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

ShinHakkaider's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 1,028 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,028 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If you feel the need to consistently cheat to "Win" then that says something about your character and youre not the type of person that i want to be around. If you make excuses for someone else's need to consistently cheat then that says something about your character and youre not the type of person that I want to be around.

Either way the person that the OP is talking about needs to find another group.

It's a GAME FFS, just take your lumps. If you have to feel the need to cheat an RPG then seriously, what kind of person are you?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

What is the definintion of "problem" in this case? Is it just a rule that you don't like? Or is it something that is fine but doesnt mesh with your table's playstyle? Or is it something that can honestly break the game? And when I say "break" I mean having seen it in action at the table, played the rule in conjunction with the other rules of the game and found that it's not something that can be fixed simply by proper application of the rules as written as a whole.

For me a "problem" is that last thing because then you simply have to house rule it or remove that element from the game.

But just because I make certain changes as to how I play at my table doenst mean that I have problems with the rules. It means, "Hey these rules are fine. But I have something specific that I want to pull of here so I'm going to supplant these rules with my own."

In my case it's more hit points at first level. It's full hit dice + CON score. Not bonus, SCORE. So a fighter with CON 15 starts off with 25 HP at first level. Increases PC survivability and doesnt break the game. Our Campaign has been going on close to 5 years and there's been quite a few character deaths but they've all had fighting chances due to the hp buff.
Does that mean the starting HP rules in the Core Rulebook are broken or a "problem"? Nope. I just like mine better so I use those.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Carl Hanson wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:


Agreed.

However, many of the complaints on here are so vociferous, angst ridden, completely negative, and even hate filled that I can't understand why they still play the game.

The game became even MORE fun when I got pissed at the devs.

I stopped attempting to listen to their often contradictory opinions on what good game design should be, and the numerous unnecessary and detrimental FAQs they've released (See: Crane Wing, Weapon Cords) and just decided to play a fun game with minimal developer interference ruining the experience for me.

There's something to be said for this attitude. I rarely go to the errata or FAQs for Pathfinder. Not because I'm pissed at the developers, but because I game with a group of highly intellegent people who can figure out how we want most of the rules to work ourselves in a way that we will have fun playing.

Yeah I've never understood the whole "getting pissed at the developers" thing. I dont know, maybe I come from a different era but when we were playing D&D back in the day, when we came across a rule or something that we didnt like or want to use? We just changed it or didnt use it.

We didnt get hot at designers or call them out in Dragon Magazine. We were more concerned about playing our game. And that's it.

Now I understand how the rules could greatly impact a PFS game so I could see how THOSE players might be annoyed. But that's one of the other reasons that I simply refuse to do PFS or living games of any type.
I have no tolerance for people just being self-entitled jerks. Not saying that's the bulk of PFS players, it's not. But if the rules threads here are any indication of the type of player that plays PFS? I'm glad that I stay away. There's a way to get your gripes across without being a jerk. Unfortunately it seems that more than a few people dont know how or are actively being jerks about it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

HELL NO.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:
Southeast Jerome wrote:

If the new 1.5e core rulebook were demonstrably better, i.e., better organized and indexed, and easier to use at the table, then I think plenty of existing players, myself included, would happily purchase it, even if there were no new rules.

Just as importantly, if they could also make the intro to the game less intimidating and confusing for new players, perhaps by integrating some material from the Beginner Box and this fall's Strategy Guide, I think the game would be able to compete for new players much more effectively. As it is, the core rulebook is very intimidating and confusing to someone new to RPGs, and the same ruleset with a better layout would be an easier sell and would grow the player base.

It would also be easier to use at the table, which to me is a paramount concern.

Yeah I dont even reach for the core rulebook anymore these days. I have my tablet or phone and just use either the PFR or PFRPG rd apps for quick reference.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Buri wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I always remind GMs, you don't have to know the ins and outs of every class that exists. You just need to be passably familiar with the 4-6 classes that will be sat at your table. If something seems hinky just say: "Can you show that to me in the book/PRD?" A simple search function should answer most questions at the table fairly quickly.
This is a great concept but falls apart pretty quick when Paizo uses all those new resources in APs. If you run PFS then you need a general awareness of everything as you have no guarantees as what's in one session to another.

You have a strong point about PFS. But then again I avoid Organized Play like the plague.

But Paizo using their own material in AP's or adventures isn't much of a hinderance if you're a GM, have pre-read the material that you're going to run and have an internet connection.

I'd say that if you're running a pre-written adventure of any kind without reading it thoroughly first, you're doing yourself and your players a disservice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
RainyDayNinja wrote:

G: [over the radio] "I know! You construct a weapon. Look around you; can you form some sort of rudimentary lathe?"

J: "A lathe? Get off the line!"

My favorite Star Trek movie (next to WRATH OF KHAN) - GALAXY QUEST.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

D&D is going to overtake the top spot again simply because of brand recognition. Even as a Paizo fan that much is bloody clear. It's going to be like that for at least a year or so.

Doesnt mean that it's a great game (It might be). Doesnt mean it's the best game. It's just the BEST KNOWN game. And on the strength of that it's going to 'win'.

Then again 4E started very, very strong too with everyone loving it and those who didnt were wrong, didnt like change and would be playing it eventually. The real test will be if people are still excited and playing it 2 - 3 years from now with the same passion.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
JoeJ wrote:
tsuruki wrote:
The reason pathfinder still ives and STILL sells better then the newest 5th edition stuff is that the Rules crunch bloat, despite what your DM-fatigue is telling you, is sometimes nessessary to keep the system strong.
Well, that plus the fact that 5e just hit the regular book and game stores today.

This hasnt stopped the WOTC & D&D proponents from declaring it a success. Technically the Starter Box has been out for about a month. So 5E has been in the hands of the public for at least that long.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Squirrel_Dude wrote:


I don't know, but maybe after two revisions, and two different companies attempting to make things work, it's fair to ask if 3.0 has core flaws that will have to change for it to be what you want. Core flaws that, when changed, will stop the game from continuing to be compatible with older editions.

If you think that changing the game so much to fix perceived issues will change the game to make it unrecognizable from what it was before (thus making it incompatible with older editions)?

Why not just play another game?

let me clarify something here: I'm not telling you to beat it and go play another game. I'm saying that, I love supers games. There are supers rules that do it for me (HERO System, Old Mayfair DC HEROES and M&M) and systems that absolutely DO NOT (the latest iteration of Marvel, Villains and Vigilantes, FASERIP Marvel).

The games that don't work for me? I don't play those. Nor do I go to their forums and say that they don't work for me and should change TO work for me. There are people who love those games, for whatever reasons, just the way that they are.

HERO System has gone through a bunch of revisions since it's iteration but at it's core it's pretty much close to the same game. So much so that I can take a source book from 4th Edition (around 1989 or so) and convert the stats to 5th or 6th edition with relative ease.

M&M 3rd Ed is different enough from 2nd edition but not so different that I cant convert things between the two.

The same goes for 3.5 and Pathfinder. I'm running COTCT using Pathfinder rules and have been for the past few years or so. are there hiccups? sure but I sort those out. Our game isn't broken or slow and if there's something that doesn't make sense or work for our table we change it so that it does. But I don't write to Paizo of come on their message boards insisting that it might be time for a new edition. That's just me though.

There ARE problems with the game breaking down at higher levels but that problem has been around at least since 2nd edition.

If people want a more balance FRPG? Try a skill bases system like HERO or Rolemaster. It's more work at the outset but in the end you get exactly what you put into it.

I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else here about what to do. I'm asking questions and clarifying my own positions.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Just for clarifications sake, I'm all for a revised edition that cleans up present rules issues, re-organizes the core rule book and gives us a decent index.

I'm not for completely changing the rule system into something else entirely. Whether it be making it a rules light system and getting rid of the myriad of options that Pathfinder at present has or making it a completely different kind of game in pursuit of that goal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Odraude wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I think there's a value in a game which rewards the fact that your abilities at math and gaming the system are better than Average Joe's.

While I partly agree with this, I don't think Pathfinder does this. It doesn't reward you for your ability to math out the best solution, or any natural gaming instincts. More than anything, it rewards you investing large amounts of time to delving through books and keeping up with developments within the metagame. New Feats, Archetypes, Errata, FAQ rulings invalidating/improving previous builds, Spells, etc.

Directed at the Thread in general.
My favorite type of argument against a second edition is the "Just find another game instead of forcing Pathfinder to change, so we can all be happy." As if there being a second edition of Pathfinder, or a revised edition would suddenly make the 1e stop existing. Even if Paizo did stop producing new content for Pathfinder, it would probably take me another 5 years to get through half of what they've published so far.

My second favorite argument: "Why should Paizo change the game for you, when you can do that yourself?" I don't know, maybe because the people requesting that change want to give Paizo their money. Now, I'm not going to argue that it will be profitable, and that they wouldn't risk splitting the fanbase. However, berating people for saying "Paizo, could you let us pay your for this service," is baffling to me.

I can agree to this. Those arguments do little for the debate at handle, instead just being highly dismissing. These same arguments are used when people ask for psionics or Asian settings or firearms. I hated them then and I hate these arguments now.

You know what? It may sound dismissive but the argument is not invalid. Some of the changes people are asking for WILL result in completely different game than what we have now. I'm not talking about the people who are asking for updates and clarification. I'm talking about the people who want an almost different game with the Pathfinder name on it.

It's the same thing that happened with 3.5 to 4E. And we got 4E. Not saying that 4E was even a bad game but it was very different than what we had previously and that put alot of people off D&D.

*looks around at the Paizo site*

Enough so that we're HERE. That's all I'm saying. People who want to use a hammer to fix a problem should use a hammer or some variation thereof. They shouldn't be using a chainsaw unless they're planning on destroying the project entirely and starting over.

I dont agree with the example of dismissing of Asian settings, Psionics or Firearms. Hypothetically, I may not be a huge fan of those things (in reality they ALL have their place in fantasy and in truth wouldn't completely bar them from my games) but they are things that CAN be excluded without effecting the game at present at all. These people are talking about scuttling the core game itself to make something that they'd like while telling the people who are enjoying the game at present that they can always keep playing the game as it is now.

This sort of thing sounds oddly familiar to me for some reason...Oh yeah it's exactly what the obnoxious 4E fans said to 3.5 people when 4E came out. The only other thing I'm waiting for is the classic: "Oh they'll switch over to the new system sooner or later. What choice do they have?"


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It really sounds to me like people either actually want other games and not Pathfinder. It also sounds like the same old thing that happened during the tail end of 3.5 just before 4E came.

People wanted this whole other thing. But instead of either customizing the game to what THEY wanted at their table they were content to push to get the entire game changed to what they wanted.

Those of us who are either fine with things the way that they are or would like a revised version of Pathfinder get to keep playing the game we like while everyone else goes to play something else or makes the present game their own.

I dont play Pathfinder as it is right out of the box, so to speak. I have house rules just like I assume most people do but you dont see me saying that my house rules should be CORE. I dont know what's right for everyone.I dont presume that much.

All these people saying that they want a smoother simpler game and feel that Pathfinder isnt that should in fact go find a smoother simpler game to play and make everyone happy.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So let me see if I've got this correct:

They arrested the wrong guy.

They knew they had the wrong guy and beat his ass in the cell anyway because,well black guy right? WHO'S GONNA CARE.

When it comes to light that they did this they drop the initial charge but then charge him with DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY for BLEEDING ON THEIR UNIFORMS?

Then during the trial when the attorneys are trying to get records of non-lethal abuse on the cops it turns out that the PD didn't keep any of those records and don't know where they were being kept??

If this was a movie I'd be screaming at the screen at how unrealistic this was.

SILLY ME.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hark! What's this? A prior incident where the Ferguson Police blatantly lied about beating an unarmed AND wrongly accused negro?!? It must be TUESDAY!!
I'll just leave this HERE.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
I've never seen animals burn business or shoot cops, but I grant you, New Hampshire doesn't have as much wildlife as it used to.

But oddly, it's something humans, pretty much any group of them, do under the proper circumstances. At least a small fraction of any group, Oppression, poverty, hopelessness, a triggering event and an attempt to control the reaction with even more oppressive force.

Then we can label them "animals", which justifies further oppression.

None of which justifies the burning and looting. It just makes it predictable.

\

Agreed NOTHING justifies burning and looting. It's wrong first of all and it just serves to give fuel to other people who dehumanize the people who just simply dont want to be murdered for something like say walking in the street.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Andrew R wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Aranna wrote:

Well this is a total mess. People should calm down until the FBI gets to the truth. Riots turn your side into the bad guys... mass peaceful protests would have done the job much better.

Personally I have heard so far that the black criminal attempted to take the white officers weapon in the car injuring the officer in a non-life threatening way and then the officer fired at the black teen in the car at least once and after the black teen fled on foot he fired at least twice at the fleeing felon. Witnesses say the teen then tried to surrender but that the policeman gunned him down anyway.

{IF all of this is true; that is a big IF since this is racially charged and people are probably lying on both sides to a greater or lesser degree.} Then the policeman should either be arrested for aggravated murder. Since up until the point the teen surrendered the officer was within his rights, but NOT after he surrendered. OR if the witnesses are lying and the boy was shot to death either in the car or while trying to flee then the officer should go on desk duty till people calm down.

The officer's innocence will be determined by the FBI. My prayers go out to those who are suffering on both sides right now.

"Black Criminal"?!?! WTF?!?

He WASNT A CRIMINAL. He was literally walking in the street with his friend on the way home when the altercation on the street started.

it started with them being told to get out of the street and them refusing according to the friend.

Wait...and you're saying that that refusal is justification to be murdered? Because I've seen plenty of White D00d's (and women now that I think about it) talk back, even RUDELY, to police and not get murdered for it.

Telling the police that youre almost to your destination in response to a request doenst make you a criminal. And it certainly doenst mean that you as a law enforcement official DRIVE OFF then come back and almost hit the two men with the car.

You're making excuses for the justification of the murder of this kid. Please do me a favor. Don't respond to any of my posts. I dont mind discussing sort of thing. I just like doing it with other human beings capable of empathy for people who dont look like them.

Have a good day.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Andrew R wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Paul Watson wrote:

Some links.

Huffington Post 1

Washington Post

Amnesty International

Andrew,
btw, if you want us to wait for proof, how about you wait for some before accusing the teenager of assaulting the cop when that's not any more proven, and directly contradicted by multiple eyewitness statements? Oh, right, that fits your narrative so it's obviously true without evidence needed.

Multiple? So far we have heard his friend and the cops. i am not aware of any other witness stories. We will have to wait and see but i tend to trust the cop more than the friend, especially given what was said. true that he could be lying but we will have to see. The animal rioters and looters getting hurt is just plain fine by me though

"animal" rioters? Yeah I've seen this narrative from people like you before Andrew.

There are TWO witnesses who have basically come forward with pretty much the same story. The friend and another young woman who was there on the street who saw the whole thing and was about to take a video but then the bullets started flying and saw the rest from under cover.

But she's black too. So I'm pretty sure that you'll discount what she says as a lie as well.

looting burning businesses and shooting at cops is about as animal as you can get. THEY acted that way, there is no "narrative"

Have seen nothing yet about a witness not actually involved. Their color is not important nor is the cops.

Of course not because there is no racial problem with white cops murdering unarmed black men on a fairly regular basis in this country. It has NOTHING to do with race. AT ALL.

And before we get to the rest of the White Right Playbook. Yes Black on Black crime is a problem. But the POLICE are supposed to be in service to the PUBLIC not just hard working God fearing white folk. So it's a problem when the the people there to serve the public trust? Start arbitrarily murdering the people that they are supposed to be protecting.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aranna wrote:

Well this is a total mess. People should calm down until the FBI gets to the truth. Riots turn your side into the bad guys... mass peaceful protests would have done the job much better.

Personally I have heard so far that the black criminal attempted to take the white officers weapon in the car injuring the officer in a non-life threatening way and then the officer fired at the black teen in the car at least once and after the black teen fled on foot he fired at least twice at the fleeing felon. Witnesses say the teen then tried to surrender but that the policeman gunned him down anyway.

{IF all of this is true; that is a big IF since this is racially charged and people are probably lying on both sides to a greater or lesser degree.} Then the policeman should either be arrested for aggravated murder. Since up until the point the teen surrendered the officer was within his rights, but NOT after he surrendered. OR if the witnesses are lying and the boy was shot to death either in the car or while trying to flee then the officer should go on desk duty till people calm down.

The officer's innocence will be determined by the FBI. My prayers go out to those who are suffering on both sides right now.

"Black Criminal"?!?! WTF?!?

He WASNT A CRIMINAL. He was literally walking in the street with his friend on the way home when the altercation on the street started.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Andrew R wrote:
Paul Watson wrote:

Some links.

Huffington Post 1

Washington Post

Amnesty International

Andrew,
btw, if you want us to wait for proof, how about you wait for some before accusing the teenager of assaulting the cop when that's not any more proven, and directly contradicted by multiple eyewitness statements? Oh, right, that fits your narrative so it's obviously true without evidence needed.

Multiple? So far we have heard his friend and the cops. i am not aware of any other witness stories. We will have to wait and see but i tend to trust the cop more than the friend, especially given what was said. true that he could be lying but we will have to see. The animal rioters and looters getting hurt is just plain fine by me though

"animal" rioters? Yeah I've seen this narrative from people like you before Andrew.

There are TWO witnesses who have basically come forward with pretty much the same story. The friend and another young woman who was there on the street who saw the whole thing and was about to take a video but then the bullets started flying and saw the rest from under cover.

But she's black too. So I'm pretty sure that you'll discount what she says as a lie as well.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
things have been tense around here as well. Cops are openly nervous, and people are worried that Ferguson may obfuscate SI.
"SI"?

He's talking about the murder of Eric Garner by the NYPD on Staten Island.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Fyre wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Star Wars ... but the movie gave them all enough character development
I guess I missed the movie where that happened. I've only seen six Star Wars movies...I'm guessing all that character development happened in some seventh film I've never heard of?
That was the Christmas Special.

What Christmas Special? There is no Christmas Special.

THERE IS NO CHRISTMAS SPECIAL.

THERE IS NO CHRISTMAS SPECIAL!!!!!!!


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Meh. It's what on the inside that counts.

Well, that's what they tell me anyway...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:


Of course Sam can't hold down his own book- he's never been on his own as a superhero beyond a token black character- has he even been given his own limited series?

Falcon did have his own 4 issue limited series in the early 80's! The first issue was drawn by Paul Smith and I think the rest were by mark Bright. It was written by Jim Owsley who would later be known by the name Christopher Priest. The same Christopher Priest who would go on the write great runs on Power Man and Iron Fist, the Ray, and Black Panther.

I only know this because I collected and read it as a kid but it was thrown out along with the rest of my collection at the time by my dad. I just recently found fairly pristine copies of the entire series at Heroes Con in NC this past June. SCORE!!


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Grey Lensman wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
To paraphrase a movie I hate, I don't think that word means what you think it means.
I think I'm supposed to demand your gamer credentials after this. ;P

I understand the desire, but I was burned out badly on that movie after a summer in high school- it was the ONLY film my diverse group of friends could agree on so it was watched every Saturday.

Every.

Saturday.

EVERY.

SATURDAY.

I used to be able to quote vast swatches of the movie from memory, but I'm not as young as I used to be. For a while, I could act out scenes on my own.

If they watched that movie every Saturday without switching up?

THOSE PEOPLE ARE NOT YOUR FRIENDS.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Pan wrote:
Many folks have mentioned being turned off/away by WOTC products and/or decisions in the past 5-10 years. Many folks mention that they don’t trust WOTC any longer it’s quite evident that WOTC lost much of its social capitol. My question is for folks who say they no longer trust WOTC, is there a way for WOTC to repair their rep with you and what could they do to make that happen? Is it possible?

It's not that I dont trust WOTC anymore it's that

1)There's another company that is making a game that I'd rather support and pay money for.
2)They no longer make a product that I'm interested in supporting.

Was how thay handled the transition to 4E part of that? I'd be lying if I said no. But overall after actually trying 4E and really not liking it I'd just as soon as play and support something else.

Is Paizo the ONLY company I support? No. Green Ronin, Frog God Games, Fantasy Flight, Kobold Press are companies that I also support.

WOTC like I said before no. I'm not interested in 5E as a game that I would play. I've looked at the free PDF and it's in no way a game that I would pay money for or support. For about half a minute I considered purchasing the the Kobold Press adventures though because...you know KOBOLD PRESS? But then I realized that the adventures are heavily tied into the Realms and so that killed that idea.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Woo Flaxman wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:

The New Ultimates

I will most definitely be supporting this book. As I've just dropped both Bendis X-titles and one of Hickman's Avengers books there's room on my pull list for this.

Any chance of a link to the original article the thread title comes from?

D00d. It's right there in what you copied. Just click on The New Ultimates...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Slaunyeh wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Scythia wrote:
I wonder if the people now denouncing this as a gimmick or forced inclusiveness were equally disdained when Nick Fury became black?
They MOST certainly did/do.
Not even a little.

Well the guys griping an complaining about the black Nick Fury replacing the White nick fury in the 616 Marvel universe on the message boards that I frequent about a year or two ago were figments of my imagination?

GREEEEEEEEEEAAAAAT that's good to know...

Not all complaining about character replacement is racist or sexist or even fear of change.

As I said above, I'm not happy with the new Nick Fury. I think it was a cynical attempt to cash in on popularity of the Movieverse version. I like the original and I think having two Nick Furys, playing similar but different roles in the same world is a bad idea. And that one isn't set up as a temporary story arc, but a permanent semi-replacement. Semi-, because I think it was actually intended as a real replacement, but inevitably writers wanted to use the real Nick Fury so he's still around.

I would have been upset about the Superior Spider-man, if I'd thought for a moment they actually meant to get rid of Peter and have Ock as the real Spider-man from then on. That would have been a really stupid idea and would have deserved all the criticism it got. Since it was obviously just a temporary story arc, you roll with it and see if works. For some, particularly those who haven't been reading as long as some of us and haven't gotten as used to the way the business works, it may not have been as obvious.

I agree that all of those complaining about change are not racist or sexist.

But there are certain trigger words / statements that kind of clue you into the mindset of the complainer. Use of "Political Correctness" "Affirmative Actions" "Create your own heroes" "What if we replaced black or female characters with white/male ones. Lets see how they like that?"

You know, the usual things that let me know what I'm dealing with.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Slaunyeh wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Scythia wrote:

I wonder if the people now denouncing this as a gimmick or forced inclusiveness were equally disdained when Nick Fury became black?

They MOST certainly did/do.
Not even a little.

Well the guys griping an complaining about the black Nick Fury replacing the White nick fury in the 616 Marvel universe on the message boards that I frequent about a year or two ago were figments of my imagination?

GREEEEEEEEEEAAAAAT that's good to know...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aranna wrote:
All the pre judging in here is horrible. It won't just be a temporary thing if people like it and buy it.

One of the writers that I follow on Twitter is Dan Slott. He's been writing Amazing Spider-Man in some form or another for more than 5 years now I think. When It was introduced that Doc Oc was conciousness was going to be in Peter Parker's body and Parker was going away? The vitriol and bile that he received was just VILE.

I'm cynical enough to know that this is what fandom is. They're not willing to give anything even a bit new a chance and their first action is to attack the creator or state how stupid a concept or an idea is.

About a year later as Superior Spider-Man was wrapping up more than a few people wrote on his twitter feed as well as to his face during signings that I was present at that they were wrong and the book was actually really good.

Made me smile a little bit.

But then responses like most of the ones in this thread remind me of why I despise a lot of my fellow fans so much.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jaelithe wrote:

Could this author be going for another variant of, "Thor needs to learn more humility, and he's utterly uncomprehending of the nature of woman, so I, [insert current ruler of Asgard], am going to change his essential nature into that of a female"?

No matter the justification, though, this is just moronic.

Should we expect the Thor/Sif relationship to now become a lesbian titillation? Will we see the Hulk now interested in banging Thor rather than beating him up? (It'd be interesting to see the female Thor now consistently kicking the Hulk's ass, though [as always should have been], because she'll now rely on her innumerable irresistible cosmic powers rather than attempting to beat him like a drum with her hammer, and using a bit of lightning for effect.)

This is not "an intriguing new take on Thor," however, no matter this author's previous success with the character. It's an asinine grasp at straws ... or should I say removal of straw?

Wanting to see a male stay a male, by the way, is not misogynistic. I'd simply prefer to see a female character of tremendous power created from the ground up, rather than one who, no matter the slant put on it, stole another character's mojo for their own.

This character will never be Thor. End of story (no pun intended).

I think maybe before commenting that you should actually read the article. Even in the headline of the article it states "THOR Drops The Hammer, a New Female THOR Takes His Place"

The previous wielder of Mjolnir will still be present in the Avengers titles.

So I'm not sure what you're going on about.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PirateDevon wrote:
thejeff wrote:
PirateDevon wrote:
thejeff wrote:
PirateDevon wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Obviously it's not the same character. I don't think that's in question at all. The name change does seem weird to me, but I'm assuming they'll have a reason for that as well. I'm assuming the new character will have her own personality and motivations as well as her own history. I'm also assuming that the original Thor will continue to be a character, either in a supporting role in this book or in a title of his own. The press releases may not have explicitly said all that, but that's because they're press releases.
It been expressly indicated in other marketing materials that not only will Thor (Son of Odin) be around but active on at least one iteration of the Avengers.
I was curious about the Avengers, but forgot to mention it.

Yah an image of the solict for issue 35 looks like this complete with Thor with new arm/ax because apparently he will need a new arm and ax.

Horrible way to lose the hammer :P

I'm actually more concerned about the arm, assuming that is actually a new arm and not just some kind of armor.

That'll be harder to revert back to normal in any reasonable fashion.

Really? Between Stephen Strange, the Infinity Gems, and all other things we could bring to the table (Franklin Richards at various points?) I would have a harder time understanding why someone doesn't just give him a new arm to be perfectly honest! Hell even Odin himself has, at times, displayed the ability to warp reality...not sure he would be helping a son who hasn't got the hammer though... LOL

Stephen Strange is no longer the Sorcerer Supreme and doesn't wield nearly the amount of power that he used to.

The Infinity Gems were destroyed (with the sole exception of the TIME gem, which vanished and recently reappeared to throw Steve Rogers and some select Avengers forward in time through the marvel universe...).

Speaking of Franklin Richard he's around in two incarnations his future self (who at present is back in the future) who is really powerful and his younger self who is still a kid but potentially REALLY powerful.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Slaunyeh wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Blondie isn't being turned into a woman. (although that HAS happened in the comics) There actually is a different person, possibly Sif? getting both the hammer, powers, and the name of Thor. That's happened to. A stuntman once was found worthy and he was given Thor's mythological belt and glove of strength to help him wield Mjolnir.
In Pathfinder terms, that's like stealing a fighter's +2 sword and then you become that fighter. I don't care how you twist it, it's silly. :p

It's more like someone getting the Axe of the Dwarven Lords (Mjollnir is certainly an artifact level weapon), and using it makes the wielder a dwarf.

I wonder if the people now denouncing this as a gimmick or forced inclusiveness were equally disdained when Nick Fury became black?

I don't know about gimmick or forced inclusiveness. That one really felt to me more like forced tie in to movieverse.

But I'll admit I didn't like it. It seemed kind of pointless to me. The whole damn point of Nick Fury is that he's been around forever and is just too good at the whole superspy thing. This punk kid isn't in the same league.
I'll admit that the story of how he was still around was getting kind of stretched. OTOH, he's still around, so it didn't really change that aspect.

You guys do realize that black Nick Fury made is appearance in the Ultimate lIne of comics FIRST right? Although he appears in one or two books before Mark MIllar and Bryan Hitch's THE ULTIMATES it's in that book that people really took notice as it was a huge seller. Bryan Hitch DREW him in the likeness of Samuel Jackson YEARS before the first Iron Man movie. Jackson who is a big fan of Marvel and gave his consent (I believe this is a rumor though but since no legal action that we know of happened I'm inclined to believe it).

So when they wanted to include Nick Fury in the tag at the end of the first Iron Man film they asked him if he wanted to do it, he said yes and the rest is history.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Scythia wrote:

I wonder if the people now denouncing this as a gimmick or forced inclusiveness were equally disdained when Nick Fury became black?

They MOST certainly did/do.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Drock11 wrote:

I think part of what I also don't like about this is it's blatant agenda pushing. I don't mind if somebody has a great plot in mind and events happen in it organically where things like this might come about.

When the base material isn't primarily and obviously made for the purpose, I hate when somebody tries to push an agenda, marketing gimmick, money grab, political statement, or some type of sociological engineering in an existing artistic work, and then tries to somehow make things fit around that and hope for the best. It's even worse when it's done to an already much loved setting or person.

This is definitely one or more examples the latter. They don't even try to hide it.

Another thing that bothers me is that they are trying to wider their audience, make the books appeal to more people, and introduce more diverse characters. Something that by itself in a vacuum isn't a bad thing, but then do things to hinder themselves.

Them being adamant about calling her "Thor" being an example of this in my opinion. They want, or at least I would hope they want, a new vibrant, interesting, decent, and well written character to appeal to more people, and yet they want to do something to make it much harder to actually give her her own identity. Something that I would think would be important. Doesn't that seem silly to anybody else? They want a female character to do well, and get more people interested, but they are going to piggy back her on the coattails of a male character to do it.

I can only imagine the name is due to blatant marketing. "Thor" has name recognition and the money tied to things like that, and in the end the dollars are probably more important than the artistic integrity of what they create.

I don't know where this story came from or what level it's from management or from the creative team. We probably won't know for years, if ever.

These ideas come from Marvel's creative summits that they have once or twice a year here in NYC. The writers of their top titles fly out to HQ for 3-4 days (this year Bendis Skyped in) and bang around ideas and plans for the next year or so of stories. They shoot down each others ideas and promote and support the ideas that they like. Their editors are in the room and pitch their ideas too but mostly i get the impressions that it's pretty much the writers.

I do think though that more recently there's an more a push from editorial to bring things in line with the MCU. Which makes sense but is still a little disconcerting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Te'Shen wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Te'Shen wrote:
And a big one for me... Why does Political Correctness seem to inhibit an honest dialogue rather than encouraging it?
Because it's a term that's thrown out to cheapen and denigrate someone's argument, stance, or platform as opposed to answering it directly. Traditionally, political correctness was supposed to stand for the status quo. the reactionary media however, have effectively flipped-flopped the meaning of the term to it's near opposite.
EXACTLY. THIS.

Color me naive, then.

Merriam Webster wrote:
Politically correct: adjective conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated.

I always took it to mean that you are eliminating word use to assuage personalities rather than using word choice to more accurately describe the events/topics/ideas.

It makes me think of this.

Quote:

. . . Language as Mind Control

One of Orwell’s most important messages in 1984 is that language is of central importance to human thought because it structures and limits the ideas that individuals are capable of formulating and expressing. If control of language were centralized in a political agency, Orwell proposes, such an agency could possibly alter the very structure of language to make it impossible to even conceive of disobedient or rebellious thoughts, because there would be no words with which to think them. This idea manifests itself in the language of Newspeak, which the Party has introduced to replace English. The Party is constantly refining and perfecting Newspeak, with the ultimate goal that no one will be capable of conceptualizing anything that might question the Party’s absolute power. . . .

Start where you are.

Okay then. Now I know exactly where you stand.

Have a nice day sir/madam.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's funny that I was just listening to the PaizoCon Coverage of a diversity in gaming seminar. Wes Schineder, James Sutter, Judy Bauer and Crystial Fraiser pretty much have it right in terms of wanting to make things more representative in the gaming community.There are few people in this thread and in comic fandom (as well as gaming) who would get a better understanding of why it's important as opposed to just hating it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
sunshadow21 wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Sadly, it's a little naive in the comic book market to think that good stories will be enough all on their own. Without them of course, you're sunk, but even with them you need the buzz to get people to read them in the first place and/or the built-in audience that the classic characters have.

It's not naive, I understand fully that most new characters don't survive. That doesn't change that fact that at some point they have to be able to sink or swim on their own, and starting with both Thor's power and name is going to handicap this new character's long term future because eventually Thor will get both back, leaving the new character with nothing of their own. They are better off simply trying out new characters or putting existing side characters in their own comics until one sticks, because once they do stick, they will have proven they have the necessary support to survive on their own. It's a brutal method, but one that all the now classic characters had to go through. Classic characters aren't made by shoehorning new concepts into existing characters.

True but it definitely helps if those classic characters are white and male, just like their fanbase though. They dont have THAT extra hurdle to go through.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Te'Shen wrote:
And a big one for me... Why does Political Correctness seem to inhibit an honest dialogue rather than encouraging it?
Because it's a term that's thrown out to cheapen and denigrate someone's argument, stance, or platform as opposed to answering it directly. Traditionally, political correctness was supposed to stand for the status quo. the reactionary media however, have effectively flipped-flopped the meaning of the term to it's near opposite.

EXACTLY. THIS.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
LazarX wrote:
thejeff wrote:


I havent read comics in years but is Peter Parker still spiderman and/or are there still clones with alternate spidermen?
Last I heard a dying Doc Octopus traded bodies with Peter Parker, but Parker forcibly downloaded his memories into Ock in order to enforce upon him a conscience. His ego still present Octopus resolved to make himself a better Spiderman than Parker had ever been... a Superior Spiderman. That was where it was last time last time I read the comic. That was long enough for the plot line to have reversed the situation by now, even if Doc Ock's original body is dead and buried.

I believe Parker's back now. The same thing happened when Ock took over. All kinds of todo about how they couldn't have killed off Peter and replaced him with a villain, even one with a conscience jammed into him.

But of course, it was just a story arc. Not a bad one at that, the little bits of it I saw.

Despite the resistance to the story initially (and by resistance I mean comic book fans being complete jerks and verbally attacking Dan Slott (the writer) on his twitter feed) it turned out to be a really good 31 issue run. It was a different take on Spider-Man showing how Peter COULD have been a better more effective hero if used to his full potential. On the same token it showed WHY Peter as Spider-Man IS a hero in the way that no one else can be. Doc Oc as Spider-Man was GREAT but in the end even he began to realize that DOES take a level of compassion and morality that he lacked to do the job that needed to be done.

Superior Spider-Man won me over within the first 8 issues or so.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Orthos wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:

I like this take on i the most I think:

"A whole bunch of little kids can now play as Cap or Thor without weird looks, so maybe it’s not all about how bitter you are this time?"
— Writer and artist Jason Latour, Wolverine and the X-Men, Edge of Spider-Verse, Southern Bastards, The Winter Soldier

I don't get it.
It basically means "we're being politically correct and therefore you don't get to complain".

See, I took it as maybe look at how something like this impacts something other than yourself and really try not to be jerks about it.

That's how I saw it. I could be wrong though.

Listen, I'm guessing I'm one of the few people in this thread who is actually supporting and reading these books and have been for a long time.
I'm also a black male neck deep in what are inarguably white male hobbies. I'm 42 going on 43 and have been reading and collecting comics since I was 6-7 years old.

So yes, seeing some one representative of me, of my son in a prominent title and not just as a co-star or sidekick I think is GREAT. My 12 year old just LOVED Winter Soldier thought it was GREAT. And I'm a HUGE Cap fan.

I hear the terms "political correctness" being thrown around every time one of these things happens, every time some editor or creator gets it in his head that maybe, just maybe we should spotlight someone other than a white male. All the old "political correctness" argument means to me is this: We don't want to see you. Get your own characters. Leave ours alone. Because, we all know how open comic book fans are to "new" characters and new ideas. As evidenced by the reaction to the two announcements last week.

I get the arguments for these things being temporary. That I DO understand. I get the arguments for this stuff seeming gimmicky. I get most of the other arguments that don't have to do with people being upset about a female Thor or a Black Falcon (NEW HERO!). I've been reading comics for over 35 years now, BELIEVE ME I get it.

I'm already reading both of those books and Remender and Aaron are doing a solid job of weaving the tales of these characters. Bucky Cap was around for a few years before Steve returned and it was almost another year after that that Steve reclaimed the Shield. But in that time we got some GREAT stories with Bucky AS Cap. I want to see where Sam Wilson as Cap goes. I want to see where this new Thor takes us and who she is. (I have my suspicions (someone introduced earlier in the run. during the Godbomb arc in particular) and it's not who Freehold DM aluded to upthread. They already said it's not her) as to her identity.

I love comics. I like talking about what I think is awesome about the things that I love.

I love comics, RPG's and movies.

The fandom?

NOT SO MUCH.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I like this take on i the most I think:

"A whole bunch of little kids can now play as Cap or Thor without weird looks, so maybe it’s not all about how bitter you are this time?"
— Writer and artist Jason Latour, Wolverine and the X-Men, Edge of Spider-Verse, Southern Bastards, The Winter Soldier


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Kevin Mack wrote:


the big three of the avengers refusing to work with each other ever again

Possible. They may let it influence the timing.

Even without the movies, none of those were going to be permanent (Well maybe the Avengers, I missed that one, but I doubt it.)

I dont know where he got that Avengers thing from either and I've been reading the main Avengers books (AVENGERS and NEW AVENGERS) consistently for maybe about 10 years now.

He might be talking about Steve being mad at Tony for inadvertently setting the stage for Norman Osbourne to take over SHIELD or Tony's involvement in the superhero Civil War. And Thor was pissed at Tony for making a clone of Thor and using that clone to fight (and in one case murder) their friends during and after the Superhero Civil War.

Whatever beefs they had with one another were settled during the Avengers: Prime mini series.

Of course more recently Tony (and few others) have gone and done something else pretty bad to piss off Steve...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Tom Brevoort calls out the naysayers who think the changes will revert by the time these characters next movies come out...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:

Similarly to my take on the female Thor: I liked Steve Rogers. Steve Rogers is Captain America to me. Didn't we just go through a Replace Steve with someone else storyline? Do we have to do it again?

That said, if we do, Sam's a good choice. Having him take the role fits their long friendship well and I'm definitely tickled by the idea of a black Captain America. The outfit looks good as well.

If by "just" you mean 2010 because that's when Steve got the mantle back from Bucky aka The Winter Soldier. It doesn't seem that long ago but it was almost 4 years ago that this happened.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm just curious, out of everyone who has commented here how many of you are actually reading Jason Aaron's run of THOR?

*raises hand*


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Why not just make new cool female characters instead of replacing old ones? I know, it's because it's hard to get people to follow new female characters, but it's not easy to get people to follow these kinds of changes either.

Exactly.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Te'Shen wrote:
Larkos wrote:

You mean who the new Goddess of Thunder is.

I don't mind a female with Thor's power; it's the name thing that bothers me and a lot of other people. Thor is Thor. It's a name, not a title. . . .

Agreed. But apparently people at Marvel have confused naming with branding.

“This is not She-Thor. This is not Lady Thor. This is not Thorita. This is THOR. This is the THOR of the Marvel Universe. But it’s unlike any Thor we’ve ever seen before," Aaron said.

I'm... already not a fan.

I can't even say I'm attached to Thor. I believe Marvel should have more female heroes as opposed to eye candy. This, however, confuses me mightily. They should allow her an individual identity, and starting by giving her someone else's name doesn't work.

“It’s a huge day in the Marvel Universe. Thor, the God of Thunder, he messed up, and he’s no longer worthy to hold that damn hammer of his. For the first time in history, that hammer is being held by a woman. That’s right. Thor is a woman!”

By the way, someone needs to educate me. If Mjolnir has been wielded by a select number of other individuals: Korbinite Beta Ray Bill; Avenger Captain America; Storm of the X-men; Eric Masterson; Odin (Thor's father); Bor (Thor's grandfather); Buri (also known as Tiwaz, Thor's great-grandfather). . . then how can Thor ever be not worthy? Odin is very cold and pragmatic, or at least comes across to me as so in the few myths I've read. That he ever held the hammer erases the concept of worthy to me.

Edit: Then again, maybe Marvel wants Thor completely out of the picture before trying something new, as if forcing you to like the new Thor by giving you no alternatives?

Odin might be exempt from the criteria of worthy since he's the one who put the enchantment on the hammer to begin with.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

...Oh boy.
I'll admit, not what I was expecting but apparently she completely and totally OWNED her audition and Bendis is all for the casting.

I hope the backlash isnt too bad.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I trust Jason Aaron to continue telling good Thor stories. The previous Odinson will still be around. I'm curious as to who this new Thor is.

1 to 50 of 1,028 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.