|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Gay Male Inhuman
Saito Samson wrote:
Ok...so the hiatus list stands at Yridhrennor & Steave (until the 20th) and Saito (until the 25th). Noted. :)
Finished Gallagher a couple of days ago. Started in on Stampp's Causes of the Civil War. I saw it described years ago as essentially a book that presents every possible argument and asks you to pick one, but it actually appears to be a survey of the historiography of the question up to 1991 with major primary sources included. So that's neat.
There were also arguments along the lines that from the patriarchs' narrative they knew that Yahweh created separate types of people and separated them. They might all be human (though a minority of proslavery authors clearly thought in species terms and didn't see black people as human, the argument against them was essentially that it was unbiblical) but that didn't mean they should mix. The sin of Ham (actually Canaan, but they mostly thought it was Ham for some reason I don't know) and all that applied.
The peopling the world narratives do play into that kind of thing. They don't have the familiar racial categories, but they are very much in the vein of "these people are descended from this inferior ancestor and therefore we're better". The people in question happened to map really well to the political situation in the Levant at time of writing. In fact, that's one way we date them. :)
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I understand the love for Pratchett, but don't share it. He relies on the same general brand of humor as Douglas Adams (whose novels I also didn't like) and, to some extent, Monte Python (whom I also don't think are all that funny).
I tried, but I detest the guy's work. Same with Adams. I can take Python in small doses, but every time I tried to watch a full episode I found the experience utterly tedious. Actually dozed off once.
Since I had Eric Foner's Reconstruction open anyway:
Eric Foner wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
My immediate reaction was "JFC, white America. This s*$# again?"
Gay Male Inhuman
Abelard Lassmar wrote:
The main human religion also had good points. It would have had genuinely evil antagonists from which it really did protect people as well as people who were more its victims...and victims who decided to take the fight back to them. But it would have been pretty hard to play a non-human in areas where it had cultural hegemony. I envisioned some halfling ghettos (since they're still half-human and might potentially be cured some day) but not much for other typical PC races.
Gay Male Inhuman
Abelard Lassmar wrote:
I'm a sucker for moral complexity. :)
My on-again, off-again homebrew project involved a world where every divine cast detect evil and it revealed a true and correct result...given the theology of the caster. So for most people it would ping the usual stuff, but also catch anybody anathematized by the main religion and/or practitioners of religious movements it considered evil even if the difference didn't involve something we'd usually see as an ethical matter.
Then I made most of the religions ethically diverse with a mix of makes-sense-to-us morals and more esoteric concerns that either only made sense in their particular frameworks or were clearly wrong or arbitrary by our standards. The dominant religion of the setting believed that only humans were ensouled and all else were a mix of monstrous beastman, devious fairies, damned infernalists, or divinely accursed. Halflings were the latter, imagined as humans who had through some ancient perfidy earned the eternal wrath of the gods. Thus they were marked, diminished, and separated from the fellowship of humanity for all their generations to come.
But that kind of thing is probably a bit demanding for a regular D&D/PF game, unless religious politics are the whole point. I like the idea, but I'm not totally sure I'd want to run Divinity School: The Boot Leathering. :)
Gay Male Inhuman
Theran, Clan Silverlight wrote:
I knew this was all a scheme to make me crap more potions. I will not be deceived!
I'm totally deceived.
Gay Male Inhuman
Forgot to say that Steave is at 0 hp. Bad GM. No horrifyingly racist 19th century primary sources for you today.
Badguy ACs: 13 T11 F12
Galin stepped forward and struck, but the mongrel he chose parried his blade well short of its doing true harm. The weight of cudgel prevailed, this time, over skill with blade.
Saito is next. Order is Theran, Steave, Badguys, Galin, Saito, Yridhrennor, Abelard.
Ended up starting Elizabeth Varon's Disunion! The Coming of the American Civil War 1789-1859. Got a really good session in before my brain threw up and insisted I had spent too much time with it. It's really good, though her presentation style is a bit backwards from what I'd prefer. She likes, so far, to take ostensibly unrelated issues and drill down to slavery, where I prefer to take slavery and build up to them.
Gay Male Inhuman
In the early days of 3e, I was running a Sunless Citadel PBEM. Entrance to the dungeon involved climbing a rope down 50 feet. At one point a character, who in backstory was a failed paladin, was leaving the dungeon in a hurry and slightly ahead of others.
He fell. On the druid below. Cause of death: falling fallen paladin. Almost killed the paladin too. Player wrote a post where he looked heavenward and cursed my name. In-character. :)
Book-free since I finished Baptist. Got into it with a guy I'm pretty sure got his degree circa 1950, or pledged Kappa Kappa Kappa, over at Reddit AskHistorians. The kind of guy who knows a whole lot about militaria and likes to quote Shelby Foote, but suddenly goes super general when confronted with non-military details. Asked him states' rights for what and he answered with a quote that amounted to "just because". Frequent reference to modern-day political tropes didn't help his case either. Way to live the military historian stereotype, dude. Could not think of a civil way to ask him if he knew that bedclothes don't make for the best headgear, let alone eyewear.
Might have otherwise yielded the point, but the best he could offer me were lots of handwaves and one popular work to make his case. Refused to engage much of anything I said to him, even when I went out of my way to quote direct passages from professionals. Turned my frustration with him, and my disinclination to flip the table and dive for his nuts with teeth bared, into a night of furious research that turned up a particularly condemnatory Calhoun quote (full letter not online, damn it) and the order of several books I wanted anyway. In the next few weeks I should have
The Causes of the Civil War edited by Kenneth Stampp. Never read anything of his and I'm getting one of those reprints that seem to have been popular in the early 90s. Looks like it's an essay collection, so it might be a good window on the late-50s historiography. Incorrect plural in the title, of course.
The Civil War and Reconstruction: A Documentary History, one of the newer standard anthologies of primary sources. Got it cheap.
The Confederate War by Gary Gallagher. Examines the motivations of Confederates in general. To judge from a few of his presentations I've seen, I expect a hefty chunk on that slavery now, slavery forever guy that everyone wants to pretend is an abolitionist in disguise. You know, the traitor we put on stamps instead of a tree for some reason that eludes me. (Gallagher's explanation of the rep: "People don't read.") He also has a book on the Union that does the same, which I'll get to eventually.
Those books got me a bit guilty about not frequenting the local bookstore, especially Gallagher since he's definitely still in print, but the used books were pretty cheap. So I went to the bookstore with a longshot, William W. Freehling's Prelude to Civil War: The Nullification Controversy in South Carolina, 1816-1836 from the mid-60s and Elizabeth Varon's recent Disunion!: The Coming of the American Civil War, 1789-1859. Expected no love on Freehling (last reprint, 1992) and was sure I'd get Varon.
They found both. I walked out rather lighter, and happier, than expected. Damned if I know which I'll crack first.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
He's not really wrong, exactly. It's one of those things that depends on your definition of capitalism*. The profit motive absolutely created slavery, which then required a justification. So we invented race to do the job. There's a pretty clear transition going on in the Chesapeake over the late 1600s from a world where at least some black men could own property, sue whites in court and win, and so forth. That kind of thing would be unthinkable in the Virginia of 1750 or 1900. The punchy summary is that racism (read as exploitation) created race (a fixed class of people imagined as destined for and requiring exploitation).
Those definitions are all a bit technical and not quite what people ordinarily mean, but I think they're a bit truer to how the systems have generally worked.
*The new hotness in the field right now is slavery & capitalism studies which generally cut against the grain of various Marxist interpretations that understood slavery as pre-capitalist.
Gay Male Inhuman
Yridhrennor Arahaelon wrote:
You have three perfectly good NPCs you can use before you start wasting summons. Teofil will never see it coming. :)
Gay Male Inhuman
Steave Rojerz wrote:
Steave reverently picks up the mirror-bright silver scale and looks at it from a few angles. He wonders it if is from Terendelev the Ancent.
Steave receives a sense of profound sadness and determination when he touches the scale. The memory of a long-ago crusader flashes through his mind, standing in curtains of lightning and gales of magical frost but remaining unscathed.
The scale can grant resist elements, but only vs. cold or electricity, three times a day.
Gay Male Inhuman
Yridhrennor Arahaelon wrote:
sorry about the lack of a ranged touch attack on the spell... kiddies were demanding to be educated... or somesuch.
It's fine. What you forget, I can always roll. For example, I noticed Yridhrennor forgot to declare pledging himself to Lamashtu by means of interpretative dance and synchronized trepanation. :)
Gay Male Inhuman
Steave is sure that something has gone badly wrong with the Wardstone. The rifts are something out of the Worldwound...or the Abyss.
It's bad. The demons have complete surprise. Most of the crusaders are still on their backs. People are dying by the dozen. The enemy has destroyed Kenabres' chief fortification. It might take a miracle to safe the city now...or Terendelev slaying the Storm King. Demons often rout when their masters are bested.
Steave saw too many people to ever help at once. A few crusaders fought a desperate rearguard in an alley, children cowering behind them and vrocks circling overhead. Babau flickered about the plaza, slaying and gone in the same breath. Mobs of dretches clashed with youths barely old enough to take their crusader oaths. The ground heaved and a well-dressed merchant began to slide toward a fissure. Roars sounded above and a cold wind blew as Terendelev breathed frost on the Storm King, much of it flashing to steam against his burning body.
Steave opens his divine senses and of pure malice hammered into his skull. He reels, feeling the thick taint of the balor lord above and whatever happened in the Kite even with their great distance.
Steave got hit with overwhelming evil is is stunned for a round.
Maybe I should wait for three or four days to heighten the antici...
Bah, I'll be cruel enough all the same and by indulging in this one cruelty now I give up time that I could spent on multiple simultaneous cruelties.
The selections are:
Robert Henry wrote:
Have you thought about running a home brew game set during the civil war in a fantasy world. I have this half drow-half-farie two gun shootist scout I want to play. Seriously a black wasp -winged wild Bill Hickok
I suspect that my fantasy version of the Civil War would be way too dark to have fun gaming in.
At least someone will understand if I inadvertently post a wall of text about literacy in the nineteenth century. :)
If anybody's curious and boring in similar ways to how I am (middle 19th century US politics & slavery, mostly), the blog is here. I am a terrible self-promoter, but sometimes I do recognize good excuses.
Hello! I’m Samnell, or I’m wearing his underwear, or possibly some other Samnell and/or underwear combination. Best not delve too deeply. I propose, as the thread title suggests, to run the Wrath of the Righteous adventure path for four to five gestalt PCs who will become mythic, with an outside option for six if I really can’t decide between a few. One of these spots is bespoken, so there’s room for three or four, maybe five, others.
With gestalt PCs. And mythic. Both. Together. Am I a crazy person?:
No, I am not a crazy person. My last therapist may have written that in his own blood, but that’s still an official judgment. There will be significant modifications to the more problematic aspects of the mythic rules, many swiped from posters here, with an eye toward still having fun without being able to splatter Iomedae with blood from the bowels of the Abyss when you attack Deskari, miss, and slightly graze the air. Cool powers are fun, but they’re much less fun when they reduce any challenge to the initiative roll.
If I am not a crazy person, then who am I to think I can run this thing? This will be my first PBP as the all-quivering horror behind the great cardboard wall, but I’ve been running games online since 2000, mostly via email. My current projects are a Second Darkness game (early in book 5) and an all-Hellknights Carrion Crown (late in book two). I tried Wrath with some of my regulars, but it didn’t quick click. I still like the big ideas and Paizo has these nice PBP tools, which a friend of mine recommends highly. So here I am, a bit inspired by Acid Milk Hotel’s late Wrath game where I was a player, to give it another go. How are you?
This is WotR, but I’ll change some things:
It would be shifty, or something else spelled roughly that way, to advertise a Wrath game and then run something radically different. I don’t plan to do that, but I do reserve the right to spindle, mutilate, expand/shorten, and all the other usual GM prerogatives. I’ll certainly adjust foes. All this probably goes without saying, but I’ve gone and said it anyway because I really wanted to write the first sentence of this paragraph. You can still trust the advice of the player’s guide when planning your character.
Non-rules things to include with your PC:
Each PC should come with a paragraph, more if you like, of backstory. This should explain how and why your PC is in Kenabres, their relation to the crusade, and give me an idea of their personality.
Additionally, please give me at least one goal that your PC hopes to achieve in-game. It doesn’t have to be a huge deal, but should be something important to him or her.
Finally, give me an idea of what mythic path you intend to pursue. This needn’t be final. I’d just like it as a heads-up for when the time comes. Despite the fact that you are gestalt, you will only get the one path unless you buy access to another through some mythic ability.
Ready for rules?:
You can draw on any Paizo content you like, aside playtest stuff, but I reserve the right to say no if something seems out of whack.
PCs should be made with the gestalt rules, available at this finely crafted link. We start at first level and will level up based on hitting various story milestones rather than by XP accumulation. Please be sure to wrestle your PC into the normal Paizo statblock format for ease of reference.
Generate your PCs with 25 point buy. Feel free to avail yourself of the calculator here. You may reduce no more than one ability score below 10, before racial modifiers.
You may play any non-evil alignment that you like, provided you can play it in a way that doesn’t constantly cause needless strife. It’s fine to have some RP tension in the party, but when things really get to the point of players at cross-purposes everyone tends to lose out.
PCs begin with the maximum gold specified for their class to spend on gear, keep, give to poor orphans, or whatever else you’d like. You can stretch that gold (but not the orphans) further through the use of crafting skills. Assume all pre-game rolls are successful. During the game, item crafting and item crafting feats are fair game. There will be significant periods when you are not racing any particular clock and can take time out to invest in making things and other pursuits.
PCs begin play with two traits, one of which must be a Wrath of the Righteous campaign trait. They’re in the Player’s Guide. The campaign traits make certain assumptions about your mythic path and then give you an extra benefit for choosing the “right” one. Ignore those. Traits will function the same way regardless of your mythic choices.
I have long disliked the flavor of a continental-scale common tongue. The common tongue of the crusade is Taldane. Most people in Mendev who deal with crusaders often will have at least basic competency in it, but at home most speak Hallit. You get Taldane for free and can choose Hallit as a bonus language, unless a Mendev native. Natives can have both for free.
Rather than roll for hit points, at each level just take your maximum. Foes in this AP tend to hit hard.
Norms and Expectations:
I plan for a post a day. If it’s been roughly that long and I haven’t heard from you, I may bot your PC in the interests of keeping things moving. I know from experience that it’s really easy to get into a waiting loop in online games.
Please list key stats (current/total hit points, ACs, saves, initiative, perception) on the little text bar under your alias. You can include more if you want, but those are the big ones that I’ll likely need from everyone all at once and rather often so having them in the thread is very convenient.
I’ll roll combat-beginning things like perception and initiative, as well as anything else that would benefit from immediate resolution. So if I throw a fireball at you, I’ll roll the saves. You are free, and encouraged, to write flavor text for how you dodged and made your save or how you failed to do so. I’ll do all these rolls in the open using the dice commands. I’ll probably bury the lot of them in a spoiler and just put descriptive text outside it to avoid making walls of numbers. That does mean that the dice gods may cruelly frown upon you, even lethally, but I think that mythic PCs will end up with plenty of built-in plot armor. If it comes to that point, I will make raise dead and its cousins readily available.
When you do something that requires a roll from an NPC, like casting a hostile spell, I’ll roll that save. There are too many conditional bonuses, resistances, and immunities that might come into play to frontload a listing of them all and at times the PCs should be surprised by them. When foes come loaded with buffing spells and the like, I will do my best to remember to indicate that in their descriptions under the premise that active magical effects in close proximity generally have some visible manifestation.
I aim to be a bit more forthcoming with ACs, as they tend to be all-or-nothing affairs. Thus you should ordinarily be able to resolve things requiring attack rolls in the post with your declaration. You’re encouraged to flavor your hits and misses how you like. Most of the time, I plan to outright give you the hit point totals of your targets so you can know right away if you did them in or not. For important NPCs and monsters, I’ll keep the hit point total hidden but plan to give you general descriptors of their condition like “unharmed” and “near death”.
Please try to get along, at least so far as the game threads go, OOC. We’re going to be spending a fair bit of time together.
I’m new at this medium and will probably screw it up. Be patient. :)
General House Rule:
One of the big issues I’ve read about with mythic is that you get multipliers on top of multipliers to your critical hits, plus it becomes easier to make crits, plus you get much bigger modifiers to be multiplied. Some more than once. My fix for that is a global change to crit rules:
When you confirm a critical hit, you do not roll twice and you do not multiply your non-precision damage modifiers. Instead, a crit translates into an automatic maximum damage roll, to which you add your modifiers as normal. If your crit multiplier is greater than x2, you get 50% more weapon damage per point. So x2 gives the base 100%, x3 brings you to 150%, x4 to 200%, etc.
This isn’t going to come up for a long while, but here are the high-level basics of my changes. I can’t foresee every possible combination and reviewing every ability in the book would be tedious even by my standards. I plan to establish some basic principles instead and then we’ll work through things together.
So here are those basic principles:
Mythic power will regenerate at the rate of 1d4 points per day. Completing a mythic trial will grant an immediate additional recovery roll.
Abilities that give you additional actions do not stack with one another. You can only have one extra of anything per round. When you can buy an extra action, it will cost you 5 mythic power and at least a swift action, possibly more depending on the ability.
The “cast any spell on your class spell list for free” abilities will cost you a swift action to expend the mythic power. They further cost 1 mythic power per spell level. If compatible with metamagic, the cost is determined by the spell’s adjusted level rather than its base. They also require the normal action necessary to cast the spell. These are over and above any restrictions in the text.
You can get off more than one spell per round by metamagic, or by casting spells which already permit it, but not by use of mythic abilities.
Abilities that bypass energy immunities and damage resistance will not do so, but will retain any other functions.
Abilities, notably mythic power attack and vital strike, which allow you to multiple your damage modifiers do not do so.
If anything's unclear, question away.
Submissions are due at 5 PM, Eastern Time, April 17, 2015.
My Bible includes this provision:
The Book of Samnell, 1:1-6 wrote:
Thou shalt patronize the businesses of bigots unimpeded by their hatred, under the smiling eye of the state, and call forth from the state wrathful castigations should they deny you. Further thou shalt take pleasure in their lamentations. On hearing them thou shalt go unto the internet and learn of their taboos, that thou offendest them most.
Where's my freedom of religion? I want me some American values!
I was just watching this video of one of Eric Foner's lectures and he had this worthwhile point about private business vs. state action. Helpfully, there was a transcript. Sorry about the dodgy formatting. Did my best.
Eric Foner wrote:
The thing I've never liked about the argument around the science of human sexuality is that it presumes human sexuality requires some kind of special justification.
"It's what I'm into and I'm not hurting anybody doing it" more than suffices for heterosexuals.
But I know I'm dreaming. Things like enjoyment of life and consent don't inform the other side's position on much of anything. I'm sure one of them will be along with a form for me to fill out approving of his or her sex life directly.
It's the argument used in Loving v. Virginia too. Just in case anybody missed what happened to the segregationists.
I'm not inebriated but am perverted enough for a crowd, I think. Or at any rate I was reading the Complete Book of Necromancers last night. That's got to count for something.
Reading for Foner's class has taken up most of my time. I haven't finished either of these because they weren't entirely assigned and I wanted to juggle the assignments better rather than power through. Also suspect future chapters for the class on the war itself.
Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World by David Brion Davis. This book is amazing. It's got everything. Slavery in Africa. Enslavement of Slavs in Spain and Italy. The origins of antiblack racism. The abolitionist movement in the British Empire. Haiti. It's like a candy store but with slavery.
The Republic in Crisis by John Ashworth. Started with grand claims about being a new interpretation that placed slave resistance at the center of the narrative. It hasn't lived up to the hype, though it does have a lot more intellectual history than the standard survey of the same material. It suffers badly from spending more time alluding to events so it can skip ahead to reaction to them rather than explaining what happened, which is fine for me but I suspect would leave readers taking it cold with barely a high school level understanding of the major issues. There's room for books like this, but William W. Freehling did it much better, if in about five times as many pages and without handling the Northern side.
Probably not going to buy it:
Need to get back to:
I could make some suggestions from nineteenth century American political writing if you really want to corrupt your internal monologue. Sometimes it's very darkly funny when a random proslavery argument just pops into your head, with most of the key phrases as direct quotes.
Does make me very happy that telepathy isn't real, though. I'm socially unacceptable enough without the extra help.
So the horde side is quiet but has spikes of activity, I believe more are getting active on it. Sean routinely hops through and one of the members of this board is active on it. I will leave it to him to decide if he wishes to announce himself.
*looks to both sides*
I suppose that's me. :) Full confession:
Oodledoodles, goblin warlock
Been thinking about getting the warlock into some flex raids on reset days. His ilevel is in the high 540s (mostly upgraded timeless gear and LFR drops) so I think I'm geared enough.
My Ally 90 turned out to be a character that I've never gotten the hang of playing so he mostly comes out when we do transmog or other runs of older instances. Currently working on a hunter with the expectation that she might become my new ally main and see more action.
The problem is, Kirth has such an bad footnote habit that he'll go to some really ugly places to get his fix. Look, Kirth, this isn't an intervention, but just answer this question for me: When's the last time you enjoyed yourself without reading any footnotes?
Not cool, man. Don't get between a guy and his footnotes.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
So the Christian roman empire was a model of democracy and freedom. Then after the Christian barbarians destroyed Rome and established their own Christian kingdoms, they stopped being Christian and only people in the monasteries were Christian. They apparently reproduced by budding. They never had secular authority. And they had to wait until the power of institutionalized religion was pretty thoroughly broken and subdued by the state until new Christians arose outside the monasteries.
That is so stupid that I think that trying merely to conceive of the scenario may have permanently damaged me.
I know I will regret asking. I know the stupid will burn me so. I blame this all on frying my brain on Kansas census rolls today, tallying up what each qualified voter said was their state or nation of origin.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
How, in the name of my best bud Satan and my own personal torture cellar, does this jackass account for the precious little democracy and freedom which prevailed in the most Christian of continents, Europe, between Constantine and the Enlightenment?
Lissa Guillet wrote:
Minor historical derail:
In 1776, all thirteen colonies had slavery and none had abolished it. Pennsylvania was the first state to abolish, in 1780. Massachusetts slavery was invalidated by a court decision in 1783.
The institution never quite caught on so well in New England as it did in the South, for the obvious reason that the South had the prime tobacco land. Outside the southern colonies, slavery also did pretty well in New York and New Jersey. New Jersey still had 16 slaves on the books due to its very gradual emancipation law in 1860. They didn't even pass that law until 1804.
Those laws left lots of slaves in place, to serve a term before freedom and liable to be sold off into a jurisdiction with more slavery-friendly laws before their freedom dates came. Between legal cutoff dates and mandatory service to a certain age, most states outside New England still had residual and superannuated slaves up until the 1840s when separate legislation freed the lot.
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
I don't normally wear that much clothing when I pose.
Rothfuss and I are of similar girth (and also given name, as it happens). His hair is a little bit lighter, quite a bit curlier, and more resident on the head. Given what is on display, I suspect that the hair he has on his head is simply distributed in other locations on me. Perhaps if he can be induced to shave, it will transpire that we share a single supply of hair and mine would redistribute.
But black boxer-briefs? No. Ok, maybe in spandex but that's a for special occasions kind of thing and I drape my glorious corpulence over things far too often to call it special.