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

Odraude's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Society Member. 6,755 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 2 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 6,755 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I can agree on the megacorps, at least for some nations. I really like transhuman stuff though. I love the idea of uploading consciousnesses and the ramifications of that, especially for what it does to one's soul if they become digitized. I'll admit, it would be a bit of a logistic nightmare if you could implant yourself into another biological body. Do you get the stats of that body? How do you balance it, if even? If the body can cast magic, do you suddenly cast magic? Do you lose some class features, all, or keep them? Maybe for sleeving, it would be confined to being downloaded into robots, androids, and cyborgs.

Arturius Fischer wrote:

It's pretty much the same issue focused when characters are on a sailing ship. Each character can fulfill a different role, or each player can be given something else to do or dice to roll for a specific task. The "Ship as one giant PC, with players working as a team" is generally how ships WORK.

If you want it to be 'smoother' or 'faster' or whatever, you have to give a specific goal. What do those terms mean to you?

You'll find in most SciFi / Space Opera shows, most of the crew isn't directly contributing to the fight. Oh, sure, Ensign Snuffy is making sure the hyperspace capacitors are properly charged and not damaged, and Sgt Shootem has a marine crew ready to repel boarders, but we don't see that very much. Even the main characters often aren't all directly contributing. What are Princess Leia and C-3PO doing on the Millenium Falcon in a fight? Not much, that's for sure.

So if you're running the game or wanting one that meets your requirements, you'll have to be a bit more specific.

Personally, I'd talk with the players and find out how they would be interested in working together for it.

If everyone wants a specific role, such as engineer and pilot and gunner and whatnot, then the "Giant Team PC" that is the default works fine (though you MIGHT want to add more options. Personally I take the D20 Future AND Star Wars D20 character spaceship roles options and smush them together, so all the side roles have plenty ways to help).

On the other hand, if EVERYONE wants to fight and shoot guns, the DM should consider them getting some type of Drone Ship (small party) or Carrier (large party) and the players planning out their characters accordingly. This way, each person gets to control a ship, even though it isn't THE ship, and everyone gets to fight as normal on the battlemap. Of course, this will slow things down, just as more PC's cause combats to take longer.

This Starfinder reminds me a LOT of the old Dragonstar. I hope it is a spiritual successor to it,...

The drone control isn't a half bad idea actually. It would give all of the players something to do in combat. Would be a cool way to handle it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While never leaving the planet, I've had players deal with aliens both ancient and recent. One adventure I'm going to run will involve delving into a ruins that was built over an old star ship with the original alien still in there in stasis.

Aside from those, we have plenty of bestiary races that are commonly used. Aasimar, tiefling, the elemental races. They may as well be core races. And since a lot of science fantasy really showcases a lot of races (like Star Wars), id redirect t expect more

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Would be interesting for them to delve into reputation (rep) as a form of currency, like in Eclipse Phase and Nova Praxis.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I hope it is an octopus race. I like octopi!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What I don't want to see is a gutting of anything deemed a sacred cow or D&D-ism just because of presence. I get that it's a new ruleset and a good opportunity to try new things, but at the same time, there is a lot of this I'd like to use in my basic Pathfinder game. And I'd personally prefer some aspects like Vancian magic to other systems. While I don't want Starfinder to just be copy paste Pathfinder, I still want some of the more iconic d&d isms to remain in.

Yes. I hope there are a couple of non humanoid creatures in there.

Ten works. Hell we already have more in base Pathfinder and science fiction really highlights the variety of aliens in the setting.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly I prefer Vancian magic.

I'm hoping that too. I'd love to see some aliens from outside of the solar system or even galaxy.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The main website talks about playing as them, so I think you're safe.

I'd really like aliens with alternative biochemistries. Ammonia and silicone bases life would be interesting to see.

rainzax wrote:

Based on a post here, I ran some statistics and devised the following chart:

Declining Dice

d12 (approx 25)
d10 (approx 20)
d8 (approx 10)
d6 (approx 5)
d4 (approx 2.5)

Each time a device is used, the user rolls the dice, which "declines" on a "1" to the next lower type. Once at "d4", a "1" drains the device of charges entirely.

The statistics above give an average of how many uses can be reasonably expected starting with a certain die type. So, a staff having 10 charges would start at d8.

I actually use this similar concept for Weapon Degradation. And I've seen it done for ammo and consumables in The Black Hack.Works really well.

Dragonchess Player wrote:
Starfox wrote:

I still want a humanocentric setting. It is just too much work to figure out how a society built on another race would work.

Dragonchess Player wrote:
3) Cheap technology and CR adjustments reflecting it. The biggest obstacle I've found in running a space campaign is that the costs in the Technology guide are too high for normal wealth by level and still having a distinct technological feel at first level. I've had to make price adjustments and CR adjustments to compensate and I hope Starfinder does too. I suspect this is one of the main reasons why this is a separate RPG line, since if the classes have the same power level then cheap technology would significantly boost their strength.
The easy way to do this is trough inflation. Base wealth levels are simply MUCH higher. So you can either get a +1 enchantment or a new laser scope for your 2000 credits, both being cheap options in the grand scheme of things. Yes this ups the power level.

You were quoting Malwing, not me.

Although an expansion on technology being cheaper, like the Firearms in Your Campaign section in Ultimate Combat, in a high-tech environment would be useful. If technology is cheap (i.e., 25% or even 10% of the market price listed in the Technology Guide), but magic is still as expensive as in the Core Rules, that could change the balance between the two drastically, without changing the "power level" of either.

I'd especially like a discussion on how different technology is either less or more expensive depending on the advancement level in that field. For example, having races specialize in different technologies (using Core races and the Technology Guide as a basis): dwarves specializing in material technology and robotics (possibly including cybertech), elves specializing in bio-tech and pharmaceuticals, gnomes specializing in gravity manipulation, halflings specializing in nanotech, humans...

I like that idea and it'd be pretty simple for the GM to do that. If a civilization is known for thier gravity tech, then their gravity guns would be a different price than elsewhere.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd actually prefer if they kept magic. I think there is something cool about space wizards on the moon. And magic keeps this system unique and opens up cool options. Removing magic from the game would just make this Traveller and at that point, I may as well play that. Why throw out the baby with the bath water? If we can have aliens and tech in our fantasy, then we can certainly have magic and elves in our science fantasy.

Oh man, the Thing would be awesome as a monster.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

There's a lot of futurism I want to see in this game.

- Uplifts: I want to see animals or other creatures uplifted to sentience, and made as a playable race.

- Digitizing Consciousness: Seen heavily in Eclipse Phase, I'd love players to be able to upload their consciousness into other bodies. Definitely robot/cyborg bodies. Maybe flesh and bone bodies.

- Digital Lifeforms: I love the idea of either advanced A.I. as PCs or people that have chosen to remain digital and on the net as an option.

- Mecha: Power Armor is awesome, don't get me wrong. But giant robots are super cool. And with giant Pathfinder monsters, at least we'd have a reason to have them around. We dig giant robots yo!

- Cybernetic and Bioenhancement options: I really want to be able to upgrade our people with different abilities tied to either technology or bio enhancements.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah magitech is cool by me.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, I hope they don't go the route of magic = technology. It just feels like a cop out. I'd rather they be two separate forces that can be combined for interesting effects. What I don't want are lasers that are just wands of fireballs reskinned.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There were definitely green skinned people, though I might be misremembering. It's been awhile since I read it.

I mean, I imagine that you could simply file the serial numbers off and that's it. It's not hard to convert things, even stuff tied to a setting.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

If Distant Worlds is the template, then we can really expect standard sci fi technology, especially seen in the 50's as well as 70's retrofuturism, combined with some sci fi stuff from the Victorian/Edwardian authors (H.G. Wells, Edgar Burroughs), with some magic in there. I definitely want there to be magic, but I also want technology to have at least an equal power in the world. I just want to play a fighter with a rocket arm really :)

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Gallyck wrote:

People who wont want magic are wrong.

WTF do you think the force is? Bleh. All i see in this thread is everyone wish fulfillment of nerfing the piss out of casters.

I mean, the thread is title "What you don't want to see in Starfinder." So it's going to be what people don't want to see in Starfinder.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
Green Akiton man? Don't you mean red?

Huh, I guess you're right. I might have been crossing my John Carter with Akiton a bit.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hope to see a green Akiton man as an iconic. Maybe their version of a ranger (explorer? recon?).

Yeah it would be weird if they were completely separate. Though I could see a Campaign Setting book that details more Golarion system specific creatures alongside the Bestiary 6.

I'd love to see some of the famous aliens from folklore and the movies. The Flatwoods Monster in the bestiary would be pretty awesome. Little green men would also be really cool, maybe called something else. We already have greys. I'd love to see the tripod creatures from War of the Worlds (the newer movie). They looks really awesome and having their tripods stated would be cool. I remember just ad hocing stats for them when I did a one shot that was an alien invasion of Faerun, but I forgot what they were.

In terms of technology, while we have robots, I'd like to see more on digital life. People who have uploaded their consciousness or advanced AIs. I've always liked transhumanism so I'd love to see a little Eclipse Phase in the game.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lord Fyre wrote:
WombattheDaniel wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
No, I don't like WH40K's setting, why do you ask?
This is one of the saddest sentences I've ever read.
I disagree. Warhammer 40k is entirely too "grimdark" for me.

Honestly, modern day WH40K has kind of acknowledged their grimdarkness and has really become a parody of itself rather than taking it too seriously. Though the same can't be said of their fan base...

1 person marked this as a favorite.
AngryNerdRageDemon wrote:


Odraude wrote:
Ruby Rhod
I hate everything about you.

Dawww, you're too kind :D

Voss wrote:
Luthorne wrote:
I hope guns and similar ranged weaponry won't completely replace melee fighting.

Eh. On the one hand, I think most modern & SF settings are pretty unreasonable if a knife or sword is a effect answer to combat.

On the other hand, the D&D chassis is really terrible at guns, and always has been. So even when they are good choices mechanically, they're terrible at being guns and just killing people quickly with bullets. It just ends up unsatisfying all around.

I'm with Coffee Demon on 'net avatars' and decking/hacking stuff. Splits the party/story/players in the worst possible way.

For what I definitely don't want to see in Starfinder: fighters (by any name), monks and any shoehorned attempt at a 'noble' class. Or anything 'balanced' by 2 class skills per level.

You'd be pretty surprised. In close quarters combat, there is a great deal of use of your free hand and a knife against someone with a rifle. Pretty much all modern day armed forces teach that.

Of course, I just want lightsabers dammit! :)

Also for the anti-net people I think it'd stretch my disbelief way too much if there wasn't some kind of internet analogue in this. Especially given how we have one and how quickly it has changed our world. I'd actually love to see some transhuman, Eclipse Phase stuff in here.

As for stuff I don't want? Gotta agree with rehashing old rules. Don't want to spent money on the same feats or classes. Other than that? Can't really think of anything I don't really want.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Hell yeah. You gotta have space bards. How else am I going to play Ruby Rhod?

With the anouncement of Starfinder for next year, I'd imagine we'd be seeing more aliens and space faring creatures to support the new rulebook.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

My body is ready!

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Man that interview was really enlightening. Sad to hear the background issues behind all this :(

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean, can't really blame him for that I suppose. If my job included reading every negative post about something in the game by people that can't say anything without being a c~*~ about it, I wouldn't look forward to it either.

I honestly wouldn't mind a second edition, but with minor changes. Keep the same basic engine but fix up what's wrong.

Or maybe a Pathfinder Unchained 2. I'd actually really like that.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

A lot of it is the removal of meaningful restrictions on casters, especially as they level. Most metamagic feats help them get around such restrictions which really makes them ramp up.

What I've done in my games is that for spells, I take a lot of inspiration from novels and such on restrictions on magic. Wild Magic, magic that harms the caster, turning most high level spells into long rituals.

6 people marked this as a favorite.

The irony is that Pathfinder is literally a 3PP homebrew of 3.5.

Dice rolling worked better in older editions because ability scores werent so tied to things like saving throws and the math was flatter. Look at LotFP, Beyond the Wall, or really any retroclone and you can see that. In 3.X, stats are more important, so you can really feel the sting. Also, many retroclones have funnels where you basically make a bunch of charcters and run them through an adventure. Whoever survives is your character.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Marvin Ghey wrote:
Lol, I guess. I'm just talking about getting those low stats up so they'll be, or at least feel, more effective in play. Changes the mindset as much as anything else, since that's an issue for some folks. Of course more important stats still will get the higher number, but it avoids forcing stats lower simply to bump another higher. I think it encourages parity, or at least competence; more people can be better at more things.

Only for people who roll well. And even then, it doesn't always work out that way.

I mean if I get an 18, 12, 12, 12, 6, 6 I'm not only pretty much required to play a SAD caster (or be screwed), I'm forced to dump lower than I probably would in point-buy.

And that's not even talking about something like 14, 12, 12, 12, 10, 6 where I'm not only screwed no matter my class, but also have a godawful dump stat to boot.

And both of those can be in the same group as the guy who rolled 18, 16, 16, 15, 14, 12. And nothing forces that guy not to play a Cleric or Druid and still be way more badass than any of the other characters.

In short, point-buy is an awful way to attempt to achieve any sort of balance whatsoever. Unless you can somehow magically make your martial players roll better than those who play casters, anyway.

sure you dont mean dice roll?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not really. It's much more accepted in the OSR community than in Pathfinder, but homebrew is generally accepted. Even attitudes about 3PP are a lot warmer than it was five years ago.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There are three main types of encounters. Combat, social, and skill. Every other class can contribute something to these encounter types. Rogues have sneak attack and skills to deal with people, obstacles, and traps. Unchained rogue has other stuff that I don't recall right now for combat. Barbarians have a good skill list, rage, and some nifty rage powers to help them deal with obstacles. Wizards and clerics have magic and with more feats that let them break what little constrains they have, plus are consistently buffed by additional spells added to their list. . Rangers have skills, spells, weapon styles, an animal companion... You get the picture.

Fighters though don't have that same versatility. In combat, they do damage, but so does a barbarian. More often than not, the barbarian and ranger can come close and occasionally out damage while still having utility outside of combat. Without a great deal of investment, they can have some decent skills while still contributing greatly in combat. If a fighter wants the same skill points as a barbarian, they need at least an Intelligence of 14 to get the minimum 4 points that a barbarian straight up gets without any intelligence investment. They'd need an 18 in Intelligence to get the same 6 that a Ranger starts off with. And while they can get feats to shore up the weaknesses of a lack of skills, they become less effective in combat. Remember that while they get a feat every level, half of those must be combat feats. And putting points into Int or Charisma makes your Wisdom suffer, which is really bad because your will save is terrible. Bravery only works on one type of Will save. Mind control is pretty much your enemy, even with Iron Will. If you put points into Wisdom, then you will be hard pressed to find room for Int and Char.

It's not a matter of being a "dirty rotten min-maxer". I'm actually a firm believer that you don't NEED an 18 in your primary stat. But I've played a two handed fighter that didn't have an 18 Strength or a negative Charisma. And it was still difficult to contribute to anything outside of combat. With 20 point buy and the intent to not min-max, I found myself with a 14 Strength, a 14 in Dex, a 14 in Con, and a 13 in Int, with a 12 in Wis, and a 10 in Charisma. This is without picking a race mind you. That gets you 3 skill points and if you pick a trait that gives you Diplomacy as a class skill, that's really only a +4 to Diplomacy, which is okay, but nothing special. And now you have only two other skill points to use. Your perception is going to be +2 unless you can find a way to make it a class skill. Plus, your other physical skills are lower. You have a lower AC and HP, so you will feel that pain. Your Will save is +1. It's going to be a long rough road unless you pick a race to compliment your stats.

Meanwhile, a barbarian has their rage and rage powers to continue to rock out. Superstition is like an Iron Will that levels with you, and the drawback has rarely come up in game. So that makes up for your poor Will save, along with the bonus from Rage. Meanwhile the ranger has their spells and weapon styles and two good saves that make them still rock and roll in and out of combat without nearly the investment that the fighter needs. With 20 point buy, I can give my ranger similar stats and they will bring more to the table. Without min-maxing, I decide to give my ranger a 14 Strength, a 14 in Dex, a 14 in Con, and an 8 in Int, with a 14 in Wis, and a 12 in Charisma. . Since I have six skill points, I don't need Int, so I can give myself some more Con for HP or Dex for AC. With me purposefully dumping my Int, I have 5 skill points, the same AC and Health, but a better Will save, more skills, a better Perception, and if I take the same trait to make Diplomacy a class skill, a better Diplomacy. Hell, I could be better at Intimidate (the only social skill a Fighter gets as a class skill) than a fighter. And comparing feats, yeah a Ranger only gets one while a fighter gets two, but both are probably snagging Power Attack. While the fighter can get another fear (combat or social), the ranger still has a better Will save, way more skill points, and later one, will have spells and a cool pet to kick ass with. Or the ability to support my allies with the other Hunter's option. And some of your skills improve in the right terrain, so unless you are travelling to a different terrain type every session, you're covered.

The problem isn't actually balance. It's equity. It's everyone having something to bring in during combat, skill, or social encounter. They don't have to bring the same thing as another, or even be 'equal'. But they have to bring something to do so they don't stay silent and twiddle their thumbs while the grown ups are talking. A bard can fight, surprisingly well in combat. But they bring their spells and Inspiring Song to the table for combat. For skills, again, spells are useful and they have a wide variety of skills they can use, plus Jack of All Trades. For social encounters, bards can use their Performance skills in place of their social skills to have duels of wit. They aren't damage dealers like barbarians or reality shapers like wizards, but they still bring interesting options to the table. Same with a paladin and ranger and even a barbarian! Every other class has class features that help them bring something different to the table in any of those three scenarios, and most of them have spells to boot, which are stronger than feats. To do the same with a fighter, you have to sacrifice more than any other class to have an 'okay' Diplomacy that has a 45% chance of success against an indifferent person. And you still only have two more points to spend, assuming you don't go human or favored class skill. And that's it. No spells, no class features, no nothing. Just that and the hopes that the GM will throw you a bone with magic items.

With only three skill points in a non-min-maxed Fighter build, what can they bring to the table in a social encounter? Or a skill encounter? That's the problem They don't NEED to be skill monkeys or faces, just like the bard isn't a massive damage dealer. But the bard still has options in combat. And the fighter needs options in social and skill encounters. That's essentially my problem with the fighter in just about every iteration of D&D.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I live in Ft Lauderdale and commute to Miami a lot so here is what I can tell you.

Avoid drinking the tap water. It was recently discovered that there is some kind of nuclear leakage getting into Biscayne Bay.

Have an umbrella on you. It gets really rainy, especially in the afternoon.

Be careful where you go. Some areas are not friendly to outsiders. Liberty City and Overtown are no gos. Wynwood is lovely but it is in the middle of gentrification and so there are still some rough areas. Be careful at night. Hialeah is great for Cubans, but definitely a rough neighborhood.

Like said before, public transportation is absolute garbage. Cab drivers are also shady down here. Best to avoid them. If you're going to drive, be careful with traffic, Traffic in Miami is terrible. It's like Mad Max down here. People will cut you off with barely an inch between you. You absolutely have to be aggressive. Uber may be your best bet, but so is walking. Just be careful, because cars have very little regard for pedestrians. And parking isn't cheap, just a heads up.

The food scene is really eclectic in Miami. I've worked many events down here with fellow cooks. Seafood is big. You'll get fresh fish and seafood daily, which is nice. There are some nice Cuban places and bodegas to get some great Cuban food. American food down here is southern food (biscuits and gravy, fried chicken grits, barbecue) mixed with American classics (hamburgers, pizza, hot dogs) and a wide variety of ethnic foods. Since we have a large Italian and Jewish population, you'll find some amazing pizzerias and delis.

Also a big thing is upscale casual gastropubs. Essentially pubs that have good food, and takes pub fare and elevates them to be more fancy but still way more relaxed than a fine dining area. You'll see a lot of local microbrews with great beers (Like Funky Buddha and Wynwood Brew), fancy but delicious pub fare (big fancy burgers, high quality fish and chips, delicious mac and cheeses), and a good mix of other foods, like Korean bbq or Hawaiian poke salads. Wynwood is king here. Wynwood Kitchen is an amazing restaurant that I've had the pleasure of working with, and I know the cooks there. They are amazing and love their job. Jimmy's Kitchen has amazing Puerto Rican food. As a Puerto Rican, I can say they do a pretty great job. Joey's and Kyu are also good, Kyu especially if you like Japanese and Korean inspired food.

If you want to take a break from Miami and come more North, Ft Lauderdale has some good restaurants in the Las Olas and Himmarshee areas. Foxy Brown and Red Cow are great and owned by the same restauranteer. Roco's Tacos is a great Mexican area. Tap42, where I work at, is an awesome gastropub with 42+ kegs of beer.

Hopefully you enjoy South Florida. It's great to visit, just not live in :)

Tels wrote:

Who says they have to be able to fight the bestiary? The lore for practically every campaign setting in existence has the more physically or magically powerful races (dragons, giants, aboleth, ogres, cyclopes etc) utterly dominating the 0-HD player races until they unlocked enough magic to fight back. Which fits right in with my personal belief that magic should be very limited. Hence the Adept spelllist unless a class feature expands it. One nice side effect of this is that every caster, arcane or divine, gains access to healing spells.

This means creatures like dragons or hydra or demons are a lot more dangerous because of the lack of magic and magical items. This is perfectly okay with me. I don't know if I'll ever get to run a campaign like this, but it sounds like it could be a lot of fun.

When running this, just be aware to make sure that the players understand this part. Tell them and encourage them to try creating tactics to deal with these monsters. With a limited set of options, you really need to be open to them about this and allow some crazy but innovative ways to deal with an encounter. Running away is always on the table of course, but if every encounter involves running away and you aren't running a Dr Who RPG, then it's going to get frustrating to your players.

Milo v3 wrote:
Part of it is lack of writing, an alphabet, agriculture, and a city state society, which would make it difficult for wizards or really anyone that uses spell research and spell books to exist.

*Looks at goblin spellbook rules, which is for a culture that lacks writing, an alphabet (probably), agriculture, and a city state society*

Basically.... You'd probably end up use cave paintings as spellbooks. Also if research is an issue, you can have the discovery of spells actually be things taught by outsiders and aberrations.

I feel the witch class would fit that role of gaining spells from an outside r our aberration.

Part of it is that. Part of it is lack of writing, an alphabet, agriculture, and a city state society, which would make it difficult for wizards or really anyone that uses spell research and spell books to exist. Part of it is flavor. I could see wizards in a Bronze Age era or beyond. But I think wizards and magi and arcanists might be the three scholarly classes I couldn't see fitting in the story of hunter gathering ancient men and women in a more primeval age.

I'd also say the same for classes depending on more ecclesiastic, organized religions, like the cleric or inquisitor.

doc the grey wrote:

Quick stuff:

1.) look into using the primative human Paizo produced about a year ago for the gauntlet charity event.

2.) make all weapons out of bone, stone, and obsidian.

3.) reduce the weapons and armor list significantly. Weapons should be focused on spears, clubs, axes, and darts while armors shouldn't really be anything you can't make out of the above materials, leather, or wood. Breastplates should be a rare find crafted from massive predators while hide and leathers should likely be the norm.

4.) Worry less about magic and more about access. If you are newer to the game and don't want to deal with a ton of stuff focus on Core only. Realize also if you are talking pre literate then you shouldn't have any scrolls floating around or you need to reinterpret what scrolls and spellbooks are. Maybe they are strips of bark with hand prints sprayed on them or pictures of animals being hunted. Maybe spellbooks are these giant murals painted on a wizards home cave making them hard to destroy but impossible to move.

5.) Realize that just about every class can work in this setting with a little flex: It might sound odd but by and large most classes should be able to fit here. Wizards paint murals on walls to hold their spells, occultists' channel their mysterious power through old relics they collect in their travels, alchemists are shamans who create various tonics and poultices to heal their families, and samurai are warriors who ride mammoths across the plains practicing their craft with spears against enemies of the tribe. Even gunslingers could work! Picture them as speakers of flames, mixing dung and fire and lighting them inside tubes carved of dragon bone, the only substance known that can handle the heat and pressure. Now might some be rare or odd? Yes! But remember that your players are PCs, they are supposed to be the rare and odd people.

6.) Limit bows! Realize that though bows are a thing in prehistory if you are going back to caveman they are some of the most advanced weapons of...

On the issue of bows, they weren't that rare. Certainly no composite bows, but many hunter gatherer societies had bows along with javelins and atlatls and slings.

Definitely agree with Wizards and Clerics being really limited, maybe even non existent in a Stone Age setting. There aren't any city states at this point because there hasn't been an agricultural revolution. Although story wise, it would be cool to see a city state that has conquered agriculture and fire and is developing these wizard spells that you see nowadays.

Sissyl wrote:

The biggest change is probably going to be an absence of money, shops, fortified towns, indeed towns larger than very small. The economy becomes strictly barter-only. Formalized religion, magic schools, theory of the planes, bardic knowledge, etc etc etc, would be replaced by primitive myths, spirits, shamanistic beliefs, and stories about what is over the next hill. Social units being smaller would mean if you travel a relatively short distance, there is a tribe that likely isn't too friendly with yours. Xenophobia is the baseline. Winter weighs heavily on everyone's minds.

As for classes, I would drop everything but barbarians, rangers, fighters, rogues, shamans, sorcerers, witches, oracles. Everyone has a breadth of experience, though, giving them a free level of NPC classes every so often. For skills, Knowledges and other studious things go out the door, Disable Device and such are no-go. However, everyone gets a few more skill points. Survival becomes a necessary skill for everyone. Spell lists are slashed, with few formalized spells remaining, i.e. only the most iconic ones.

In regards to the barter economy for early age, it actually wasn't very common in the early days. Many people theorize that people had more of a favor/debt economy, where you do something for someone with the hope that they repay your favor to them. This would be great of a stone age style game. If you are doing Bronze Age, there's still evidence of currency, but it's generally used for big transactions and was based on cattle and later grain standard.

Watching Crash Course on YouTube is really good for historical stuff. I'd definitely suggest taking a look.

As for magic, I went the opposite way and make magic more common, but way more dangerous and all casters have Wild Magic rolls. I also have the wilderness as a naturally magic, almost Feywild meets Wonderland area that gets stronger and more dangerous with the presence of magic and casters.

So apparently they are making a horror movie taking The Ring and The Grudge and putting them together. Sadako vs. Kayako it's called. How do you feel about that?

1 to 50 of 6,755 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.