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 2013 Star Voter, 2014 Dedicated Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 2,804 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 337 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DM Beckett wrote:


Another thing is it isn't that they are THE apex predator, as much as one of many, something that's also reinforced with many vampires, being immortal, beginning to plot and scheme in order to feed and keep their minds active. As far as the Amino Acid thing. I personally hate the kind of modern vampire concept of trying to make it scientifically explainable. It's way, way to overdone, and honestly, kind of boring. <It's kind of cool to have individuals think they can figure it out, (and not because it isn't), but the idea of just having vampires (and other supernatural and cursed creatures) be scientifically explained is dumb.

Reminds me of midichlorians from episode 1. I dont care for these types of explainations either.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

tiff about CotCT:
The campaign traits and tie that binds the PC is pretty much resolved like immiedately. I would consider changing things slightly from the players guide to try and strengthen the player bind and make campagn traits much more interesting. My two Plat

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Logan1138 wrote:
Adjule wrote:
Oryou can do like so many others, and not allow rez magic if revivify is not something you like.

Yeah, I know, I could do that but the number of things I would have to change (if I even ran a session....I don't DM much) is starting to mount to an undesirable level IMO.

I am just getting an overall vibe of "too powerful, too easy" from 5E at this point. I like gritty, low-fantasy in my D&D and 5E (at least what I have seen so far and it is still early days) is looking like 3.X/PF/4E in terms of PC power and non-lethality. Plus, as I stated earlier, I don't really run games as DM that much (I kind of suck at DM'ing), so I wouldn't have control over which elements are removed.

I was really hoping that 5E would be the system that allowed me to get back into gaming in a serious way. Finding people who want to play "old-school" rules (B/X Basic and 1E AD&D) in face-to-face settings is pretty difficult so I was hoping that 5E could allow me to game F2F (I don't like PbP gaming) using rules that I enjoyed. The more I see of 5E, the less I think that is going to happen. Maybe the DM's guide and its "dials" can save this situation (for me).

It's funny you posted this logan because on another forum I frequent people are decrying the lack of power and find the game too deadly and lethal to play. This demonstrates just how diverse the play style preference is in the hobby.

I am with you about having to change a lot and I dont want to do it. However, I tend to change a lot of rules in 3E/PF anyways so its not a biggie for me. I guess after a decade of making 3E/P fit my playstyle the system is like an old pair of boots that just fits and makes them hard to set aside. I do think the effort might be worth it though to get BA and more grounded casters into my game. I need to see more though before I can even consider the leap.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yes Hama, can you expand on why you do not like 5E?

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

This is personal preference but I do not run APs I do not have all the parts to. I just like making sure the big picture makes sense all the way through. In many cases I have to make changes and I want to know what making chanmges will do to the story. So I would probably not run Iron Gods if you are starting soon.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

check out hero points.

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
pH unbalanced wrote:

In small-town Northeast Texas in the early 80s, it meant you didn't talk about it in public.

But it didn't feel like special persecution against gaming because there were similar witch hunts against ........dancing.

Footloose?

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
Sissyl wrote:

Tell you what, let us check the first post of the thread:

Pan wrote:
Many folks have mentioned being turned off/away by WOTC products and/or decisions in the past 5-10 years.
Anything else?
And I'm talking about the subset of those people who said that their trust was broken by the release of 4e.

The word trust was something I scooped from other posters. What I really should have refered to is brand. There are many examples covering many products of why WOTC brand has gained an inconsistent reputation. What does WOTC need to do to change that for you. You being someone of course who was a customer and now feels the brand is inconsistent or untrustworthy.

Please lets not debate motives or let this go into E.war territory.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Actually cleric channel is one of my least favorite additions of pathfinder. I'm not that hot on the alchemist either. I would apreciate if you would refrain from saying "hate" when really the conversation has been about modding an ability some people dislike. 5E is a sytem that is supposed to be all about customizing to your taste. So far its been a constructive conversation except for a few people taking exception to the dislike of sculpt spell.

Taldor

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

So in about 4-5 years we will hear your thoughts on how 5E is "groaning under its own weight." To be honest the will saves of clerics and rogues is pretty much the same as when PF was released. Are you sure its not the new hotness of a freshly released system that calls out to you? As has been mentioned many times supplement books are not required to play PF. If the weight is too much you can do something about that. If PF was great at launch why is it still not great? I don't think supplements are to blame.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Diffan wrote:
I like the sculpt spell ability because it shows that Evokers know their way around destructive magics. It shows that training steadily in the particular school has greater benefits than being a generalist. I'd also like to see what other effects are tied to schools.

I agree with the thought process here but I feel the sculpt bit is ultimately cheesy. I probably shouldn't say this but the no friendly fire thing reminds me of an element I dislike in video games. It just removes an interesting challenge of the game and makes it easier. I wish they would have chosen a different school for the PDF.

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The great ball bearing debate of 2014.....ah D&D some things never change.

I know the spell sculpture is just an evocation thing but I dont like it. you can drop fireballs right on top of your friends or even have them stand in a wall of fire while the enemy dies. Ofcourse I guess my bad guys can use this tactic too but id reather not. Freindly fire is one of the tactical parts of spell casting dont like was that get around that.

Taldor

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Player says: "Umm I am not sure why but its something my character can do."

Player means: "herolab made my PC and I couldnt recreate it with books and a sheet if I had to."

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

All my collected wisdom says the answer is….maybe.
Keeping players behind WBL and/or limiting consumables is fine if you keep two things in mind.

1. Make sure the players want an adventure based game isntead of an encounter based game. Your players will hate it if they are not on board with combat as war. Some folks just want to "kill things and take their loot" For others, combat isnt just a challenege, it's a desirable part of the game. Some players want at least half a tank of gas going into each challenge.

2. Make sure you take care to balance the adventure and not simply the encounters. One of the big reasons combat as war has gone out of style is its difficult to run a well planned adventure. The players need difficult yet possible challeneges laid out before them. Challeneges that have different levels of success based on how the players engage them. This requires a level of trust between GM and player.

There is another option out there now. 5E is kind of a hybrid right now of many play styles. Its being sold on the idea that 5E is modular. I cant speak to its success yet as I havent gotten to do more than kick the tires. 5E might be a better system for the type of game you are looking for. Though 3E/PF isnt the perfect fit for adventure based design I think its definetly riggable to support it. It is a lot of work so make sure your players are on board first.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There is a player companion or campaign setting book about vampires called blood something that works pretty well for CC.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Anguish wrote:


So it's a load of hooey, all these threads. Martials can be underwhelming not because they need more numbers or feats or whatever... they can be underwhelming because THEY'RE NOT CASTERS. That's it. That's all it's ever been about.
qoute wrote:
Funny. Martials have no problem competing with Casters in 4e.

Sure if you dont mind blanket AEDU.

qoute wrote:
Martials are underwhelming because there's a preconceived notion that spells need to be awesome.

Agreed and I think casters could do with some restraits as well. 5E seems to be heading in that direction.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'mma shout out to Scott Betts. I often disagree with him but the man has some excellent posting skillz.

Oh and to my homies Iron Truth, greg helmberger, and Mark Hoover too.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Abyssian wrote:
Pan wrote:
So i'll be bottling my peach-ginger mead this week and will have 3 empty primaries for the first time in ever. I got a bourbon barrel porter ready to brew but I need some more suggestions. Y'all good folks have any reccomendations?
How's that Peach-Ginger Mead? Sounds like a good mix of flavors.

The mead I still very young so it of course had that strong alcohol taste as newly made meads tend to have. It was drier than expected (this is fine by me) and it reminded me of pinot grigio with a hint of ginger flavor. I am glad the ginger laid down a bit because it’s already indicating this will be a very refreshing beverage. I will let y'all know what it’s like this time next year when I can chill it and sit out on the porch on a warm summers day.

My buddy came over and helped me bottle. We went to work all day and brew'd up an EPA for fall and the bourbon barrel I mentioned earlier. The BB will need to age though so probably the tail end of winter i'll crack that and see. Lots of people like using makers mark but I much prefer Eagle Rare when it comes to bourbon. I also got French oak for a nice toasty flavor.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Its ok I thnk your topic is very similar yet also different enough. I just posted the link because there might be some good reads for you in the "ick" thread.

I have two groups that tend to have pretty disparate styles. Group 1 is really into adventure/story/heroics. These guys are really into overarching plots and interesting adventures. They tend to prefer an indy jones style gamew here gore is pretty minimal and romance is a passing moment not something dwelled on. Action/adventure/story rules this table.

Group 2 is beer and pretzels. These guys are really into building characters and getting into fights. Thats tempered some with a few of us "plot" guys. These folks love gore and mature themes and joking around. In fact, one member of group 1 crossed over for a few motnhs but ended up stepping out because of playstyle differences. (we had one guy who has a problem tossing the word "gay" around in derogatory manner. The group has since come to a point we sternly told him "enough is enough" even for beer and pretzels we have our limit.)

I tend to be a bit of a chamleon so I adapt to whatever the group becomes comfortable with. I dont neccesarily have a preference but I do like variety hence two gaming groups.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hide the body.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

WOTC I think has a deal going with some company launching their E tools.(what is it called now, project morning star?) I doubt the folks at hero lab will be given a shot at 5E anytime soon. WOTC is working with third parties, but for now it seems only on their terms.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
roysier wrote:

Honestly they need to hit a home run, they need something that is really attractive not just something that they want to do. The reason being is D&D next is a d20 system not that far removed from Pathfinder. Players will migrate over, older players coming back and brand new players will go to D&D first because they have heard the brand name and are not familiar with the Pathfinder brand.

My advise to Paizo if they want to put out a sure fire hit would be another kingdom building AP, the amount of gamers that came to Pathfinder due to that AP is staggering.

Not sure the system alone will draw the players. WOTC is the one who needs a home run in the adventure dept.

I certainly wouldn’t mind another kingdom builder! My hope is for urban political intrigue that takes place in Taldor completely though.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Please see this thread.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Player says: I bullrush the darkness.
Player means: seriously, I have no idea whats out there but imma bout to find out!

Taldor

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Its 1 part class selection and 99 parts teamwork.

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Steve Geddes wrote:

That variance in player preference should ameliorate the cookie-cutter-ness, I would have thought.

I wonder if those groups who continually see all the same stats are dominated by one or two gurus with strong views about what stat allocations are 'best'. I know my group will tend to bow to the expertise of whoever has the deepest rules knowledge of our current system.

I am curious too. despite having a chargen session, I dont even know what the other players stat allocation is in our recently started Jade Regent. To think of it I went through kingmaker, Carrion Crown, half of serpent skull as either GM or player and couldnt tell you the stat allocation of the players other than my own if my life depeneded on it. What I can tell you is the race/class and personality of each PC. /shrug

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There are a lot of tools at your disposal in these situations.
On the player side:
Take classes with spell lists so you can use wands
Take classes that can easily pump UMD so they can use wands
Hire a medic to tag along (GM dependant)
Take leadership to gain cohorts (only works if GM allows and high enough level)
"combat as war" Adventure really, really, carefully :)

On the GM side:
Allow the PCs to hire a merc to patch them up
Allow PCs to take leadership and get a cohort to patch them up.
Provide a liberal amount of healing potions, wands, etc.
Adapt adventures, encounters, monsters, etc to fit the style of the group to allow them to play with their chosen classes.
Take the hard knocks aproach and when the PCs die/TPK say "see this is what happens when you dont cover all the roles!" (Not reccomedned for most groups)

From what is in the OP it sounds like a combination of unwillingness to compromise and/or adapt on both sides. I think your prediction is correct. This is a slow moving train wreck you are currently watching.

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Quark Blast wrote:
Pan wrote:
Not surprised but not a fan of pew-pew cannon casters and clerics. I really like how its written its a pleasure again to read D&D rule books. I hope to run a few one shots at various levels over the summer to get a feel for how this beast plays at the table. Thats about it for now.
I noticed that too. Wonder if they did that on purpose or it just fell out that way? Hmm... now that I think about it, I guess the editor would claim it was written that way on purpose LOL!

Oh yes its quite on purpose. I know many people hate the "crossbow wizard" and like to have a sun up to sun down caster option for blasting. I dont begrudge them that I just want a dial to turn that off when I play. Its a very cleverly written AEDU system. You can get rid of the encounter powers by modifying the short rest so some dial ability is built in. I am a litle surprised all this was in the basic game but I guess I shouldnt be.

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Adjule wrote:
Apparently, Wizards of the Coast want people to get to 3rd level asap, so the amount needed to get from 1-2, and 2-3 is extremely small. 3rd level is when players can choose their focused path, so they want them to get to 3rd quickly. Why they didn't just do that at 1st, or even 2nd, I don't know. But oh well. I may change the experience progression, or just do away with experience points all together.

There are quite a few articles explaining the design decisions over at WOTC forums. I'll summarize a few of the ideas though.

Levels 1 and 2 are supposed to be like an introduction. These "apprentice" levels allow players to gain levels quickly and learn the process out of the gate before getting too far into the game. Some fans also wanted characters to start with low hp and few abilities to feel gritty.

By delaying archetype to level 3 it discourages multi-class dipping by not front-loading the classes.

My guess is that starting at level 3 will be a popular choice with 5E.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Generic Dungeon Master wrote:

I’ll be happy with it right up until the time they start introducing all the other “Classes”

I hate them, hate them all

When I started I tried to get my players to “Role-Play” things like

Barbarians (you are a fighter who doesn’t wear armor, doesn’t trust Wizards, and is not afraid of anything)

And Rangers (you are a fighter who wears light armor, and lives in the woods, protecting travelers from wild animals)

And Druids (you are a Neutral Cleric who only uses spells that effect the natural world in order to keep the Circle of Life going on forever)

Yeah, that’s right. I always felt that the ridiculous number of new classes ruined the game for me

(And the new Pathfinder ones are killing Pathfinder for me)

Why do we need to keep re inventing Role Playing Choices as mechanical advantages of one kind or another?

I skipped nearly all the supplemntal 3.5 era books except PHBII and DMGII. Now that I am with PF I love the APG. Though I plan to skip the ARG, ACG, and will evaluate PF unchang'd closer to release. Game is only ruined by supplemental material if you choose. Some folks like those options why deny them?

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

wow, hitting a guy with a shovel made the pally fall? The way I figure it the fall was just a matter of time anyways so alternatives are moot.

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Wear sunscreen.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Diffan wrote:

At-Will magic (Cantrips / Orisons) - Taken from PF's at-will cantrips / 4E's at-will powers this allows caters to be casters throughout the day. Some people like it, others don't. It IS a fixed rule but I'm sure people can find ways to limit it. Personally I think it makes me playing a wizard feel more "wizardly" than "Um, I do nothing but "help action" to save on spell power" 3/4 encounters of the day.

This is the biggest stickler for me and am pretty sad they didnt put it on a dial. Maybe the PHB/DMG will give me some options to mod this unwanted feature.

diffan wrote:


Bounded Accuracy - This is one of the biggest draws for me. I'm getting really tired of he ridiculous bonuses, ACs, attack mods, etc. that I'm seeing with v3.5 / PF and 4E. I don't need to have PC's who has AC 29 - 32 at 13th level. It's just.....unnecessary and creates a HUGE immersion problem when viewed in conjunction with the rest of the world. I mean, my 13th level v3.5 Fighter has an AC 29. That means he can literally go into any small village and destroy EVERYTHING without fear of reprisal from the locals. Even if 30 villages attack him at once, his AC (even prone) is likely high enough (mechanically speaking) he can lay there for a while and not take damage. That, to me, is just dumb. With bounded accuracy, AC 18 is HIGH but still hit-able with a d20 + ability modifier.

I am 100% with you on BA. In fact, I would say its the crown jewel of 5E.

Taldor

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Na its 5E for me so I can differentiate it from other iterations. The only way to really stop E.warring is to not participate in it.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Can someone TL;DR that?

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Get a wand of false life and stay out of trouble if possible.

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
Pan wrote:
I dont think the reactions here are that negative. If anything they are rather lukewarm or neutral. It makes sense to me that PF fans are not that excited about a new D&D. People seem to be pretty content with 3E/PF and the huge libraries they built and 5E is not enticing enough to lure PF fans in; yet.

You may be right about the reactions being lukewarm, but my question revolves around why Pathfinder fans on one forum tend to have a [lukewarm/disappointed/negative/whatever] reaction to 5e's release, while Pathfinder fans on the other tend to have a positive reaction to it.

Both groups are Pathfinder fans, so why the tendency to react differently?

Quote:
Enworld in my experience tends to be a rather positive place which is why I enjoy reading there. Discussions tend to be more constructive even between folks with differing opinions.
That's been my experience as well, and probably has something to do with it.

Oh my bad. Yeah my guess is the folks who frequent here are pretty happy and lean towards being one system PF fans. PF fans on enworld are probably a little more open to multiple systems and switching things up.

Taldor

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
Auxmaulous wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
Auxmaulous wrote:

Yeah, two different websites and forums.

So, your point?
I guess if two things are different there's no point in exploring what those differences are or why they exist! How silly of me!
Well no, you have an agenda (and I get that) I just wanted you to come clean with the point you were trying to make.
I think my real question is why the Pathfinder fans here seem overwhelmingly disappointed in 5e, while the Pathfinder fans at ENWorld seem overwhelmingly pleased with it. Obviously merely liking Pathfinder isn't the differentiating factor, so I'm looking for thoughts on what that factor might actually be.

I dont think the reactions here are that negative. If anything they are rather lukewarm or neutral. It makes sense to me that PF fans are not that excited about a new D&D. People seem to be pretty content with 3E/PF and the huge libraries they built and 5E is not enticing enough to lure PF fans in; yet.

Enworld in my experience tends to be a rather positive place which is why I enjoy reading there. Discussions tend to be more constructive even between folks with differing opinions. It was a positive place during 4E launch too. Now RPG net seems much more negative about 5e then just about anywhere else. WOTC forums? That place is like a shelled out battlefield from the E.war.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Sometimes you have to walk. My best friends that I love to spend time with are the worst gamers ever. Sadly, I had to break off with them and form a new group that I took the time to screen and form. There is a point where you have to decide if your playstyle is worth giving up to keep rolling with someone you dont match up with. I can still go fishing or drinking or anything else with my good buds but now I get my gaming fix too.

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Serpent Skull book 1 is fantastic. We loved it probably the best enrty of any AP so far. It plummets quickly after that though and serpent skull became a walk away for us.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Zhayne wrote:
That's flavor text, not rules text. It is non-binding and mutable and should have no bearing on its acceptance or refusal.

It may come as a surprise but some folks do indeed like PFS, Golarion, and gosh even PF. It's true you can compeltely disregard the flavor if you want, but some people like to embrace the spirit of the game as odd as that may seem to you.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
insaneogeddon wrote:
Players seem to like being able to play things they find interesting but otherwise don't in low point buys and personally I think it highly unlikely any would make it to 1st and even get trained in a medieval type world with under average stats.... THIS IS SPARTA rules tended to apply - down the reject child pit with you !!! be it on purpose or because your siblings/tribes members beat you too food/took your food or you got diseased or tricked easily or just didn't have the charisma to be breast fed when times were tough/avoid being eaten etc. Such a different world today!

LOLWUT?

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I see words and phrases like "one dimensional" and "more interesting" and am convinced this notion has little to do with balance.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

yawn, please use search function before posting.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Put me in the clamp and cap camp.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

"Hey Blondie do you know what you are......."

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Matt Thomason wrote:
Pan wrote:
Might be a quirk of my group but we find a system fits each genre for us. So when we pick a fantasy system that's the system we use when playing fantasy.

Kinda related - It'd be nice if the RPG industry could settle on a standard for naming game systems. "Edition" still feels misused to me when applied to D&D, because 3e and 4e were new systems, as opposed to 2e that felt more like an evolution of 1e. Bottom line, 3e was a new game, so was 4e, and neither were really a new edition of the previous incarnation. 3.5e I'll quite happily accept as a newer edition of 3e.

It feels kinda dishonest to market something as a new edition when that usually implies it's been revised and corrected rather than thrown out in favor of a complete redesign. I don't mind trying out a new game, but please don't try to sell it to me as being an newer version of the one I'm already playing. That's like telling me Linux is a new edition of Windows, they may be somewhat similar in concept but they're not exactly compatible out of the box.

I was very casual at the time and dont rememeber the 2E-3E change over marketing. I was a hardcore player though during the 3E-4E and remember that changeover. It didnt bother me but I do think "the game remains the same" video was a big mistake. It does seem to imply that 4E was a revision or update. There was lots of dicussion online about the development of 4E. It really shouldnt have been a surprise that they were making some big changes to D&D. Also, you could have thumbed a copy of the PHB before buying.

To be fair I think WOTC is trying to get away from the word edition. The first breaking stories about 5E all used iteration instead. People have been trained to think each new iteration is an edition. So they instantly started referring to D&D:next as 5E. Old habits die hard. Cant really blame them for something that was decided decades ago. It's also not like gamers are begging for edition to be dropped either. You have to admit its an easy way to differentiate iterations without having to re-name each one.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Can these threads be combined?

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
I kind of like the idea of giving the players metagame assistance with riddles based on character skill ranks - if you have 5 ranks/training/whatever in a skill, you get to do a Wikipedia search; 10 ranks and you get to use Google; etc.

Haha thats awesome. You probably just made Hama faint.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

38. Why are you still standing there? Do you want my autograph before I kill you?

1 to 50 of 337 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 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.