|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
This makes some sense.
I remember WOTC forums pre-4E being plunged into endless martial-caster disparity talks. The kind that got so bad that folks would claim you cant objectively have fun with 3E. If you said you did, they dismissed you as ignorant or invoking Oberoni. Not a great time or place, so I moved onto greener pastures.
I have no interest in engaging in rules and RAW fights. I wanted to talk shop about the fun I was having. I wanted to talk about homebrewing and table dynamics and playstyles. I wanted to talk about the possibilities new releases would provide. I found Enworld to be the place to do it. Come 2008 tho, the E-war really screwed things up even for Enworld one of the best moderated sites on the web (YMMV.) All talk was bogged down in "feel" and "balance" threads and it drowned out anything else. I left again.
As a 3E fan I chose to check out PF. Found it to be the route I wanted to go and the forums were pretty sweet. The mods did a good job of directing E-war rubbish into a subforum and kept the place fairly nice. Folks were happy and engaged and talking shop. A few years passed and PF popularity soared. Wasnt long before things started to look like 2006 in here. However, despite that the subforums seemed to do a decent job of directing traffic away and allowing folks who wanted to avoid the madness to do so. I guess it was only a matter of time before the place was overrun.
I like it here I really do. Though its getting difficult to come around often. Some of my favorite posters are running away from here. The negativity is ever increasing, and its starting to feel like an MMO forum around here; which is a damn shame. The fact I still like PF and have fun keeps me knocking despite awful neighbors. YMMV.
I've been on a journey for years now to discover what I want from a TTRPG. The one thing I discovered is that I do not like "generic apply any skin systems". I prefer systems that have an explicit purpose be it fantasy, science fiction, or horror, or.....
That said, D&D, specifically 3E/PF, have become my fantasy system of choice. The edition wars are often looked on as a terrible time with lots of hurt feelings where nothing constructive was ever gained. Quite the contrary for myself actually, I managed to really understand and learn what it is that I want out of a fantasy TTRPG. For that I will always be grateful of the E-war.
At this point I have been using 3E/PF for over a decade. In that time I have encounter numerous problems and issues in which I complained, cried, laughed, and worked my way out of. At this point I know exactly how to fine tune this engine to purr like my old '76 V-8 T-topped camaro I sold so long ago for school money....
So is Pathfinder the penultimate of TTRPG design? Not a chance; the game will keep evolving! (albeit at perhaps a more conservative pace than many paizo forums goers would care for.) To answer your question, I know, it's only Pathfinder, but I like it!
but still Mongo is just a pawn in the game of life.
Jacob Saltband wrote:
Its essentially an "with all due respect" or " no offense, but..." type of statement. It makes me think of this.
I used to date women that worked for the same corporate office as I do. I was pretty good at asking them out. Problem is we often had little in common, just enjoyable company. The biggest issue is the type I was dating thought gaming of any type was childish. I may as well put on a diaper and suck my thumb if I was ever to reveal my hobby. So I put up with that for a bunch of years.
I got tired of playing crouching cougar, hidden gamer so I decided to give online dating a try. I am juggling about 5-8 different women right now trying to find the right mate. Im not there yet but I recommend trying online as opposed to hoping for a random encounter. Everybody has some cute happenstance story about how they met and lived happily ever after, everybody but you that is. Even when I was dating out of the office I had to make things happen. I suggest a change up in strategy. In any event, good luck out there.
I think multi-classing, prestige classes, and archetypes go a long way towards playing against type. Even races have become more flexible with the addition of more choices plus alternate traits and feats. The combinations are endless and I think they promote creativity.
For instance folks may assume the ranger is a forest traveling archer. Well if you apply the urban ranger archetype you can change that to a street wise skirmischer used to living in crowded cities. Thats just one of myriad ways to reshuffle the flavor of a class. Add race and traits and its even more open to creativity.
I believe this to be a strength of PF that other simpler, tighter, and more exclusive systems lack. YMMV
I find getting a person's experience to be helpful when discussing playstyle and game taste. Its when folks try and make objective arguments solely based on their experience that things go out of bounds. It happens occasionally, but so does the newer players arguing against experience.
"Sorry grandpa, nobody wants to play the game that way anymore. Kids today like new types of fantasy and if we don't change the game to accommodate, then its all over for the hobby"
Nobody ever seems to mind that new canard being trumpeted repeatedly.
Dude the online scene is like that. I'm usually a one gal at a time kinda bloke. Though as I got started I'm receiving all kinds of attention. I didnt want to get hitched to the first woman I dated so I thought id take out a couple. Its bloomed into something I can barely keep track of. I wont lie I'm loving the attention and my self esteem is through the roof. You made a great analogy though, this really feels like an audition and I'm hoping to start eliminating (man that sounds awful) some of the women and getting down to one soon.
I am enjoying this season but,
The Woodrugh dilemma "im not gay!! What a baby? Great lets get married!!" bit is just a little cartoony. Though woodrugh is hardly alone as a caricature this season.
The shootout scene was way too convenient that our main cast survives alone. It also conveniently closes the case similar to season 1 but feels sort of lazy compared to the natural feel of season 1.
I keep watching cause I think this thing is going to turn a corner at any point and get infinitely more interesting. Problem is that corner never gets turned. Maybe they have a ton in store for us in the second half of this season.....maybe.
I think the talent is definitely there this season.(probably not vaughn though hes inconsistent at best, drama aint his bag) I feel the execution and writing have really taken a step back. So far all we have is a good cop drama, but not something living up to the True Detective brand. Heres to hoping for a better second half.
Gregor Greymane wrote:
Thats absolutely true. Funny story about Bud, I had the office rolling on the floor laughing the other day. For some reason they were trying to figure out what dysentery was. I informed them of the alignment and that im pretty sure Bud lite causes it :)
Fun fact time, Budweiser used to make 55 million gallons of swill a year in 2000. Guess how many gallons they make a year now???
16 million gallons weoooo Viva la beer revolution!!!
This is assuming its on the GM to do all the work. I expect my players to meet me in the middle. If folks are too far apart I will suggest they do not play together.
True there are all kinds of speeds and playstyles. My point was that greenteagamer dont want to mess around with a casual player. At least not those who are vocal about finding a happy medium for the group that requires greenteagamer to use bumpers or a tee. I believe his very next post attest to that. He wants a proficient group looking to excel, not just coast by. By using the ad I mentioned, he can try to screen out undesirable players. That way he doesn't ruin their fun nor they his.
@greenteagamer sorry about using you in my example bud not trying to pick on ya or anything.
As far as optimize or die goes, I think folks need to understand there are different proficiency levels out there and none of them are badwrongfun. Some folks are more casual and others are hardcore. Unfortunately, our hobby community is tiny so chances for overlap are great. This causes a lot of wrecked games for all involved. Being mindful of expectations is key to avoiding bad gaming no matter how you like it.
If I was greenteagamer my gaming ad post would say "We go at one speed, mine. If you cant keep up, dont step up, your character will only die!"
Oh hilarious story I got about this. I had a roommate many years ago (still a really good friend of mine) and we would occasionally get on each others nerves. A lot of it was simple disagreements about things. Anyways I got annoyed because everything in the bathroom was crammed into the cabinet or drawers and I had to go fishing for my things everyday. I finally asked my roommate why he did this. He mentioned the flushing microscopic germs and I eyerolled.
Anyways, one night we got in a big drunken fight about what I cant recall. I do remember shouting, "Oh yeah?? Well I take your toothbrush out every time I flush and put it back when I'm done." He left my stuff alone after that.
Evil always triumphs over good, because good is dumb!
Sure add the newspapers to individuals walking on street and driving their own car and Id say its apt.
You mean like prop 8 was?
Many of the locations I have been to are filthy. They use microwaves and other questionable methods to heat and serve food. The bread, oh god the bread, is gross and always has been. Even though they supposedly have many types, they all taste the same and the wheat isnt really wheat. Essentially, just forms of white bread that is soft and flavorless. They dont cut their cold cuts and keep them in plastic bins all day. Ultimately, subway is on the same level as McDs or BK but get a pass because their food is healthier. Perhaps im blessed to live in a city that has numerous sandwhich shops, all of which beat subway by a wide margin. Subway is the white castle of sandwhich shops and like white castle I must be heavily under the influence before it sounds acceptable.
Yeah this explains a lot. This gaming style makes GMPC more than a useful tool, but a necessary one. Since you have a lot of practice I am guessing you have rounded off the edges of using GMPCs and are well practiced with them. Many folks continue to threadcrap the discussion of this thread but I for one am glad it happened because of hearing about others perspectives like this.
pres man wrote:
I do find the whole, "The GMPC might have to interact with another NPC and that is just GM mental masturbation," idea a bit strange. I mean are there never two or more relevant NPCs "on stage" at the same time? A king, the queen, and the councilor? A general and his XO? Or is it always one "talker" NPC and a bunch of mooks?
Depends on how your table runs their games. At mine scenes that are role-play acted out always include the PCs, and thus the GMPC. Sure as GM I might have say, town guards and thieves, in the same scene with PCs and it all plays out as individuals. Though, if the PCs check out of a scene because they are finished, or not interested, I have to account for the GMPC. As I mentioned before my preference is to play GMPCs as individuals with motives and not party role filling robots. So if a GMPC is genuinely interested in seeing something through, the players sit back and wait while I act it out myself. That is odd, and not to a benefit of the game for us.
My gaming group goes through this process all the time. We often discuss game elements that we like/dislike. One example is XP. I have one player that loves XP and wants it to be part of the game. Everyone else hates XP and wants it removed from the game or kept under the hood. For the one player who loves XP, well he also loves our gaming group so he lets XP go because its worth it to him to keep playing. On the other hand, a player once mentioned that he has no taste for an evil campaign and would sit one out if the group wanted to play one badly enough. You have to weigh out your desire to play with what you are willing to sacrifice or put up with.
My group is comfortable enough doing this. What I have seen is a lot of folks who are not. They would rather put up with elements they greatly dislike because "bad gaming is better than no gaming." When this happens folks either sit on it and have less fun, or worse, they go one to sabotage the game in a passive aggressive protest to try and force the game in a direction they find more suitable. To avoid that I strongly suggest groups try and discuss gaming elements before and after sessions.
As the DM, would you set aside your DMPC for the good of the player who gave it a go and still can't stand it? Would you weigh the overall reception the DMPC receives and tell him, "Sorry, but ... needs of the many"? Certainly a DM has a responsibility to the game, to the players' enjoyment and to his own. Is it wholly situational?
I'd say its entirely situational. You should always weigh the group vs. your own preferences. I think you can graciously bring up grievances for discussion. If you are odd man out, you should decide whether or not you can overlook the element for the good of the game. Its important to remember its a group activity so there needs to be some give and take. If one person is laying down an ultimatum against the rest of the group, I'd ask them to sit out as GM. Personally knowing my group a person would more likely remove themselves than force everyone to give up something they are interested in. YMMV.
Agreed. Folks need to be flexible to make this game work. Everyone has a breaking point though too where it might be a good idea to walk away or sit out. Like lets say you are good at running a GMPC, and everyone says you are good at running GMPCs, but they don't want you to because they don't like it. Do you drop the GMPCs or do you drop as GM?
Sorry to hear that Jig. I have never experienced anything like this in PFS, but honestly my PFS has been very limited. I think this has less to do with role play definitions and more to do with not being a rude ahole in public games.
When I run Kobolds I tend to make them ambush fighters. They try their best to face foes in environments they have an advantage. Weapons are for swarming or mop up after the trap has done its job. Otherwise they will try their best to get a safe spot and use range attacks since they are not hardy enough for melee battle when given a choice.
You could optimize their weapons I guess but once you start down that path you can pretty much throw away 90% of weapons in the ultimate equipment book. I do think occasionally coming up with a beefy Kobold that can melee or a chieftain sorcerer that leads the pack can be fun. Id combine a boss with clever encounter places instead of worrying about optimizing equipment to challenge PCs with Kobolds and other similar monster types.
On the flip side, I always thought it peculiar that lycans use weapons while in hybrid form. So many modules have great axe wielding werewolves it just seems to defeat the purpose of being a lycan in the first place. Kinda points out how important weapons are to anything humanoid shaped in the game I guess.