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. 7,112 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 2 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 7,112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't like jargon. I prefer they. It's established, though maybe not grammatically correct. But eh, it works for me.


If you ever get the chance, look up Mindjammer RPG. They have a really cool stellar system creator that I use along side Traveller Book 6: Scouts and this update to TB6:S about gas giants to get some fairly close to realistic systems (if that matters). It includes distances from stars and probable year length in there that I've used in my M-Space game. I have the standalone Mindjammer RPG for FATE, but I believe they recently updated it to Traveller.


Benjamin Medrano wrote:
Fardragon wrote:


The thing about the gap is it would seperate populations culturally in the same way as physical seperation seperates populations genetically.

So imagine a distant world in another system colonised by elves before/during the Gap period. They might react in a competely different way. So if the GM wants imperialistic crusading elves they can have them (whilst still using th official universe).

Yes, the GM could. But as far as I'm concerned, it'll be just as easy, if not easier, to make up my own universe since the core setting material will have no support for what I'm doing.

Anyway, no one is going to convince me. These are my personal feelings, and I'm trying to let Paizo know that what they did in this particular case and recently disappoints at least one person.

I have mixed feelings on the setting of Starfinder. I love the aliens and the Drift, but I hate the Gap and the current treatment of elves. I'll probably do what I usually do and cannibalize parts of it I like to use with the stuff I've made up.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, further research into ants have revealed less of an authoritarian style of rule and something more akin to anarcho-mutualism. But they have such simple nervous systems that no one it really in charge, not even the queen and drones. So you can't attach a human government to an animal species that are essentially automatons. Most of their actions are run by a complex array of pheromones, not independent thought.

Also some colonies have multiple queens and ants don't each their males. That's more of a spider/mantis thing. Also the drones (breeding males and females) represent an important part of keeping the hive alive and making a new one. Fun fact, ants and bees reproduce haplodiploidly, which means that unfertilized eggs are always female while fertilized eggs are always male. This makes an unusual generation precedence where male drones have no fathers or sons, but they have grandfathers and grandsons.

I think it's a good idea to read about ants before using them as an example. They are fairly surprising. I know all this because I made an entire race of ant-like people for a game I am running.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aunders wrote:
JakBlitz wrote:
Crystal Frasier wrote:
JakBlitz wrote:
But it's still a...

Depends on whether or not you consider modern America a "patriarchy" vs a society with patriarchal values.

In all but the most conservative lashunta nations, there are no longer laws saying men can't hold higher office or be CEOs. But culturally, most of them—men and women—just sort of know that a man is too emotional and hormonal to handle that kind of pressure. Plus men have to take care of the kids, so why give that promotion to a man when you know he's just going to step out of the workforce eventually to be a dad? Ect ect.

Lots of cultural holdovers from very old traditions, but slow growth towards actual equality, rather than just equality on paper.

I read this and really can't say anything about other than now feels like this was thought through to push someones agenda. As stated before the Lashunta were already a very interesting race that occupied a unique place in the races of the RPG. I would rather not be fed real world politics in my fantasy role-playing games.
I don't know about anyone pushing an agenda. Science Fiction has always addressed subjects like this or even more drastic ideas. I like it, and even if I don't end up using it in any of my Campaigns it never hurts to have the fluff there for you to use. Real world politics have always fueled fiction, so I can only imagine Paizo intends to keep up with realworld problems.

A good example of this are Heinlein s characters, who he purposefully made minorities as a counter to heroes at the time. That said, rpgs are much more interactive and more done for fun, so not every one wants to deal with social issues at the table. This is especially true if you've dealt with them in real life.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Archmage Variel wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
CKent83 wrote:
Archmage Variel wrote:
CKent83 wrote:

As far as elves being "snooty" and "xenophobic" goes, that's probably an attempt to keep them as familiar to traditional elves as possible, which is probably because this setting is going to have lots of races to play as. Keeping "vanilla" fantasy races as close to their default settings as possible is a way to give new players something familiar to grab onto.

Besides, who cares about elves with their, "I'm so much better than you," attitudes? Pffft!!!

;)

It's not an attitude if we are better than you.

Of course elves are xenophobic. It's much easier to lie to yourself about being superior without having to face reality whenever you look out your window.

I mean look at the starting ages, a human could graduate from wizard school at 17 years old. An elf, however, at the earliest graduates from the same school at 120 years. This is a severe deficit. Heck, a human could master the arcane arts before leaving their twenties, while an elf would still be learning the alphabet!

Ah, this one again... How long are baby elves in diapers again? :P

They are not diapers! They're ergonomic waste containment devices! And how long!?! I never take mine off!

All jokes aside. I'd think that the xenophobic sentiments of non-forlorn elves may be an interesting approach to roleplay off of. How does a elf react when he sees an alien for the first time. Elves aren't always the most adept species at diplomacy. What is their response? I like you, you're one of the good kasatha. Not all heroes are nice, and not all adventurers are heroes. Some are just xenophobic. So long as you can play the role without offending the people you're with, it's an interesting perspective. That said, I think the perspective of the forlorn elves is meant to be the more conventional approach to introducing elven characters into a campaign. Xenophobic Castrovelian elves seem like more of a plot device to me than...

Unfortunately, in my experience, whenever a player plays a bigoted character, it never really pans out as great as it sounds on paper. When a story is told about a bigoted character as a protagonist, it's usually following the story on how they meet a person of the race they hate and learn from each other, overcoming their bigotry. Remember the Titans is probably a good example of this, as is American History X (although a bit more violent). While most of the players I've played with that do it end up playing their character as more a joke character that makes snide remarks about drow or half orcs, with little character growth. Of course, seeing a PC get worse over the adventure is a type of character growth and is interesting, it also has the capability of rubbing players the wrong way. Especially people that have dealt with bigotry in the real world.

Maybe I've just been unlucky *shrug*


Jason Mosher wrote:

I feel like this was overlooked in the Elf conversation...

I wrote:


Archmage Variel wrote:


If the problem is that there has been a change to elves being more isolationist, I would argue that this is not the case. The elves in Pathfinder have largely been described as traditionally adopting an "isolationist" policy. However, in Pathfinder this policy is described as having had negitive impacts on the Elven communities, leading some Elven enclaves to break from their long held isolationist traditions. This reasoning helped to establish reasoning for elves existing as a prominent and core race, while retaining the flavor of elves as holding slight biases and high opinions of Elven tradition and superiority. The only break from this was the forlorn. The forlorn allowed Elven players to break from the Elven archetype of the haughty and naive mage/archer trope to that of a more solem and worldly adventurer. One who understands death and the consequences of time as they apply to the shorter lived races. Forlorn have known true loss. They have formed attachments as most elves would loathe to do, and they have payed the price for their experiences. In this way, Pathfinder was able to both maintain the trope, while allowing for a diverse range of character options. The elves of Starfinder need reason to no longer apply as such a core race to the Starfinder setting, but need to have been made so in such a way that a player can still feel that an elf in the wider setting of Starfinder can feel attached to the setting. I believe the forlorn of Starfinder fill that niche perfectly. They give the opportunity to represent a facet of Elven role play that plays off of their own personal perceptions of the wider universe, as well as the perceptions that their own race holds for them. How does a native Castrovelian elf see a forlorn adventurer. If such an adventurer can beat the solem knowledge that they will inevitably see their party die, would that be a success, or a willful acceptance ones of fate? I
...

That is true. Unfortunately, I still just do not like how the elves have become xenophobic and unilateralist. It's been done before.

Personally I really liked how Dragon Age did elves. I thought it was a more fresh take for them while still keeping them different enough from humans to matter. Same with The Witcher 3. For a long time, I kinda hated elves and preferred half orcs. But it turns out, I just dislike aloof protagonists with a superiority complex :)

But I don't want to take up the entire topic and make it about elves. So far, Castrovel seems to be an interesting planet. I really like the potential dangers there with the wildlife that the players can interact with while planetside. I'm actually running an M-Space campaign where the players are exploring a planet similar, so I can mine some good ideas off of this.


When you make an entire culture hateful and isolationist with a superiority complex, it's hard to root for them in a story. Especially if you're dealing with elven NPCs or worse, an elven PC.

And the thing is... this isn't new stuff. Nothing was changed, but merely amplified to an almost caricaturish level. The elves of Kyonin are depicted about the same way in Second Darkness, only not as bad. There isn't anything creative or new or interesting about their culture that hasn't been done in other mediums (Eldar for example). And yes while they are not a core race anymore, people are going to want to play elves in Starfinder because it's elves.

It just feels like a poor treatment on a race that had the potential for an interesting and engaging culture in a new setting. Why have a new setting when we'll just have the same old cultures? It is a missed opportunity. I hope that dwarves and half-orcs get something better than this.


Taking a break from the elves, I like the ksarik. I have a soft spot in my heard for tentacled dog creatures so this one is right up my alley. I love it's genetic ability like the Kroot. Definitely something that will be interesting.


Fardragon wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Fardragon wrote:
Ashanderai wrote:
Fardragon wrote:
Elves where already portrayed as xenophobic and isolationist in The Hobbit (1937). I'm not sure where the idea that this is a new thing has come from.
I don't think I have read anyone in this thread making that statement. Those who are critical of the elves in the article are saying that they don't like the xenophobic elves because it is a doubling down on the traditional stereotype instead of taking the opportunity to do cool 'Space Elvez'.

Dialling it up to 11 has always been a key component of space opera.

And what's the alternative? A race of jolly toymakers who live on an ice planet and work for a demiurge? A race of friendly but shy folk who love food, beer, and tobacco? A race that has purged all emotion and lives by a code of logic? People who live in trees, are permanantly high on drugs, and talk constantly about peace and love (until being exterminated by the first non-peace-and-love race they encounter)?

I'll take my elves arrogant and xenophobic, thanks.

Alternatively, they could be a race not defined by an oversimplified monoculture and instead could have complexity and depth beyond "we hate everyone."

Anything would be better than taking the most disliked traits of elves and making it worse. I'll pass.

You mean "they could be humans with pointy ears".

Not necessarily. It's definitely possible to keep to their own flavor while not making them oversimplified and stereotypical. Complexity and depth in a culture doesn't somehow equal bland. That's the issue I'm having is that the other aliens in Starfinder are fairly interesting and cool, with great ideas that are twists on standard space opera tropes. While the elves are just xenophobic isolationists, just like they've always been since Tolkien's time. Only turned up. It feels like a missed opportunity to do something unique and fun with the elves, and instead makes them even more unlikable and a caricature of elves. It's like no one learned from their mistakes with Second Darkness.

Besides, let's not forget that humans can be xenophobic and aloof isolationists. Arguably better at it than fake elves.


Fardragon wrote:
Ashanderai wrote:
Fardragon wrote:
Elves where already portrayed as xenophobic and isolationist in The Hobbit (1937). I'm not sure where the idea that this is a new thing has come from.
I don't think I have read anyone in this thread making that statement. Those who are critical of the elves in the article are saying that they don't like the xenophobic elves because it is a doubling down on the traditional stereotype instead of taking the opportunity to do cool 'Space Elvez'.

Dialling it up to 11 has always been a key component of space opera.

And what's the alternative? A race of jolly toymakers who live on an ice planet and work for a demiurge? A race of friendly but shy folk who love food, beer, and tobacco? A race that has purged all emotion and lives by a code of logic? People who live in trees, are permanantly high on drugs, and talk constantly about peace and love (until being exterminated by the first non-peace-and-love race they encounter)?

I'll take my elves arrogant and xenophobic, thanks.

Alternatively, they could be a race not defined by an oversimplified monoculture and instead could have complexity and depth beyond "we hate everyone."

Anything would be better than taking the most disliked traits of elves and making it worse. I'll pass.


I'm disappointed in the treatment of elves. It's an unusual step backwards I feel, making them even more aloof and xenophobic and unlikable. I feel like given all of the ways they made many of the other alien races fresh and fun, this was a weird choice to take a stereotype that arguably many are tired of and bringing it more to the front. Definitely a missed opportunity imo.

As for the change in the Lashunta, I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, I disagree that their depiction was problematic. On the other hand, I actually prefer this change to the lashunta. I find aliens that have different biological functions and capabilities to be cool, especially to see how a culture is built around it. And their ability to have different results of their puberty interests me moreso than the previous sexual dimorphism. So I think the retcon made the lashunta more interesting to me than the more cliche original pulp trope. Also I like their decentralized, more libertarian government style of a confederacy of city-states. Too often you just see either a space democracy or space empire, so it's cool to see something different and fresh in sci fi.

And for me, I really wanted to hear more about the formians. But I like ant people, so that's admittedly a bias for me.


I think in the future, it would be a better idea to simply make a Google Document that has a link in the first post. That way you can simply edit it and it'll be in the first post.

A bit too late admittedly, but next time! :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Faelyn wrote:
Odraude wrote:
I like her hair. I wish I could dye my hair and not look dumb.
Amen... back in my younger days I tried dying my hair black with red tips (like blood red). Within two days the red had faded to copper and I quickly earned the nickname Duracel from my buddies...

Yeah, I feel you on that. I'll just stick with my black hair.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I like her hair. I wish I could dye my hair and not look dumb.


With tidally locked, since it's so close, it could have what's called a lobster ocean at where the sun is hitting it directly. Any closer and it would probably look more like Venus.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I could see the drone stabbing you with a cocktail of antibiotics and nanomachines for healing.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Good to see my favorite alien puppers back in action.


Jason Mosher wrote:

I agree with the obsolescence of knowledge skills in any setting in or post-information age. What should be abstracted for stealth should also be abstracted for knowledge, but the use of tech should be more rationalized.

As I posted elsewhere, technology-based skills should replace knowledge skills IMHO. Each character in any space opera or sci-fi story had their areas of technical expertise, and that should be translated into SF. Instead of the generic "computers" checks we saw in the playtest video, there should be "Computers: Security; Engineering; Science; Communications; Databases; AI; etc."

Again, IMO, this should be the impact of technology on game mechanics. Hell, if this isn't the case I may house rule it. It just makes sense.

I disagree to a point. As we've seen in today's world, there is a great deal of misinformation on the internet. And that having the information to do something doesn't actually mean you can use it effectively. If I ready a WikiHow on doing brain surgery, that doesn't mean I can suddenly do it. Or that the WikiHow was even correct.

I think knowledge skills still have a place in sci fi games, both as a way to do specialized things and as a way to spot misinformation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Depends on the ship I imagine. Star Wars and Traveller low balled how good computers would be in the future. Eclipse Phase gives some good ideas on how to do Stealth. Thing to remember is that not every ship will have those capabilities. Especially low end military and most civilian ships.

There's also hacking. It's doubtful that ships will have super advanced sapient virtual intelligence, so you can hack the ship's computer to leave you undetected from such measures.

As for knowledge checks, the way I've seen it done and I do them is to have basic knowledge freely available, but specific stuff that requires a degree take a bit longer to find, and with a higher chance of finding misinformation. Just because it's on the internet doesn't mean it's true :)

Also it's better to focus on using information in an age where information can be found fairly easily.


I second dropfleet commander on that one. Their models are gorgeous. Firestorm Armada has some good, cheap ships that you can't go wrong with. Now if only they could get their s!~& together for the game...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Legos. That is all you need.


Fardragon wrote:

Yeah, the original Traveller (which I played a lot) did have some rules for improving skills, but it wasn't as a reward for adventuring. Basically, you had what you got at character creation (which tended to lead to PCs being quite old at the start of the game). But players aren't expected to be motivated by xp gain.

Star Trek is a more extreme example, since not only is skill progression minimal, there is no gold or loot either. Players are expected to be motivated simply by a desire to resolve the story. That worked fine for our group, but I'm sure there are some players who won't move unless there is the prospect of fat loot on the table. Indeed, I suspect that is the reason for D&D being more successful than other PnP rpgs.

Honestly, I always found that mindset silly, especially in a game where everything including the loot is imaginary. That's why I play the game to have fun, face challenges, and chill with friends. Because gp isn't real.


Reading Cepheus Engine, which is a retroclone of T1, there were rules for increasing skills. You could also get some stat boosts, but the importance of progression was based more on getting more money and doing the adventure, rather than getting experience for better stats. Which for me, I've honestly preferred adventuring and gaming for fun and the excitement rather than getting loot and XP.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was right. Where's my cookie? ;)


I figure it'd be yeh-SO-key


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, I'm glad they went technomancer for lashunta. Mystic would have felt like much more of the obvious choice and this seems a lot more interesting to me.


Stellagama has a PWYW pdf that has a great deal of the stars around the sun. It's come in handy in my sci fi games, so I think you guys might enjoy it. It's more of the standard Traveller hexagon star map, but that is a bit simpler on the table than going full on 3d Cartesian map.

The link is here


There is also the level of automation that a ship can have. Earlier science fiction like Star Wars and Trek don't have a significant level of automation since that didn't fit the thoughts of science at the time. Especially Star Wars has a level of analogue tech (which I personally dig) that requires a person to run it. So ships like that would require a larger crew.

I like having the option to pay for automation for certain functions. Gunnery, Life Support, Engineering... things that you don't need a lot of people for. Maybe it costs less than hiring out a person, but you get a more limited use out of it. Or conversely, it costs more than hiring a person but there isn't a monthly salary/wage to pay the computer.


I'm actually reminded of a 3PP for Cepheus Engine that does a similar concept with their ships.


Could probably use Mass Effect Andromeda's crew as a good size. Has a total of eleven people, and it means that you can interact with friendly NPCs along with your fellow PC adventurers.


Fardragon wrote:

We have been over it before. But you don't seem to understand that there is a greater difference between science fantasy and space opera than there is between generic fantasy A and generic fantasy B, or are unwilling to accept that Starfinder isn't going to be better* than the space opera rpg systems that are already available (or you have unlimited funds, which I guess is also a possiblity).

*I've been playng PnP rpgs for 35 years. They don't get better, they don't get worse. Fashions come and go. Gamma World was something very similar to Starfinder back in the 80s, a conversion of (1st edition) D&D to a post-apocalyptic SF setting. It was D&D with mutants and ray guns.

Not really. Space opera is generally defined by it's melodramatic tendencies, space warfare, romance (the classical term), and interstellar travel/communication. Science fantasy is simply science fiction with fantasy tropes in it. Supernatural, archaic governments, swords... It's really not hard to combine the two or eschew one for the other. Hell, Star Wars is a good example of a space opera/science fantasy mash up. So given that the main difference is in tone and not really rules, I think it should be easy to convert science fantasy to space opera.

Now, trying to turn Starfinder into a hard science fiction is probably a lot more hard and probably not worth the effort. Especially with games like Traveller/Cepheus Engine and Eclipse Phase that already does it.


This is very true. A constant issues I've had with games like Traveller/CE, Stars Without Number, M-Space, etc, is that there is a fairly limited amount of premade ships for use. Usually you have to find those with third party companies, but it'd be nice if there was a sort of bestiary for space ships. Call it the Shipyard or Fleet Log or something.


I'll be honest, I never watch Threshold. I just remember someone telling me that they went so fast they devolved into salamanders. Hence the joke about it.

Probably should move this back on topic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:

^Good question. If it is like hyperspace travel in Isaac Asimov's Foundation series (instantaneous but required many short jumps with substantial setup time in between) or Star Wars (setup time of only a few minutes, and then go very fast for as long as you want), then getting across the whole galaxy and even some way beyond the visual edge of the galaxy is at most only a moderately big deal; by implication, getting to another galaxy would be a huge deal but definitely doable with appropriate preparation and resources. If it is like warp travel in Star Trek, you would need decades to get across the galaxy unless you find a wormhole big enough to get through, and centuries to get to the next galaxy even with a souped-up warp drive.

Of course with a souped up warp drive, you'll end up turning into salamanders.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, I'm really glad that they have avoided doing the Star Trek monocultures gimmick with a lot of the races. I get that simplifying aliens and their cultures makes it easier to describe them to players, but I always found that terribly dull, limiting, and uninteresting. So I'm glad that they didn't make the Shirren the standard 'hive mind collective insect race'.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I don't want cool sci fi troupes and ideas being hamstrung by a desire to keep it 'fantasy'. I think they should take Tolkein and Martin, shove them in an air lock, and space them to make room for Burroughs, Howard, Wells, and Herbert.


Boy, I hope not


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like the race a lot. My only real nitpick is that I am kind of disappointed that they dont retain full use of their fifth and sixth appendages. Still, I guess we have the kasatha for that, so I'm cool with it.


Also how fortuidous! Today's blog post is about the shirren

http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5ljpv?Introducing-Starfinder-s-Final-Co re-Race-The#discuss


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What I've done in my current M Space game is that I have a race of insectoid-like creatures called formacids that are very much like ants. I gave them a haplodiploid reproduction cycle similar to ants and I try to set out how I imagine their culture, society, and government would generally play out.

The interesting thing about haplodiploidism is that males come from unfertilized eggs and have one X chromosome, while females come from fertilized eggs and have two X chromosomes. This has a peculiarity where the male drones don't actually have fathers or sons, but they do have grandfathers and grandsons. This makes the family unit really interesting.

I too went with two sexes but multiple genders based on their class (worker, soldier, etc), which affects classism in their society. However, I also subverted the ant social structure by trying to see how a democratic government would work for a eusocial alien race.


I dont remember reading that the Shirren are the swarm. Where do they confirm this?


LinkDead wrote:
Garrett Guillotte wrote:
Odraude wrote:
I'm hoping "The Swarm" isn't the final name for the creatures. It just feels too generic of a name. Other than that, I like it.

That seems to be the running theme for naming things. The Gap, the Drift, the Near, the Far, the Swarm, and credits are all really generic names. This makes sense to me as far as the core book is concerned, as it makes them a little easier to re-skin.

It sounds like they're holding back stuff that's more flavorful for any future AP reveals they've got planned. A lot of what was mentioned but couldn't be discussed in detail seemed to revolve around the AP contents.

I think the generic names make sense when you have different places, different worlds with different levels of technology, different factions, that might all call something different in different languages.

I don't know, other sci fi mediums give inspired names to their Swarm creatures and it seems to work out fine. Zerg, Tyranids, Rachni, Arachnoids.

I just feel like there could be more creativity in some of these names.


JohannVonUlm wrote:
Cthulhudrew wrote:
Some more Appendix N reading suggestions can be found here.
Good find. Thanks. So someone thought about doing this a year ago. I'll have to start looking through that list.

Good thing is that I left it open for editing if you want to add more stuff to it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
jedi8187 wrote:
sanwah68 wrote:
Because I couldn't help myself, I just spent a number of hours over the last couple of days looking for a compatible figure, as a Vesk WILL be my first character for Starfinder. Every repilian race I have found a mini for has a pronounced muzzle....anyone else had any luck ?? If there is nothing out there, I hope Paizo get a license with Reaper ASAP ;)

I'm sure you looked into them but the Lizardmen from Warhammer Fantasy, now Seraphon, might have something for you. The armor would be fairly primitive for Starfinder though. If you don't want to wait for official figures that is.

Get some green stuff and other sci fi models and kit bash them together, and you've got yourself a lizard man alien.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm a bit torn on this. On the one hand, I love lizard people. They are always pretty cool. On the other hand, I was hoping for more unusual looking aliens than just humanoid lizard.

So, idk how I feel. The art looks great though.


Recently picked up These Stars Are Ours for Traveller and it makes me want to run a game with grays as a large evil empire against humanity


Generally when I do stuff for my sci fi game, I use an expanded system I made for gas giant classification. It starts with super earths and ocean worlds, and runs the spectrum to gas dwarf, ice giant (neptunian), gas giant (jovian), and finally brown dwarf. I mostly do it for flavor as well as to show the different resources the players can obtain to use, sell, or exploit. Or in case of gravity, to see if the players can escape from the gas giant's gravity if they go in to scoop for fuel.


A cool interview, but I didn't really see a lot of new stuff mentioned. Though it was good to see the druids expanded upon.


Ryan Freire wrote:
Brain in a Jar wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
But they are not the same. By definition, a GM does not cheat. You may have issues with how they implement rules and mechanics, but the rules are a guide for GM's not their overlords.

How about you take GMs off your pedestal for a moment.

If a GM mentions to a group that they will fudge/cheat dice rolls etc before the game. Then it's fine. No issues everyone is happy.

If a GM doesn't do that they are cheating. Plain and Simple.

If a GM uses house rules and tells the players before the game. Then cool everyone is on the same page. No issues.

If a GM doesn't tell players about house rules they are cheating.

It's really not that hard.

Your perspective is wrong.

The gm puts the most work into preparing and running the game. It comes with the privilege of more control over that game. Full stop.

As a GM for almost two decades, this kind of thinking leads to bad GMing.

Yes the GM puts in a lot of work into the game. No denying that. But ultimately, you're GMing for the players to show them a good time, not to control them. And in D&D, there's always going to be give and take from both the players and GM. If you're just going to force the players to do whatever you want or complain whenever a player makes a remark about the game, it's probably best not to GM.

It's like me being a chef. I generally have to accomodate the guest within reason. Allergies, stupid food requests, dietary restrictions. Sure, I can complain all I want when a customer orders something dumb, but ultimately, we give it to them if we are able to. A chef that makes no compromise won't be in business for very long. Believe that.

1 to 50 of 7,112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, 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.