in your world and enjoying magic for more than just numbers and bonuses.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
JohnF wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
91 is the year before i met my wife:) i turned 15 that year

In '91 my wife and I celebrated our 13th wedding anniversary ...

I was four and wetting the bed being a regular bad ass!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:

I'm sorry you had such a negative experience with the book, Dragon. While I don't agree with the premise of this thread in general, it is true that last year had a couple of significant challenges that may have contributed to some of the problems you cite.

Many of those factors (losing a core member of the design team, developing a bonus hardcover superadventure to support a huge Kickstarter campaign, and developing a book as visually complex and ambitious as the Strategy Guide) are not likely to occur in 2015, so I am personally optimistic about the future.

I am working on Occult Adventures (next year's Gen Con release) as a freelancer, and have had lots of opportunity to participate in the overall conception of the book. I've also worked closely with each member of the design team, all of whom have been uniformly terrific and on-point in every discussion I've had with them.

That book is going to be fantastic.

If we fell short of your expectations with the Advanced Class Guide, I'm confident that the books coming up will regain some of that faith you have lost. I have a lot of faith in them, and in those yet to come.

Erik,

I have full faith that Occult Adventures is going to rock, for the same reason I suspect that the ACG missed a lot of marks.

When I interviewed you at PAX last year, I saw the excitement in your eyes when you talked about a type of occult psychic magic as a possible future endeavor for Paizo, and the possibilities that you guys might explore there. You mentioned how other members of the staff were also very interested in the idea, and since you've announced Occult Adventures we've heard from other people brought on to the project and that same ecitement can be seen universally. It's that love.

I think even if the blatant editing errors were not present in the ACG there's still be a higher than normal dissatisfaction with it, and I think that can be traced back to the very idea behind the book, the concept of hybrid classes. The idea...

I actually disagree with this. A lot of what I've seen, including my own thoughts, actually like the idea of the hybrid classes and it doesn't feel lazy to us. It's just the editing was done poorly.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I appreciate the dev comments. I understand that errors happen and nobody should expect absolute perfection. My biggest problem was (until now) little public dev comments about the editorial issues. No blog posts and little word for a month after the ACG. That's really what I wanted. Just a blog or thread that has what Lisa and Erik typed for the consumers to see, perhaps condensed down. It really helps put our nerves at ease and lets us know that you're reading our concerns. The comments here have put me at ease and while I wish this was more public for ease of finding, I'm very happy that the devs have come out to address these issues with us. Thanks for the responses.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Erik Mona wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:


I can only speak for my experiences, but after reading the ACG I was so dissapointed I looked into more 3PP that could act as a new source of content for myself and my group and alternate systems such as DnD 5E, Rogue Trader, Numenera, Monster Hunter International, and Dark Heresy 2E

I'm sorry you had such a negative experience with the book, Dragon. While I don't agree with the premise of this thread in general, it is true that last year had a couple of significant challenges that may have contributed to some of the problems you cite.

Many of those factors (losing a core member of the design team, developing a bonus hardcover superadventure to support a huge Kickstarter campaign, and developing a book as visually complex and ambitious as the Strategy Guide) are not likely to occur in 2015, so I am personally optimistic about the future.

I am working on Occult Adventures (next year's Gen Con release) as a freelancer, and have had lots of opportunity to participate in the overall conception of the book. I've also worked closely with each member of the design team, all of whom have been uniformly terrific and on-point in every discussion I've had with them.

That book is going to be fantastic.

If we fell short of your expectations with the Advanced Class Guide, I'm confident that the books coming up will regain some of that faith you have lost. I have a lot of faith in them, and in those yet to come.

Honestly if this had been a blog post, some critics would be a lot less worried about Paizo. But the only blog we got was about the misprjnted title. When a company stays quiet about a mistake, it makes us wonder what they are doing, or if they even care. I'm glad to finally see devs weigh in on the product, but it has been a month since the ACG release. In that time, ive already seen people return their hard copies and jump ship to 5th ed or other RPGs. And when someone asks me if they should get the hardcover, i can't lie to them about its issues. It's hard to defend Paizo when, at least up until now, there weren't any public, formal statements about the ACG. So I'm glad we finally got word about this, but I really wish it was sooner and more readily available to the public.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Odraude wrote:

Figured I'd ask here since the devs are looking at this one.

I've asked this before, but no one ever answered it. The one thing I have on my mind is, with GenCon coming earlier, and the ACG being what it is because of rushing, is anything going to be looked at so that Occult Adventures doesn't suffer similar issues? I like Paizo, but I don't want to buy a hardcover that will have the same (or more) editing errors that the ACG had. The ACG may have been a singular drop in quality, but it is one that has the chance of repeating itself again next year. And I've been waiting for psionics to come out, so I am a lot more invested in Occult Adventures than the ACG.

So what can we expect from Occult Adventures and avoiding the same editing issues that plague the ACG? Is GenCon coming early being looked at as a potential issue?

Yes. We are absolutely doing things to try to let us do a better job on Occult Adventures.

Thanks for letting me know. I appreciate the time you guys take talking with us. :)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Wertz wrote:
Thehigher cause wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Personally I can't honestly recommend buying the physical copy, not until a second printing with all the Erratas.
I agree 100%
Ironically, every person who takes that stance actually delays the publication of the second printing... and if enough people were to do that, there would *be* no second printing.

Unfortunately, I don't have the money to buy a product with a great deal of editing errors. I don't want to spend $39.99 on a product with gross issues just so I can get the errata sooner. I don't have a lot of money and as much as I like Paizo and want to support them, I can't spend money on a product so I can get the errata faster. The frugal part of me won't allow that.

Seems like a catch-22 alas :(

Also, any chance you can comment on my question about the GenCon rush and Occult Adventures? I've been looking for a dev comment in regards to it, positive or negative. I just want to know if anything is being looked at to prevent OA from having similar editing issues due to GenCon coming earlier. I love psionics and I love Paizo, but after ACG, I am really worried about OA having the same issues.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Figured I'd ask here since the devs are looking at this one.

I've asked this before, but no one ever answered it. The one thing I have on my mind is, with GenCon coming earlier, and the ACG being what it is because of rushing, is anything going to be looked at so that Occult Adventures doesn't suffer similar issues? I like Paizo, but I don't want to buy a hardcover that will have the same (or more) editing errors that the ACG had. The ACG may have been a singular drop in quality, but it is one that has the chance of repeating itself again next year. And I've been waiting for psionics to come out, so I am a lot more invested in Occult Adventures than the ACG.

So what can we expect from Occult Adventures and avoiding the same editing issues that plague the ACG? Is GenCon coming early being looked at as a potential issue?

1 to 50 of 1,360 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.