Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Adventure Path #85: Fires of Creation (Iron Gods 1 of 6) (PFRPG)

Orthos's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Marathon Voter, 2014 Marathon Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 15,637 posts (21,247 including aliases). 12 reviews. 4 lists. 1 wishlist. 108 aliases.


1 to 50 of 3,030 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marc Radle wrote:

As others have correctly pointed out, many of these settings are closed content or otherwise unavailable for conversion.

The Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk are certainly off the table. I would imagine so are most of the others like Planescape, Dragonlance, Eberron, Spelljammer, Ravenloft, Dark Sun etc.

Not really sure what the point of this is ...

Pretty sure it's fishing for ideas of "what themes do people want more of".

I don't think anyone thinks Louis is planning on actually converting these worlds specifically. But people saying "I want more Dark Sun" gives a pretty concise way of saying "I want more post-apocalyptic, harsh worlds with a heavy focus on survival with some psionic flavor and some things I'm certainly forgetting".

Ditto with "I want more Eberron" being simpler to say than "I want advanced magical technology, non-standard monster/race alignments and associations, more complex and less absolute divine arrangements, and lots of political maneuvering between noble houses and powerful mercantile empires".

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
I have to disagree completely with your DM on refusing to let you switch your character as I am all about facilitating what players want if they want to change later on, as I said I totally understand giving the players the book so they can just read through it so no one could ever feel out of pllaceomething like that if your DM is not going to work with you if you're unhappy.

So if you're okay with this in retrospect, after the player builds a character that doesn't fit in and is clearly unhappy, why are you not okay with giving the player the necessary information to make an effective character in the first place and avoid the unhappiness entirely?

Because the player's replacement character is going to be coming in with just as much information available to the player from playing a bit with that other character - long enough, clearly, to discern s/he's not going to be able to contribute effectively or enjoy the plot - as they would be if given some of that information in advance and allowed to create their character with those preparations in mind. And if you try to prohibit them using that information, you're going to risk a fairly decent chance of ending up with yet ANOTHER character that can't contribute or has no reason to participate in the story or otherwise makes the player not have fun, and you'll be yet again back at square one.

You're so hooked up on avoiding optimization/minmaxing that you're risking hamstringing the players, then claiming that if they're unhappy with being hamstrung you'll let them redo their characters with the information that most of us would just hand to them in the first place.

Quote:
But that's exactly why I'm here, I'm looking for spoiler free summaries exactly so I can tell my players what kind of game it's going to be.

The problem is your definition of a spoiler is far, far stricter than most people's. To keep pegging on the Runelords example, most people wouldn't consider it a spoiler that there are giants in the campaign, because it's right there in one of the chapter titles. You however do, and you're hiding those titles from the players trying to keep that information away. And that's where a lot of the problems in communication here are happening - completely different standards.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
WotR GM: I want to be able to see you guys doing intersecting charges with that thing. :)

All I can see is Crono-Frog X-SLASH. Of which I totally approve.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Turin the Mad wrote:
whoa ... oley sheetz that's a lotta corn dawgs ... Ima go food-n-boooze coma now .... :*eerrrpppp*

Burgers here, just got on the grill


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Artemis Moonstar wrote:

I just wanna say...

My players are going to hate you guys. They already hate the boards for inspiring me to stat out a creature that uses scent on light and eats it (thus leading to lots of dark vision)...

Now they're going to be terrified that every house, store, hut, barn, and warehouse is going to actually try and eat them. They're already terrified of Gazebos (Animate Object + Haunt rules + other home brew stuff = FUN!)....

I can see it now... A Large sized dog house, with legs, ears, and a tail. The entry-way full of adamantine teeth. It's innards? Full of Gelatinous Cube, and the floating remains of those who have disturbed it's master's grounds. The Master, of course, being the Colossal mansion that houses the soul of it's creator's wife, whom died during the construction, and until the still-beating eldritch heart of the Chelaxian opera diva is dug out of the foundation and destroyed, the house shall return every time it's destroyed, serving as both body and phylactery for the vile temptress. (Colossal house, lich archetype, siren's song).

Edit: Every night, the mansion sings soothing songs to the bones of it's pre-death lover, as it did in life, who's corpse rests still in the master bedroom. The song manifests as a haunting lullaby, spreading out from it's hilltop into the town below. Every night, at least one villager is drawn to the mansion while they sleep, wherein they disappear behind the closing, ivy-choked gates... [/edit]

*wrings hands evilly* Heh heh heh......

Eeeeeeeeeeeexcellent.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shadowborn wrote:
Cr500cricket wrote:
Please do the cookie golem Please do the cookie golem!

Gingerbread Golem

Gingerbread Golem Swarm

"This is what you get for touching the Gumdrop Buttons!!"

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh Tripod Redirect Image, it's been so long since I've seen you.

Also that Gun Mage is so saved. Thanks!

Anyway.

I ban almost nothing. I encourage my players to try out new races, homebrewed stuff, 3rd-party stuff, and a great deal more.

The only thing I prohibit is gunslinger and tech-based classes IF the campaign is set in the earlier portions of my group's homebrew setting's timeline, which is rare - as the Age of Steam draws near, I allow those classes more and more; that Age takes up the largest playable portion of the setting's timeline, because I am a major, major fan of Final Fantasy VI's late-1800s aesthetics. Steampunk/Dieselpunk plus Magic and Magitek is my flavor of choice for a setting.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Today is probably going to be primarily a packing day, except for Age of Worms time.

Tomorrow I go to sign my apartment lease and pay my first month's rent.

Wednesday I go to get the power turned on. Would have done it sooner but I needed proof of rental so had to wait until the paperwork was done.

Wednesday or Thursday I need to arrange for internet service.

All goes well, I should be able to move a few small boxes throughout the week, taking them over and dropping them off after work, then move all the big stuff on Saturday. In addition to the stuff I'm moving myself with some help from my parents and some church people, I've got one coworker delivering a chest of drawers (thankfully, since she lives way up on one of the mountains out here, which I would be very nervous about driving up/down myself) and the mattress place I bought from was doing free delivery as part of a Labor Day Weekend sale. (Got a MemoryFoam mattress for $500, no delivery cost, no tax. Pretty darn good deal.)

Add to that that we're very likely going to be doing at least some overtime at work this week, I'm probably going to be very busy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zgotar The Slaad Landlord wrote:
You guys are a bunch of modrons

Them's fighting words.

*grabs the words out of the air, throws them in a tiny LEGO arena, sells tickets*

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Lazarod Malloran wrote:
#ThrunesGoHome

"People called Thrune they go to the house"?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:

I hate their trample ability.

I mean seriously, have you ever had a house land on you? Its like insta death attack!

And if you're unlucky enough to be a Witch, you automatically take double damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Conspiracy Keanu wrote:

What if goblins are only burning down houses

Because they knew all along that houses are OP and are trying to help us???

Whoa.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:
You are mixing up in order to nerf houses with ordering nerf houses.

Houses have killed Santa.

Nerf has killed Santa.

Clearly, Vod is trying to kill Santa and end Christmas.

Logically, this means that soon, the goblins will soon come to burn everything down in order to save Christmas. Which is clearly what they've been doing the whole time.

Hooray!!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

HRRRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMM!!!!

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

Life is great.

I love the flavor of ancestor.
Dark Tapestry lets me be crazy psychic guy.
Old Juju just makes me happy.
Lore: all the knowledges (also CHA to defenses).
Nature for the Nature's Whispers.
Outer Rifts... except I wish you could be something other than demonic.
Spellscar: because bwahahahahahahah! (Why will no one let me play thiiiiiiiiiiisssss?)
Waves played great when I ran for it, too.

So... all of those.

I love the black-blooded, the seeker, the purifier, and the reincarnated oracles, too. So much fun!

This is a nice list. Add in Metal and Battle and Flame and Winter for me.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm more of a supervisor, really. No apology necessary.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey guys guess who finally posted an update


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tossed Slaad wrote:
Macaroni Slaad wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Macaroni Slaad wrote:
Here in the Maelstrom there are no rules: no government, no baby sitters, no bedtimes, no frowny faces, no bushy mustaches and no negativity of any kind.
Your list of no rules suspiciously sounds alot like a bunch of rules. {squints eyes}
And no consistency!
No consistency is too absolute. How about the consistency of rice pudding instead?

Dammit, now I'm hungry.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Here ya go. Enjoy!

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you're gonna post in the "kill the person before you" thread, you get what you came for.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

That's kind of clever.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scythia wrote:
Arturius Fischer wrote:


Quote:
But what I'm saying is there is ZERO brokenness in any class under 20 rp, zero, nada, none. They present zero problems in party or game balance.
Yeah, no. Comparing those to the 'standard' Core races results in a difference in balance, to the point where if they are an option, almost nobody will pick the old ones at all. Now, some people may cry 'RP purposes!', but those people are less concerned with rules balance anyway and don't quite grasp the problem.

That must be why nobody plays humans anymore.

Oh, except they're still exceedingly popular with optimizers, even beside those "broken" non-standard races. In fact, if it hadn't been for the FAQ about using an SLA to get early entry into a prestige class, human would likely be the undisputed king for optimizing.

Heck, they still are. I see humans recommended more often (floating stat boost, free feat, free skill points, and most of all guaranteed to be allowed in almost any game by even the most restrictive of GMs) than any other race combined.

I'm very tempted to link my rant on why I don't like humans in RPGs, with them being mechanically superior to everything and its grandmother being one of the main points, but I'll spare you. =)

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Petty Alchemy wrote:
Snaaaaaaaark.

Is it a boojum?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Alot not sure why am being here.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

No worries man, take all the time you need.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:

You do know that you're not obligated to use EVERYTING a gaming company churns out?

There is no such thing as bloat. Just people who don't want to put their foot down.

One's bloat is another's much-anticipated expansion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ah, but now we have looped back to where we began!

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Da'ath wrote:
Orthos wrote:


No. This would be an immediate dealbreaker for me. I'd sit this campaign out, without a second thought.
I'm with Orthos in all respects on this one. I'm willing to try out a lot of things, but this isn't my cup of coffee ( I don't drink tea :P ).

You can have mine, I've never been a coffee fan =)

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Again, choosing favoured enemy because of effectiveness is something I really find iffy, would the character have hated giants if the book wasn't focussed on fighting them? It's just really lame and I don't want to see some of the great ideas for characters be squashed because they want to make sure they're hitting the hardest.

I agree with you to a point, but disagree vehemently with your final conclusion. Think of it more like this:

"I'm a ranger with favored enemy aberration. I'm a hunter of the foul things that should not be. I have this amazingly thorough backstory on why I hate these abominable creatures."

<several sessions later>

"WTF? We're three chapters in and we've seen only one aberration! But there's been tons of goblins and undead and giants! Why'd you guys hire me instead of someone who's got their hate-on for goblins and undead and giants? I'm going somewhere I can hunt the things I hate. You guys should hire a giantslayer in my place. Peace out."

So instead of asking "would the character have hated giants if the book wasn't focussed [sic] on fighting them?", try asking "would a character who doesn't hate giants have any reason for sticking around?" and "If not, why not encourage the players to make characters with rivalries that will encourage them to stick with the plot?"

Informing the players of "these are a sample of the kinds of enemies you'll be facing regularly" allows them to build their backstories with the eventual encounters in mind, both so they'll be mechanically effective (because nothing annoys a ranger player more than never/rarely being able to fight their favored enemy or never/rarely being on their favored terrain) and so they can craft a backstory that meshes well with the campaign.

You are the first GM EVER who I've seen want to try to avoid having players make backstories that slot well into the campaign's expectations, and giving rangers a favored enemy that you know will show up often is one of the easiest ways of doing that. What better way to ensure a character will be invested in the plot you're running than ensuring that he'll be a lifelong nemesis of an enemy type that's guaranteed to show up regularly?

That's why the chapter titles are there, really. And the covers. Those are designed to be seen by the players. To give them something to be hyped about in the future. I've lost count of how many times my players have looked at a chapter cover and gone "Oh man, who is that guy? We're not gonna have to fight him/her, are we? Oh man, that's awesome." Or "Oh man, that's an ominous title. Wonder if that means what I think it means?"

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would consider it immensely not-fun. One of the best parts of Pathfinder for me is the ability to make those choices, to design my character the way I want to, to put things together so they work how I desired. I can't guarantee the GM would have the same thought processes I would in building the character, picking feats, picking spells, picking skills... there's just too much I'd want that I couldn't ensure the GM would choose, and choose in the way I envisioned.

No. This would be an immediate dealbreaker for me. I'd sit this campaign out, without a second thought.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

But enough talk. Have at you! *casts fireball, dimension doors away*

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Da'ath wrote:
Re: Orthos - you have my sympathies; I hope his personality and role playing ability make up for his "selfish behavior" (in my opinion). That would be the only saving grace for me.

It comes and goes. Some days he's great. Other days... yeah.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Called it.

Any love for Trigun?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Me dammit! Not again!

*casts Goner on Sissyl before being defeated*

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you don't have Rasputin Must Die! (or don't want to look at it because spoilers), you can find an example of the Troop subtype on the blog here.

There's also this thread, where Brandon Hodge (the guy who wrote RMD) explains a bit about how to make a Troop from scratch.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Of course you did. *rolleyes* At the very least pick up Prince of Wolves and Master of Devils and read them first, or you're going to be confused by some of the back-references.

Yeah. It's pretty much an inevitability - a plot involving Golarion Elves is going to have to have Calistrans in it. And Calistrans, obviously, are going to be flirtatious and sensual. Which I can see why a lot of people like, but for me it just really distracts from the main story.

And I want to like the paladin character. I really, really do. But she's every cliche complaint that people have about paladins in their party. She's unfriendly. She has no sense of humor. She snaps at everyone. She's harshly judgmental. She gets in a fight with one of the other party members and only reconciles because the Calistran Inquisitor tricks her into it using a spell. She has no subtlety, and is almost as badly lacking in humility. She smites first and asks questions later. And on more than one occasion she risks hurting allies in the process of getting her smite on. At least one of those times it's highly implied it was intentional, too.

I've played a prudish paladin character who wasn't interested in bedding up with other characters and was primarily focused on her duties and her oaths, not too different from this character. She still managed to have a good sense of humor, to jest with her compatriots, to politely deflect flirtation attempts and raunchy comments and innuendo, or in some cases even joke back, so long as she made it clear at some point she wasn't serious about any invitations or acceptances.

I'm only halfway through the book, though. So I'm hoping the remaining half sees some improvement in her character. I've pretty much given up on the Inquisitor being anything but either constantly flirtatious or violently homicidal, though.

I've been reviewing Gross's books as I read them, and thus far Queen of Thorns would be the lowest-ranking of the bunch. (Though I haven't even started King of Chaos yet, as it's the last of the series, obviously.) Which I'd really hate to do - all those complaints aside, the story itself is very good. It just keeps getting derailed by "the inquisitor is flirting again" and/or "the paladin is being a jerk again".

At least it's just those two, though they dominate a lot of the story. The ranger is pretty cool and mysterious. The gnome is awesomely gnomey and provides a nice firsthand experience of the Bleaching. And of course Radovan and Jeggare are their usual fun selves.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cecil Harvey wrote:
Zeromus wrote:
Give me a five-star review or I'LL BIG BANG YOUR ENTIRE REALITY BACK INTO THE STONE AGE!!

How about you put some bloody pants on first?! No one wants to see your disturbing Giger parts.

For the gods' sake, we have a child in the group! By my reckoning... It's complicated.

I don't really know how different temporal speeds work. Just put some on some pants.

I am hatred incarnate! I have no parts! And even if I did I'd show them off just to make you suffer!

Zemus may have had pants, but they probably exploded with everything else when I crawled out of his corpse.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pretty much 1-for-1 with Tactics here. CT was THE game for me. Still is. FF6 is a very, very close second.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Also the bards only count if they're spoony. That is a must.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Give me a five-star review or I'LL BIG BANG YOUR ENTIRE REALITY BACK INTO THE STONE AGE!!

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Admittedly, I appreciate them for doing so primarily in the case of the Paladin. Consolidating Paladin casting into CHA instead of WIS was an immensely good idea.

Qadira

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Now we fight like men! And ladies! And ladies who dress like men!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I suppose I should get the Brain Tumbler warmed up.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I disagree very strongly. Fantasy and Sci-fi's only real difference is the coat of paint.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We don't talk about that movie >_> Really the only connection it had with the series was the name, being made by Squaresoft, and featuring a character named Cid. Most of the other recurring themes in the series - familiar monsters and creatures such as Chocobos (thank you Liz); summons/godly creatures like Bahamut, Ifrit, Shiva, and the like; recurring equipment/items/locations; the general themes of good and evil prominent in the games; and so forth - were absent from the movie, even as side shoutouts.

That said PC-only gamers can get FFVII, FFVIII, and FFIII on Steam now. I wouldn't be surprised if more of the series join them in the future.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Lilith wrote:
Totally going to run a FFVI game at PaizoCon next year. HAS TO BE DONE.

Going to leave a trail of bodies through the Magitek Factory again? Uwheeheeheeheehee!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:
Who's going to tell them?

Somebody's gotta tell them.

Qadira

3 people marked this as a favorite.

"MISTER SMEE!! Clear out this riff raff! I need space to do my morning stretches and limber up before I work out my latest plan for skewering that pesky Pan! Any swab caught lollygagging, I'll hook him myself and toss him overboard - to Hell with the plank!"

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

=(

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Artemis Moonstar wrote:
I am so totally going to try and stat up Setzer now...

Houserule the Swashbuckler ability with thrown knives to allow Darts (because I have no earthly clue why it doesn't), and take Deadly Dealer. Voila!

The hard part is affording the airship, really.

1 to 50 of 3,030 << 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.