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

Pan's page

RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter, 7 Season Dedicated Voter, 9 Season Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 4,062 posts (4,192 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters. 9 aliases.


1 to 50 of 765 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Pan wrote:
OP have you considered trying 5E? Do you find the same pitfalls in that system?
I'm unlikely to try 5e anytime soon. Recently I've been feeling very ambivalent about D&D, and am honestly more interested in tinkering with my fantasy heartbreaker than playing.

In that case, I strongly suggest looking over the 5E free rules PDF. Even if you don't play it, the design is a good read for someone with the interest.

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm with the crowd that says "feats don't stop you from doing things, they just make you better at doing things." Of course, the effectiveness of any particular feat is definitely up for debate. I am fully aware some feats simply don't work or are not worthy of existence. As a result of that fact, my players often skip feats of limited narrative variety in favor of ones more useful in combat. Sadly, dems da breaks in 3.5/PF.

I agree that feats can lead to an ideology that they are required in order to attempt things. I think 5E putting more power back in the GM chair will do a lot to move away from that mindset. In fact, many of the examples given by the OP seem like encouragement right out of the 5E DMG. I like the fact that 5E feats tend to be equal amounts crunch and fluff making them seem just all around more useful. By containing more in the package, characters need fewer feats, which is another added bonus.

OP have you considered trying 5E? Do you find the same pitfalls in that system?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hate noon Twins games because people flood the skyways and its hard getting around here at work. Although, it's a little bittersweet since the window in my row looks over Target Field!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is plenty more to see. Not sure the twin cities is a huge destination for your future trip planning but you'll find a big midwestern welcome if you decide to visit!

Take care thanks for letting folks know its not an all out war zone in the U.S.!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ghost Busters directed by Paul Feig starring....Oh wait!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can hand the GM reins over anytime, however, anytime someone else runs a game it falls apart when either the GM or players want to quit it :(

Hope you enjoy playing!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:

Funny how many people don't see being a horrible undead monster as a bad thing just because getting their was slightly easier.

Keep in mind it's not a temporary character. Its you. Right now. And its forever

Yeap, thought about it. The answer is still yes! I mean you could do a world of good with the powers of a lich, and since you are not evil you are actually a groovy undead monster instead.

Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:

Well, you're dead for starters. Some may consider that a downside.

no nerve endings or biology or any of the fun things that come with it (sex, food, etc).

The only downside I removed was the need to do something inherently evil to begin with and the part where you automatically kill people by touch or frighten them by your presence.

Well, now you include some downsides to consider. Still you should say yes with all the good you could do for your loved ones and the world at large.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, if I wanted a hard sci-fi I'd just use Traveller. Which I do, and is why I'm only lurking at SF. I tend not to tie myself to one system so im always looking for the best fit. The Paizo kitchen sink approach means the game will probably allow you to simply handwave a lot of the fantasy elements away. My caveat would be that some of those fantasy elements are really baked into the system so you can only make it so hard.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm having Rhubarb oolong this morn.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
I think 5E and Pathfinder separately cater to groups with different playstyles and game preferences. It's probably good for both games that they exist, rather than one group trying to adapt a game to a different approach or championing for corrections in the game to lend it to their GM style.

Yeap, 5E is what I want to run as a GM. PF is what I want to be a player in... Either way I win!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

5E is new and tighter then the previous few editions. I think its relative ease of use will give it long legs. Dont worry though, soon forums will cry in agony under the weight of whats broken about it once the hardcores have had their way with it. For now enjoy the buzz!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bootleg DVDs are all over the place of the holiday special. Sure the quality is probably crap, but are y'all seriously saying high quality picture would improve the experience?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

spoiler:
I know this gothic horror and all, but seriously the Talbot family reunion was worthy of a top notch western showdown. The morality was all over the map, as well as the understanding of exactly how dangerous the evening was going to prove.

Also, every time they introduce a new character it just expands on the story. I love how they can close one door and open another seamlessly. I am more anxious for PD than I am for GoT!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am with the encourage dont punish team. In fact if I feel I have to punish my players for any reason I step back and evaluate our preferences and question our compatibility.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sam taking Gilly and the baby out in the middle of the night makes sense. Sam stealing his fathers Valaryian sword is just suicide.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Too bad, despite season 2 being a marked drop in quality it is still one of the better shows on the air. TD you will be missed by at least this cat.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd rather the well established guys take a back seat and see focus on new guys. They can just fade out and in as needed. /shrug


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Black Dougal wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
Hitdice wrote:

All I can say at this point is, I'm very curious to see what a high budget name brand D&D movie ends up looking like. If we get something on the same level as other Hasbro properties such as Battleship, G.I.Joe and Transformers, I'll be psyched.

Oh god those are my worst case scenario.

My biggest concern though is that the directors last work was Goosebumps. Which was less about adapting Goosebumps into a kid friendly horror movie, but rather a meta comedy referencing the books. I don't mind some Guardians of the Galaxy level humor but please oh god please don't let it become a portal fantasy with a group of gamers being put into the Forgotten Realms....

Come on, 6 young teenagers at an amusement park get on a roller coaster that starts going through a tunnel with the sign Yawning Portal at the entrance. They emerge to find themselves in a fantasy land being chased by 5 headed dragon that is actually a lesser deity, but for some reason can never catch them. Every 15 minutes they think they are about to go home when something happens and they have to start a new quest.

Its such a great idea it will spawn TV spinoffs, maybe even a cartoon series.

It does sound delightfully stupid.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dire Elf wrote:

My group has been playing a lot of modules recently, where in the past we mostly played homebrew adventures. I have to say that I prefer the freeform stuff.

My experience is that modules tend to make the GM - and the players too, to a certain extent - forget to leave time for roleplaying. The focus relies too heavily on getting from one plot point to the next. When we played homebrew adventures, we could often go an entire session without rolling any dice. We would have long in-character conversations and talk about things our characters were doing that had nothing to do with the adventure. The GM would just set us free to do whatever we wanted, as long as we hadn't picked up the session in the middle of a combat.

It's possible to insert that kind of thing into a module, but it seems to be a lot harder to do than it is for a homebrew. Not being a GM myself, I'm not sure why that is. Perhaps it's because the homebrew adventures were telling a story that we were all writing together, while modules are more like actors working from a script.

I find the first half of an AP to be very open and encouraging of RP. Unfortunately, this fails to continue into the second half. I think high level being an utter PITA to write for doesnt help.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
necromental wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Pan wrote:


While I agree that a lot of that makes thematic sense, Id be careful not train the players to act a certain way. If they feel like anytime they don't rise to the challenge they will be punished, they will never back down again. Eventually, choices evaporate and you have trained them to accept the railroad. YMMV

Training them to weigh realistic consequences isn't a bad idea. Following the story shouldn't be frowned on.

As to not backing down... That is kind of the hallmark of an adventurer. Adventuring is super dangerous but super rewarding. It's not a job that suits the timid.

I mean, what would Lord of the Rings have been like if, at the council, the members of the Fellowship said, "Oh man. This is dangerous, forget this, hey Elrond, here's the Ring you can handle this one."

If Raistlin told Caramon, "Yeah. This Tower of High Sorcery test is super risky. I'm going to pass and become a farmer."

If Drizzt went to tell some Mercenaries about the Dragon in the mountain rather than go deal with it?

If Captain America (movie version) told Tommy Lee Jones, "Oh man, Bucky and a bunch of others are captured by Nazis? Sucks to be them! I've got a show to do!"

It's one thing to back down if you can't win. It's another to back down before you even try.

And sometimes an adventure that the DM envisioned just isn't interesting. Turning down anything until you get just what you want will cause a GM burnout, but having to accept every rat-killing and McGuffin fetching will do the same to the players, if they are penalized for turning down ANY assignment.

This. Also, not every adventure is an epic save the world endeavor. Often, in a sandbox the adventures are much smaller in scope. The players can see them to conclusions or stop pursuing them as they see fit. I agree that consequences should have impact, however, if you do go with strict mechanical penalties, you may trap the players into every rat-killing McGuffin fetching quest that comes their way. Sounds like being on the rails to me. I tend to side with RP based reactions and leave mechanical penalties for rare occasions when they are really warranted. Its a balancing act not a binary process.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
Mathmuse wrote:


** spoiler omitted **...

Your option 4 is option 1.

I believe in having consequences for actions. If they don't go after the item, and then claim that they are too inexperienced to have done it then the person isn't hiring them when the cavalry has done whatever it is they would do.

The item is lost. The PCs now find that anyone else they approach for a job is offering them 25% less for the job. A 25% reduction in the base price, something they can't diplomacy back. When asked why, it is because their reputation of adventurers has been tarnished.

They were adventurers who were not willing to adventure.

And yes, this is a hit to their WBL, which they would have to earn back by repairing their damaged reputation.

I would create a story path for them then, should they wish, to regain their reputation.

Basically the PC's reputation (at least in that area) would be:

"These guys were hired to retrieve an item. When the chance came to get the item they refused to do so and claimed that they were too inexperienced to do it. They weren't willing to take a risk. They are cowards."

And that reputation as cowards would stick until the PCs managed to prove otherwise.

While I agree that a lot of that makes thematic sense, Id be careful not train the players to act a certain way. If they feel like anytime they don't rise to the challenge they will be punished, they will never back down again. Eventually, choices evaporate and you have trained them to accept the railroad. YMMV

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I view railroading as a GM taking away choices they ought not to from the players. Often, this is due to an inexperienced GM, but sometimes its just a controlling individual that should be avoided. Railroading is the point a linear or structured adventure becomes too confining to enjoy. On the other hand, the general sandbox can also be too freeform and not provide enough boundaries for a sustainable game. That point in the sand is all over the place amongst gamers and only the individual or group can answer it for themselves.

For me I enjoy running modules and especially adventure paths. I think generally Paizo does a good job of allowing the GM to give their players adequate choices. Just because you have to resolve problems x,y,z doesn't mean you have no ability to choose how to resolve them, or in any particular order either.

Another benefit of the APs is the player's guide to the campaign. The guides give you a theme to base your character building around and an expectation of the type of game you will be playing. I know some folks want to build characters more organically, or even adventure where they feel like, but I find working inside a box can be just as enjoyable as working outside one.

Everything so far above is how I feel about fantasy gaming. When my group switches over to Traveller, a hard Sci-Fi setting, we engage in the opposite behaviors. We make very disparate characters with no link or set expectations whatsoever. The game grows organically and we enjoy the freedom to be proactive in our pursuits. Not sure if it is the system, or the setting, but we just like different lanes for different games. We even meet in the middle of sandbox and linear gaming when we choose Call of Cthulhu.

Ultimately, I don't put myself on either side of the sand because I like both. Miles vary greatly in my experience and there is no right or wrong way to play. Key is to figure out what you like and find a group that is similar.

-cheers


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tormsskull wrote:


PT.B=The Devil wrote:
My players reminisce about the time they played a ranger who became a city vigilante. They talk about the time their Bard became Baron of a small wilderness country. They talk about fighting dragons, old ones, and beholders. They never ever talk about their stats. Ever. I guess that explains why PB isnt seen as "cookie cutter" or "unearned" by me and the homies.

That's awesome - but I think you missed the point. If you use PB, why would a player ever tell stories about their stats? "Dude, do you remember that time I bought an 18? That was really smart on my part."

Do your players ever talk about that time when the group almost died but then Jane scored that critical hit to save the day? Its kind of like that.

We never talk about rolling "18s" though we talk about the times that one person had great stats and no one else did. Rolling stats wrecked more games for us then it ever made better or memorable. I understand what you are saying, im just providing another perspective. No insults, no badwrongfun, just a case of one man's feature being another man's bug.

Peace?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tormsskull wrote:
TOZ wrote:
I can't for the life of me understand such a view.

It's probably due to starting with Basic D&D and roll 3d6 in order stat gen method.

In that method, rolling an 18 was very rare. Even when it switched to 4d6b3, an 18 was still fairly rare. So having an 18 put a character in an imaginary little elite club.

When people started using PB and buying an 18, that imaginary little elite club became a free-for-all that anyone and everyone could enter.

People use to tell stories about that one time Bob rolled an 18 - it was an event. No one tells stories about that time Bob bought an 18.

My players reminisce about the time they played a ranger who became a city vigilante. They talk about the time their Bard became Baron of a small wilderness country. They talk about fighting dragons, old ones, and beholders. They never ever talk about their stats. Ever. I guess that explains why PB isnt seen as "cookie cutter" or "unearned" by me and the homies.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

You got 3 min to put that into paragraphs.....

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scythia wrote:
I just hope it's more akin to Stand Alone Complex (with a good mix of action and intrigue), and less like the Ghost in the Shell movie (that tended to feel like a freshman philosophy class being taught from Isaac Asimov novels).

Flip that around for me!

Though i'm guessing you will be very pleased when this comes out. Along with the whitewashing i'm predicting a simplification of the writing for a general audience. I think the comparison to the Aeon flux film is about what i'm expecting here. Hope I'm wrong tho!

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah those producers have terribad filmographies.....Im still hanging onto hope because I loved GitS 1 and 2.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Werthead wrote:


1) Set in the original timeline, not the Abramsverse (as mentioned earlier, CBS don't have the rights to the Abramsverse without doing a new deal with Paramount).

Fine by me.

Werthead wrote:
2) Set after STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY but before STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION.

Hmm interesting.

Werthead wrote:
3) The show will not involve a starship called Enterprise.

DS9 was my favorite Trek, so I can certainly live with that.

Werthead wrote:
4) The show will be "tightly serialised".

Perfect, I prefer this method.

Werthead wrote:
5) The show will be a "seasonal anthology" series like TRUE DETECTIVE and FARGO. Each season will be set in a different part of the STAR TREK universe and canon, and will be free to use different castmembers (new or old), settings and ideas.

Now this is the best nugget. I see a few folks were like "aw I wanted to see X period of Trek...." and I think eventually you will. Hopefully they can make cohesive interesting seasons over and over again within the format. I think that will be key to the success of this new series. My interest is piqued!


7 people marked this as a favorite.

so you're a 39 point build?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It will be interesting to see how well Warcraft does. I think that can shed some insight to the market. Even though at this point in time I think Warcraft has more presence than D&D does.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One of the biggest contributors I believe is the same topics coming up over and over. New forumites don't have the conversation history that the veterans do. So often the bad faith arguments are "here we go again" or getting "inb4" the rhetoric begins. Worst case scenario the poster makes bad faith arguments out of spite. A good exercise is to think if you have nothing constructive to contribute its best to not contribute at all.

Let me be the first to apologize for failing often on this. I swear im getting better though!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Add Spy to the list. Ugh, they beat every joke to death and it was way way too long. Overrated so do yourself a favor and skip it if you havent seen it!

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

While I think its good for folks to discuss role playing games and their preferences, I feel talks of where the "pendulum" should be are not particularly helpful. The results of such are generally endless arguments about rightgoodfun, which is only true for the opinion holder and those who share it. The best part of the article was this paragraph;

"Not every game of this sort must be completely balanced with regard to all of these aspects. Such a decision is entirely in the hands of the game master and the players. If a particular group desires to stress acting, or combat, or problem solving, or any other singular feature of the whole, that is strictly up to the individuals concerned. How they enjoy gaming, and what constitutes fun, is theirs alone to decide."

Overall, I think there are some good nuggets in the article. Particularly, the parts that discuss calling out a module/adventure/tournament and what parts of the game it emphasizes to set accurate expectations for players. However, discussing the difference between role play and role assumption is fine, as long as the writer refrains from marking boundaries of good vs. bad. I think GG gets really close to doing just that here.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Christopher Dudley wrote:
DoomOtter wrote:
I hate it when people play classes and races stereotypically.
Yeah, that used to bug me, then I figured that maybe I've seen it hundreds of times, but they haven't gotten to play it hundreds of times, so, I just smile and nod. I haven't seen a clichéd character type that didn't have some individual expression come through in it.

+1 The only characters I hate at the table are absolutists. You know the type that must murder on site their favored enemy even to the point of suicidal odds, or the guy playing a "pharasmin follower" so he must destroy all undead immediately despite any assistance or leads say a ghost might provide the party, also the paladin that detects evil 24/7 and kills immediately once ping'd no matter the context. Those folks need not apply at my table.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
Orville Redenbacher wrote:
I miss the 30's pulpiness and immersive feel of the older films. CS felt like a constant hood wink to the audience. The entire experience was like one of those craptastic MGM/Universal park rides. Speilberg has made a few of these stinkers in his career but nothing on this level. They completely missed the mark on the experience IMO. They could have taken and run with the "I like Ike" theme but ultimately they just put Soviet skins on the old nazi BBEG schtick and rolled with it....ugh. Oh and it doesnt matter who wrote the nuclear blast fridge ride scene it was fu##$g stupid, yeap thats right the gopher too. Also, vines and monkeys? WTF did you have to make me think of CS again for?

Ok, let's take an honest look at Temple of Doom. An annoying shrieking love interest who is always complaining about everything. The banquet of eyeball stew, snake stuffed with live snakes, and monkey brains from the skull for desert. What could have been an amazing look at the thugees that was instead a reskin of the nazis. Also, bugs in the trapped room? A mine cart designed like a roller coaster? Indiana being possessed by shiva and then acting like nothing happened?

It's got just ans many annoying and stupid plot choices as Crystal Skull. It's just that nostalgia for a beloved childhood movie gives it a pass.

All fair points. Keep in mind though, I never said ToD was good, just that CS is a stinking POS. I do get a huge smile on my face every time someone mentions the premier being at Cannes film fest for CS :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I miss the 30's pulpiness and immersive feel of the older films. CS felt like a constant hood wink to the audience. The entire experience was like one of those craptastic MGM/Universal park rides. Speilberg has made a few of these stinkers in his career but nothing on this level. They completely missed the mark on the experience IMO. They could have taken and run with the "I like Ike" theme but ultimately they just put Soviet skins on the old nazi BBEG schtick and rolled with it....ugh. Oh and it doesnt matter who wrote the nuclear blast fridge ride scene it was fu##$g stupid, yeap thats right the gopher too. Also, vines and monkeys? WTF did you have to make me think of CS again for?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Molten Dragon wrote:
Molten Dragon wrote:
Pan wrote:
Redbeard the Scruffy wrote:
Have you tried putting them on pause after one of the books, storing the characters, and then finishing later while another GM runs substitute games?
Yes to disastrous effect....Once we stop, even if the GM says "just a break" it means campaign over :(
This has been my experience for the last 30 years. I've learned to just roll with it.

I hate to quote myself, but just by way of follow up; we put the campaign I was dming on "break" to play shadowrun for two sessions. That fizzled so now we are doing mutants and masterminds again with me dming.

I'm 100% certain we will never get back to the campaign on break. And I'm fine with that and so are the players.

It didnt bother me so much in the past, however, since picking up the APs it bothers me greatly. I want to see the story all the way through now! Guess I learned my lesson no APs for my other GMs. Sadly, that means I dont get to play any :(


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"objectively better..." :)

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
bookrat wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

I haven't checked it too closely, but my back-of-the-envelope calculation is that the guy with -4 will equal or exceed the guy with +5 16.5% of the time (presuming all other modifiers are the same for each).

That's not really indicative of "moron vs genius".

For what DC? Once you get in to negative modifiers, without some sort of asistence (proficiency, magic, etc) it's impossible to do a Hard difficulty task without GM adjudication.

This. Rulings over rules means you can play fast and loose with skill checks. Some things a proficient player should just be able to do no check required. Some things a non-proficent low attribute score player should simply not be able to do, denied a check.

I get that some folks wont jive with that. Some need the game rules to be able to represent any scenario like a simulation. A rulings over rules player will just give a Hercules PC a belt of giant strength allowing them to be over the Str cap. Or alternatively they will allow that character to exceed the cap because of story reasons. They work around the system when they need to. This doesnt work for some folks who need solid written mechanical representation. In that case, folks might want to stick with a 3.5/PF type game. YMMV

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Redbeard the Scruffy wrote:
Have you tried putting them on pause after one of the books, storing the characters, and then finishing later while another GM runs substitute games?

Yes to disastrous effect....Once we stop, even if the GM says "just a break" it means campaign over :(

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I guess I should just be happy my groups meet consistently, on time, and everyone gets along for many years. I just get tired of unfinished campaigns and dont want to have to finish them myself as GM every damn time. UGH!

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Taking characters from level 1-15 in a narrow but detailed adventure is nearly impossible. Yet again another member from one of my groups wants to hang up the GM towel from burnout half way into an AP. Im not sure if Im a good GM or just damn stubborn enough to plow through one. All I really know is that im tired of APs dying on the vine and not getting finished. :(


3 people marked this as a favorite.

but when will then be now?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

y'all game with some lunatics.

I got one for out of game. I threw together a game of half my friends have a guy I recently met. As everyone arrives a few of us crack a beer. One of the guys I dont know says, "wait wait this isnt going to be drunken D&D is it? I dont want to play in that type of game." We tell him that no its a few beers adult type of game. His fears are quieted for the time being.

Well a few hours later he has polished off near a 12 pack and is pretty drunk. One of my friends a female player playing a female character casts charm person. The "oh no drunken D&D" guy starts hollering that she uses her huge breasts to charm. Well she was right creeped out and the game session ended with this guy passed out on the front lawn. Only session we played together and now that lady has sworn off gaming. :(


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hate the game, not the playa

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmm if you truly wanted the Tengu to be unique I was going to say an owlbear construction gone wrong. Though it sounds like you found an answer to your setting.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

P.K. Dick


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Posting this made me hungry. munch....munch.....

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmm I was enthralled with my options early in the game with Eve. Scanning in deep space and hoping not to get caught was a blast. Then doing it in worm holes got even better. The constant threat was so exciting. Eventually, I got better and better and the threat dissipated. I moved on to working in a corp. later on into crafting. At the point of doing excel spreadsheets in my free time I decided to stop Eve and MMOs altogether. Ill always look back fondly though its the only one that held my attention. I ran DDO for a long time but that was due to great friends more than the game.

Back on topic, I still like my Birthright idea. Also, the mentioned killing lowbies doesnt net much reward so the focus is on the big fish. Id give it a whirl if i wasnt in a kick ass BR campaign right now :)

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I see another SB ass beating in P-Mann's future

1 to 50 of 765 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.