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 Campaign Setting Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 6,276 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 2 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 1,294 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

To further what Jawa said, no one is asking for alternate settings. Simply, we are looking for some basic groundwork and advice on running other genres and ages. In that way, they don't lose sales on Golarion products and 3PP can swoop in to provide more specific support. And I'm sure with how varied Golarion is, there could be a setting book that uses examples of each genre.

Dragonchess Player wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Primitive Era: Stone Age and Bronze Age adventuring, with rules for low magic, sword and sorcery, Hellenistic, and sword and sandal gaming. Themes would include low magic, tribalism and animism, survival, and humans transcending from nomadic tribes to sedentary civilizations. Or on the opposite side, high magic with demigods roaming the world doing wild things. Ancient astronauts, cities of wonder that are destined to sink from their hubris, living gods.

The rules in Ultimate Combat (Gladiator Weapons, Primitive Armor and Weapons, Performance Combat for gladiatorial games, Vehicles for chariots), Ultimate Equipment (Special Materials includes a section on primitive materials), Ultimate Magic (Words of Power), and Mythic Adventures can be used for pretty much all of this. You just have to make your own setting and apply restrictions on available material; Paizo isn't about to split its customer base by marketing any setting other than Golarion (and the associated solar system in Distant Worlds).

Odraude wrote:
Post-Medieval Era: Renaissance through Victorian and Edwardian and ending just during the Interwar period. Classics such as Steam Punk, Gaslight Romances, Pulp Stories, Early Soft Science Fiction, and Sword and Planet. Themes such as the difference engine, the march of industry, eugenics, imperialism, nationalism, exploration, and weird science.
Again, existing rules can be used to cover this....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Those are good. Though one thing that we should remember is how to fit more esoteric tech that would be found only in fictional genres. So things from ancient magitech of Atlantis, or Steampunk airships, or Dieselpunk airships, or much of the technology seen in Wells and Verne books. I definitely want to see real-world technology as well as fictional technology to run really different and fantastical games.

Also my reason for combining Renaissance with Industrial is that we really have enough to run a medieval and renaissance inspired game honestly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I like where this topic is going.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Aberrations would certainly be my go to for psychic energies. Outsiders and fey too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Kana wrote:
They have acknowledged that there are issues. In this post Jason Bulmahn says not only do they know there are issues, but that they will be addressing them.

That was 24 days ago and seemingly addressed minor things before the scope of the poor editing was realized. Not to mention it's not really in a public accessed area that people can read, like a stickied thread or blot post. That's the issue is have. No one would have seen that post if you didn't ljnk it for us.

Also, it doesn't address how this will be prevented for future GenCon releases, which is what I would like to see. I don't want to spend money on Occult Adventures if it's going to have the same editing issues.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Darkholme wrote:

The degree to which magic items are requied to not screw up game balance is kindof annoying, and it would have been nice if the game shipped with an alternate mechanic to replace it rather than needing to be something I houserule out.

5e is much better for low magic, and I suspect that will be the scenario where I start making regular use of it.

Pathfinder Unchained would probably be the book to have low magic gaming. They are going to have alternate rules systems for crafting mundane and magic items as well as monster creation. So who knows? Good to make a topic about it, since it's still being developed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Marc Radle wrote:

An actual dowloadable errata document will happen when rhe book gets a second printing.

However, my hunch is Paizo is keenly aware that this book in particular is sorely in need of a thorough FAQ asap and is already hard at work making it happen

Still, it would be nice to have a dev post saying that they are looking at it and apologizng for the editing issues. I don't need an eta. I just want some form of acknowledgement and apology. Hell, we got a whole blot post about the mismatched title for ACG. I just want a two-three sentence post about the editing here for the fans to see so we know that there is something being done. And something later down the road explaining how they hope to prevent this repeating itself for Occult Adventures.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

No prob. Not tonight since I'm playing caretaker to my sickly lady friend. But definitely this weekend.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Consider me interested. I can cover Aztec, Mayan, Incas, and Taino pantheons if necessary.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

As a fan of Arcadia, I don't want Paizo to be afraid of having Arcadian villains out of fear of offending people. If you treat them like actual people and not as caricatures (both positive and negative) then everything will be fine. But I don't like this "Arcadians cant be villains or victims" attitude people seem to have. Or this "let the Arcadians invade as some odd form of colonial payback". Feels less driven by telling a good story and more driven by "sticking it to the man". I don't want that at all.

I don't want Jim Crow: the RPG. But I also don't want White Guilt-finder either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Tels wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Bill Dunn wrote:


There's no point if grousing about it. Not all games are going to enable all concepts out of the box and that's OK.
A dexterous character who wields a rapier is really iconic character concept. It is a failure that hte game do not support that concept (well, perhaps it does now with the ACG, not sure).
It doesn't, I know, I've ranted about it.

Swashbuckler comes close, but you need another suppliment to get dex to your rapier. Devs really droped the ball and disappointed a lot of swashbuckler fans.absolutely nailed it on that one. :/


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
anlashok wrote:
Bill Dunn wrote:


There's no point if grousing about it. Not all games are going to enable all concepts out of the box and that's OK.

I'm sorry but no. That's insane.

Not all games are going to enable all concepts, no. I'm not going to expect to play my space pirate captain and her fleet of battlecruisers in Pathfinder. I'll play rogue Trader or Savage Worlds for that.

But when the system itself has no problem with the concept and we're talking about something as trivial as tweaking an existing feat? There's definitely a point in "grousing" about it.

This idea that you can't have any opinion on a product other than a positive one and still play it is completely absurd.

But but... Paizo doesn't have to make good options for anything! And critiquing them is bad, because we'd just be whining like petulant children. Instead, the adult thing to do is to accept mediocrity or take our ball somewhere else. Clearly voicing dissent is the wrong thing to do always! :p


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Bill Dunn wrote:
Suichimo wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Seems to me a LOT of people complain about the system as it is. Complaints about not enough dex-to-damage options just up your strength if you really want to melee THAT badly

And if that is against your concept?

Then you've got a few choices to make:

1) house rule it with willing GM and players
2) accept your concept can only be approximated with the rules you've got and do the best you can
3) play a game in which that concept can be achieved like Mutants and Masterminds or some other system
4) change your concept

There's no point if grousing about it. Not all games are going to enable all concepts out of the box and that's OK.

No, its not okay. If you want more options or better designed options, you should voice that opinion and show it's merit. Just smiling and accepting mediocrity is a worthless method of going about anything in life. Whether it's dex to damage or more representation in RPG or better editing, people should voice it for the betterment of the game. Hell, that's how Pathfinder was created. If we folloeed your advice, we'd all be smiling like fools playing 5e and letting our 3.5 and 4e books to gather dust.

Mediocrity should never be accepted and no one, fan or worker, should ever get complacent. Not saying Paizo is either, I'm just saying that the "like mediocrity or leave" is a worthless, dismiss binary option in a world where there are better options. Like improvement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

They have actual rules for fighting the hunger in Blood of the Night.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Thelemic_Noun wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Lol wanking
You're not supposed to laugh when you're doing that. If you are, something has gone horribly wrong.

Or horribly awesome :D


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I am sick of the apartment-house disparity. Damned Ivory Tower balance!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Odraude wrote:
I like Pathfinder but I need a break from it. ACG really has me bummed and I think I'm going to hold off on purchasing anything till that is sorted.

See the ACG has done the opposite for me.

I feel like spont feats goes a long way to addressing the martial vs caster disparity, and investigator does a great job at making a direct damage skillmonkey that can skillmonkey as well or better than the Bard with minimal combat investment (4 feats and 1 talent, 14 in dex and str).

If I didn't have a laundry list of psionic classes I wanted to play an MMM warrior and investigator would defiantly be on my *soon to play* list.

The content of the ACG is awesome. But the editing really kills it for me. And the lack of dev responses assuring things are being looked at is also disappointing me. With the exceptin of Liz who did kindly tell me that they are listening. Which I am very grateful for, but there needs to be an easier to access announcement about it. I mean, we got a whole blot post about the mismatched title for the ACG. I just want a topic that says the equivalent of "We're sorry and we're looking into it". I feel they used to be more transparent and engaging on these issues than they are now. Maybe it's a result of dealing with angry fans that cant express criticism without insult. That can wear on a person after a while. Who knows.

I'm also worried Occult Adventures will suffer the same fate, since GenCon is coming earlier next year. I don't know, I just feel less confident in Paizo lately with the handling of the ACG. So I'm taking some time, waiting for some word about the ACG being sorted. That and I'm still unemployed :/


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Every time I see this thread update, I get hopeful for more information. And then get disappointed that it's more forum roleplaying.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I will never understand the draw to Doctor Who.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Wiggz wrote:
Krathanos wrote:
Chalk up another vote for a dragon-centric AP. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we still haven't had a Dragon BBEG, which is a crying shame.

But hey - we've got Robo-Gods!

Maybe they should do a 'transformer' themed AP next, or one where the PC's go on a five year mission to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations...

This is a really good idea. I've been working on a planet hopping adventure for awhile now, especially with the Technology Guide out and about.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
Odraude wrote:
darkwarriorkarg wrote:
We went from Torag to Erastil dysfunction...
If you want, we can make this about how Iomedae is the epitome of Lawful Stupid now :)
No she's A%@@$%& Good.. With an appreciation for TranceStep appearantly.

Poe-tay-toe, poe-tah-toe

:p


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Interesting. Any of this fit into dieselpunk settings?

See above. It assumes Industrial Revolution / Roaring 20s, but it should fit your needs perfectly. Dario and I based our flavor after cult-famous scientists like Tesla, but the style is purposefully between WWI and WWII.

You'd have to ignore most of the artwork in the book and say it looks like your own stuff, but there's nothing specifically stopping it from being diesel, and it would work well enough flavored as such. We define the driving power source, immateria, as being "any mundane natural force," of which diesel power certainly applies.

I can most certainly dig that. I was just complaining about a lack of dieselpunk in Pathfinder so this will fit nicely.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
darkwarriorkarg wrote:
We went from Torag to Erastil dysfunction...

If you want, we can make this about how Iomedae is the epitome of Lawful Stupid now :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Gnomezrule wrote:
Odraude wrote:

Honestly, I feel like there will never be a good, official Dex-to-Damage feat in Pathfinder. Feats like this cement that in this instance, the devs are unwilling to change this design philosophy, no matter how much evidence is brought up.

May as well give up and hope a 3PP comes up with something. Only thing more disappointing than this is the lack of dev response about the editing of the ACG.

It's getting harder and harder to defend Paizo these days. It really is.

Or a player cements his or her opinion that differs from the dev (and other players) that such an option needs to be limited and not open ended or that it would make DEX even more of a super stat than it already is.

If you are set that Dex to Damage is not game breaking and you want it spread wider in your games. Create a second feat that gives dex to damage with finessible weapons. Or make finesse as it is a weapon property of the current finessible weapons and at your table "Weapon Finesse" grants dex to damage.

"Do it yourself" is a hackeneyed excuse that doesn't contribute anything. That's great for when I GM, but what if I play with another GM that doesn't allow that? Or, heaven forbid, PFS, where I can't bring house rules in? What do I do now? That's why people want an official version and have brought enough evidence to show that it's not unbalanced. While the opponents haven't had the same evidence forward, mathematical or anecdotal. So it feels like no matter what evidence and politeness we use, their minds will never change and we'll never see what we want. Hence the frustration that nobody is listening.

Also gnomes do, in fact, rule :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I wish Dragon78 were here. He'd say something optimistic and cheer me up today. :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Yes


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

As an aside, what is a good example of third party companies that do some of these genres? Like steampunk or future or my favorite dieselpunk.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
The Crusader wrote:

I guess the real question is: After they blanded Erastil, after they watered down Torag, (and anticipating that they'll sand off any sharp edges that Abadar might have) what's left that separates one Paladin from another? It's not about aligning yourself with a deity, because you can only act one way. So, you're really just choosing domains, at this point (which only matters for Sacred Servants...).

I guess we're all just Sarenrae worshipers whether we want to be, or not...

And did somebody upthread say the devs wanted to change Ragathiel's obediences, too??!?

This is a little hyperbolic. The Erastil one especially did have the higher chance of alienating female gamers and making them more uncomfortable. It'd be like having a LG deity that's okay with slavery, then wondering why all your black players don't want to play with you anymore. The Erastile change was needed in my opinion.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Like the title suggests, I wanna brainstorm some awesome ways to describe how a mortal becomes a god.

1) The mortal sneaks into the Boneyard and erases their name from the book of life.

2) Deicide, which curses the murderer with becoming the new god.

3) Devouring the flesh and blood of a god in its entirety.

4) All gods are dreamers that sleep in the plane of dreams to untether themselves from the physical world and become omnipotent. You can find "your bed " in the Dreamlands, fight your way in, then rest for all eternity to become a god.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Orthos wrote:
Now let's be fair, Kratos is clearly playing in a setting where corporeal afterlives are the norm and there is a physical entrance/exit to the afterlife on the Material Plane.

Sounds like my setting :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Tacticslion wrote:

While I disagree with Thelemic_Noun's assertion that one needs stats in that case (at least without reasonable limits on the word 'needs'),

Kthulhu wrote:

Nah, you just apply the +2 modifier to the ally god's +infinity, and compare it to the enemy god's DC of infinity.

End result: The winning god is decided by which one winning makes a better story/adventure.

... is equally invalid.

So, let's reiterate what we've learned:

What we've learned wrote:

FOR CERTAIN GROUPS, STATS FOR GODS ARE BAD IDEAS. THOSE GROUPS SHOULD AVOID HAVING THEM.

FOR OTHERS, THEY ARE USEFUL - AND EVEN 'NECESSARY' - FOR THE SAKE OF GOOD GAMING AND GOOD STORY TELLING.

SO LET US REMOVE THE CONVERSATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD HAVE STATS, AS THAT IS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS THREAD.

This is the only thing that has been established - and established repeatedly - for the last two pages.

Come on, everybody. This is a thread about peoples' homebrew rules. If you've any comment other than, "I don't see the need for them personally." please feel free to make it. If you haven't noted that you don't need rules like this, but would like, to, excellent. If you have rules that you'd like to note for others to look at, such as Kthulu's last post, wonderful.

But currently we're dragging a guy's thread down; insinuating that he either play your way or he's doing it wrong is a wasted effort. Stop it. The opinion on the subject is noted, but it's now time to move on.

Please critique the rules, not the need for them. Thanks!

(That said, I don't know how it's only now become just apparent that Kratos is a dirty power-gamer. I mean, dude's abusing the rules all over the place. And man... all those dirt roads, and blood. And he never bathes. Ugh.)

+1


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Kain Darkwind wrote:

Well, they do now, anyways. Feel free to offer thoughts. If you have non-ridiculous builds (Animal/Nature Oracle, infinite spell loops are ignored, etc) that can beat them, please point out the weakness to me so I can determine if it's something a deity ought to be able to counteract.

Full thread here.

** spoiler omitted **...

Found Mythender in Golarion here, if you want some inspiration.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
ElementalXX wrote:
Hey! i just noticed, Kratos is a munchkin

So is Elric of Melnibone clearly. Dirty dirty munchkins :p


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Neongelion wrote:

You know, as much as a massive fan I am for mixing sci-fi with fantasy, I'm not sure I'd use Pathfinder for games that have no fantasy elements in it at all. At that point, if I wanted to do pure, unadulterated hard sci-fi, I'd just use another system like Traveller or Eclipse Phase or a more generic ruleset like Savage Worlds.

Now something like Rifts, on the other hand, would be cool. I despised the Rifts ruleset but I think its setting is pretty cool, if only to get inspiration for my homebrew setting (which is essentially the Shadowrun universe, several centuries after a gigantic apocalypse reverted the world to a medieval civilization but still have all these high-tech stuff lying around).

I'm of the opposite opinion, especially after the Technology Guide and multitude of 3PP companies that have made alternate genres out of the d20 system. I feel Pathfinder is robust enough to handle these rules additions with some work.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
ElementalXX wrote:
I find killing gods cool, should i feel bad? :/

You should. Chances are you are a dirty munchkin :p


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Feels like we want the same thing but with a different name :p


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
I was trying to come up with a better term and couldn't think of anything. Just using the common usage.
I'm pretty sure I'm not the only person who sees it as a derogatory term when it comes to defining game content.

>spends all thread pooping all over anyone that wants stats for deities

>gets offended by the word fluff

Okay then, time for sleep :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Bandw2 wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Dieselpunk
i just want this, so much this.

Mmhmm. Ever since I saw the Batman animated series from the 90's and the anime Metropolis, I've been in love with diesel/decopunk


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

If fighting gods is fun for people, then let there be deity stats. I personally like the Pathfinder version of Mythender, which uses the mythic paths and is simple and more free form.

I'm on a tablet so I don't have the favorite for it. Hopefully someone can link it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
The Crusader wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
I bet someone will complain about this change, even though it was called for.

Challenge Accepted.

I actually liked the fact that all the LG deities were not squeaky clean. I guess we can just keep ironing out all of the wrinkles until they are all the same...

Nothing bland about that.

Except this isn't making them all the same.

It's making Torag actually Good.

There is nothing bland about that unless one buys into the wrongheaded conceit that the only way things can be interesting or have depth is to grimdark them up.

Is long past burnt out on Good being portrayed as "good in name only" in this genre. Like by twenty or so years.

I'm sorry to disagree with you here. I have no problem with Torag being more than a bit of a jerk to his enemies, and I read "scatter" to mean something other and considerably less than "genocide".

I have to agree with Freehold here. I don't read scatter their enemies as total genocide and salting the fields. More just a mass exile. I wouldn't call that good, but I certainly wouldn't call that evil.

Neutral change for me to be honest. I don't use Golarion so if people prefer this, then I can dig it. Mikaze will at least be happy to hear the NG God of undead in my setting. :p


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

So with the Technology Guide out, it's really got me wanting to see other genres done in Pathfinder. So what are your wants in a possible (but totally speculative) Ultimate Technology,?

I'd like to see the book separated into these chapters :

Primitive Era: Stone Age and Bronze Age adventuring, with rules for low magic, sword and sorcery, Hellenistic, and sword and sandal gaming. Themes would include low magic, tribalism and animism, survival, and humans transcending from nomadic tribes to sedentary civilizations. Or on the opposite side, high magic with demigods roaming the world doing wild things. Ancient astronauts, cities of wonder that are destined to sink from their hubris, living gods.

Post-Medieval Era: Renaissance through Victorian and Edwardian and ending just during the Interwar period. Classics such as Steam Punk, Gaslight Romances, Pulp Stories, Early Soft Science Fiction, and Sword and Planet. Themes such as the difference engine, the march of industry, eugenics, imperialism, nationalism, exploration, and weird science.

Modern Era: Postwar Modernism to the Information Age. Noir, Dieselpunk, Atompunk, and Contemporary Era genres. Would deal with themes of paranoia, nuclear technology, war, and such.

Future Ara: Beyond the modern era. Science Fiction of all types, from Hard to Soft, Cyberpunk to Post Apocalyptic. Human transcendentalism, exploration, rights of non-humans (robots), oppression... sky's the limit on this one.

So, what ideas do you have for an expanded Pathfinder?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Honestly I'm okay with that. Ive always wanted vancian psionics but that never existed until this book. So I'm happy to use psionics with a magic system I prefer.

That said, the Kineticist has been said to not be a caster but still able to manifest powers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I actually prefer Chelish, since Cheliaxian sounds too much like chillax.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
memorax wrote:
Odraude wrote:


On the other hand, we got the Slayer and Investigator as actual good skill classes that can contribute more than most martials can.

All any of this proves is that there are examples of good mechanics and bad mechanics that are in Paizo books. Though it's my opinion that editing aside, ACG has a great deal of good options, with a few that admittedly boggle the mind.

Don't get me wrong there are good things. Though with the Investigator we might as well just have a tombstone with the heading Rogue RIP 2014 IMO. No reason to take a Rogue anymore. Slayer is good as well. I just think that in the end feedback is useless IMO. As for better or worse the devs will do their own thing.

That's also not true. Feedback was taken into account and applied during the playtest and after. For example, the action for studied target on the Slayer was changed in regards to the feedback given.

The thing with any beta is that the feedback isn't always right or matches with the design vision of the company. For better or worse, a company sifts through the feedback and sees what aligns with it. Of course I don't agree with their decisions all the time (like Dex to damage). But from the previous books we've read they do listen and apply what feedback fits in the game.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Dustin Ashe wrote:
Odraude wrote:

I feel like I'm the only person that wants a colonial Arcadia adventure now... I have run one, which included the less than savory themes.

Course it crashed and burned so maybe that's telling me something...

Oh, we can totally have a colonial AP. I just want to be the Arcadians, not the Avistans. There is nothing heroic that I can see about taking part in colonizing an inhabited continent.

Well, how I ran it is that the setting I run is essentially Age of Sail Caribbean. It has native kingdoms based on the Taino and Carib peoples with a lot of liberties taken, as well as colonists that invaded more deserted islands before being beaten into a stalemate after a hundred years of war. There is one deserted island that I used as the base colony by both colonists and the natives. Of course, it was inhabited by drow and lizardfolk, but the players didn't kick them off their lands and were in warm relations with them. Better with the drow.

Course, when I run, I don't really shy away from mature topics like slavery. But, I never show them in a positive light and many times, I don't dwell on them. It's always counter balanced by goodly people that help the players. And ultimately, if people aren't comfortable with it, I dial it back even more.

One day I'll have to upload my document with the information.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I feel like I'm the only person that wants a colonial Arcadia adventure now... I have run one, which included the less than savory themes.

Course it crashed and burned so maybe that's telling me something...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
memorax wrote:
I'm with Kthulhu. After seizing what we got with Sacred Geometry and Slashing Geace I'm not holding my breath on the revised Stealth rules.

On the other hand, we got the Slayer and Investigator as actual good skill classes that can contribute more than most martials can.

All any of this proves is that there are examples of good mechanics and bad mechanics that are in Paizo books. Though it's my opinion that editing aside, ACG has a great deal of good options, with a few that admittedly boggle the mind.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:
wakedown wrote:
Stealth is still kind of clunky in the 3.5/PF era, which is why Paizo has the Stealth Playtest rules around for a revision/overhaul to the system.
Do you honestly believe that anything is ever going to come of a thread that lasted a month three years ago? That wasn't a play test, that was Paizo throwing something out there to quiet the criticism of how poorly written the Pathfinder stealth rules are for a little while.

Actually, I do. I can see stealth being addressed in Pathfinder Unchained, since the whole point of the book is to look at problem areas that exist due to backwards compatibility. And issues people have had. They have confirmed changes to the rogue, monk, and fighter. So I have some faith in the content.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Aaaaaaand there goes the joke :p

I get that it's a joke, I just enjoy responding to jokes as if they were serious. Maybe there's something wrong with me...

Nah.

Fair nuff.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Devil's Advocate wrote:

Well, whatever the [Redacted] class is, let me be the first to say what we're all thinking:

[Redacted] is the final nail in the rogue's coffin. The rogue class was already the weakest in the game, and the [Redacted] only makes it worse. Anything you can build as a rogue you can shoehorn into the [Redacted] class instead, and doing so makes a better rogue than the actual rogue.

The Slayer and Investigator have already finished killing the Rogue and burying it. All further classes could do would be defile the corpse.

Though Pathfinder Unchained might resurrect it, in which case this is likely simply not true.

Aaaaaaand there goes the joke :p

1 to 50 of 1,294 << 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.