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. 1,005 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,005 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

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.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

This, at least for me, is great news.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Diffan wrote:
I feel Golarion is pretty much Forgotten Realms lite. It's pretty much the "...and the kitchen sink." setting that Forgotten Realms is but without the thousands of years of lore and history FR has or cool things like Zhentarim, Undead nations, or Shades.

And that's exactly why I like it.

Also? Lack of major NPC's that people (meaning players) treat like celebrities.

Also lack of really rabid fans who feel the need to keep to the FR timeline based on the fiction lines and other material as opposed to the game that they're playing right then and there.

I still have my original grey box FR (without the box though. but I still have the hex grid overlays! and the maps!) and I was a fan of the original Elminster articles in Dragon Magazine. But once it got out in the wild and scooped up by obsessive fans? Not a setting that I'd ever run again.

I will say that the 3rd Edition FR Campaign Setting book is really well done though.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
John-Andre wrote:


Was I right? Is it ethical to only allow the players to use rules the GM has access to? Or should I just decline all further requests to run Pathfinder because I can't buy the hardcopy books?

When I started with my group 4 years ago I inherited them from another GM who was stepping down from GM'ing. We started new characters from first level and emailed them a house rule document that might have been 3 pages in total (not densely packed pages either). I also told them for starters Core Rulebook only.

I explained to them that I didnt know them and didnt know their playstyles or what kind of players they were so for now lets stick with core. I had no problem with letting stuff in on an individual basis but if anything got abused it was going to go. They were relying on me to be a good DM operating in good faith and I relied on them to be good players operating in good faith.

As more and more options became available because my group are really and honestly a good group of players by any standard, I had no problem opening stuff up for them to use if they asked. The only exception to this at the beginning was opening up to "weird" races. But eventually I even relented because one player is playing an android fighter/monk and another is playing a ratfolk druid (the PC just died and was reincarnated as an elf so...).

If they had been completely different type of players I would have probably excused myself as DM and found another group. I have players who optimize their characters but not to the point of abuse but to effectiveness. They all share the spotlight relatively equally and overall they are a fair if not wacky bunch. I'm lucky to have them. And I mean LUCKY.

I guess my point is this: If you're going to run a game for people it helps if those people aren't jerks. It also helps if you're not a jerk. Once you you have that non-jerk element? Compromise is your friend. If you have to explain the WHY of a restriction with the hope of it either going away or being eased, then do that. If a situation with your group isn't really tenable then excuse yourself and move on. And I mean move on with the intent of finding a group more to your liking and not going on a message board to voice your displeasure with the group in question.

You gave them an ultimatum. Your way or the highway. They chose the highway. Neither one of you tried to compromise as far as I could tell (and telling them to buy you the boks wasn't a compromise...) That's why you're here and they're there instead of all of you being at a table having fun playing a game that you like. TOGETHER.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bill Webb wrote:
The only real way to do a $40k or so cost project is this. Keep in mind we are a small basement company, and that we write checks from the bank of Bill and Krista.

I dont know HOW MANY TIMES you can say this and people STILL not get the bloody point. It's either this (KICKSTARTER) or the product doenst get made.

I mean you guys have been saying this for YEARS and in more than one place but still there are people who still have a problem with it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I use a combination of my iPad and my iPhone.

My iPad is used to reference most of my PF library that I have in PDF using Goodreader.

My iphone is used to quick reference rules stuff using PFR an PFRPG RD apps. Granted I only use the phone version if I already have something open and am using it on my ipad and dont feel like fast switching between apps.

This has worked out great for my group and I for the past few years. Especially when almost everyone has access to the PFR and PFRPG RD apps on their phones/devices.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

EDIT: As per Vic's request/ IMPERIAL DEMAND deleting my comment to Scott.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Read the rules and *shrugs*. It's okay I guess. Again I wont be investing in / spending any of my money on D&D 5E / NEXT or whatever it's called.

It will be the first edition since Red Box that I wont be buying the core rules. I dont miss NOT playing D&D. I though that i would but I dont. W

As for EnWorld, i've been a part of those boards since before their server issues. Since 2002 I think and ENWorld has been pretty overwhelmingly WOTC positive. The only cracks in the WOTC loving facade over there was at the end of the 3.5 days where the frustration of the posters there made them long for a new and different edition like 4E.

Support for 4E was pretty strong over there and honestly before the NEXT announcement it still was. The tags for Pathfinder over there are a pretty recent thing maybe the last 2 years or so. Before that? It was pretty much 4E all day over there.


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

The pilot episode... might... be floating around out there.

Also, Grodd.

Yeah, having seen the Pilot episode I did like it and I'm not even a huge DC proponent.

Yeah, Grodd and possibly Prof. Zoom.


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

I would like to see a new setting.

Golarion is great, I love it, but I also love other things. At the top of my list would be a low magic setting, with alternate rules to support that kind of game play. I also wouldn't mind seeing a hyper fantastic setting akin Wonderland.

To a degree this can be achieved with the current setting, but it requires a lot of work to guide Player expectations and assumptions. I would rather pay Paizo staff to do that work.

I'd think that this is something best left to a 3rd party partner as Lisa Stevens has on several occasions stated that multiple settings are what helped sink TSR back in the day.


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

I havent really watched a Gundam Series since SEED (which I enjoyed) and havent seen SEED Destiny. But I am watching Unicorn now and going into it knowing nothing about it and assuming that it was going to be some alt universe Gundam you cant imagine my surprise that it takes place in the UC.

BRIGHT NOAH!!

Also its great to see the evolution of several of the mobile suits from the the various UC series including the Quebley, the Sazabi (the Sinaju!) and the Zeta Plus.

Watching episode 7 and just saw the Hyaku Shiki's oversized beam gun being used by one of the GM derivatives.

Really enjoying this show.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
R_Chance wrote:
Scott, WotC didn't even turn out a conversion booklet to smooth the transition from 3.5E to 4E like they did from 2E to 3E. .

To be fair, 4E was such a radical departure from the pre-existing d20 structure, that I'm very certain that it would have been impossible to make something that would even begin to fulfill that requirement.

They really didn't try to do a 2e to 3.0 conversion either, and 3.5 to 4 was far more radical a change.

But they really DID do a conversion document for 2E to 3x.

I remember it because right up until very recently I still had my physical copy of it. I just got rid of a bunch of my 3x hardback books including a 3x Players Handbook and this thing was just inside the rear cover.


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

There were parts of The Crystal Skull that felt like an Indiana Jones movie. The opening chase through the warehouse and everything right until the end of the Rocket Sled.

Then the Jungle chase was good right until the thing with the monkeys. Then the fight on and around the fire ant nest was good.

I while I didn't care for the conceit of the sci-fi element, when I did see this in the theater I saw it on the screen at the ZIgfeld Theater which, aside from the true IMAX screen at Lincoln Center, is probably the biggest and best screen in NYC. The final visual with Indy in the foreground looking at this massive flying saucer/interdimensional craft gearing/spinning up for departure was actually really, REALLY great.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cimbria Arctus wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
Crystal Skull wasn't terrible, and was actually better in a lot of ways than Temple of Doom. The vine swinging with the monkeys and the nuke in a fridge were dumb, but at least it didn't have the shrieking blonde <DIRECTOR'S WIFE>.

(fixed that for ya)

At least we know how she got that role...

if I recall correctly they met during the filming of Temple of Doom and got married AFTERWARDS.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Sutter wrote:
Ross Byers wrote:
Is there anyone who would disagree with Idris Elba for the Pathfinder movie?

Interestingly enough, I *did* have a cast member of The Wire in mind the whole time I was writing this—but it was Clarke Peters, not Idris Elba. (Because really, Lester is the coolest character in that whole show.)

But Elba's a close second. ;)

See that's who I was thinking of as well. And yes, Lester IS, next to Omar my favorite character in the whole show.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:
Also, I guess I shouldn't be surprised given where we are, but what is with all the people who prefer Pathfinder to a game they haven't seen yet? Isn't that like saying I liked Avengers better than I'll like Avengers 2?

Isnt the reverse also valid though? People who are here on a Paizo message board saying that they are ready to jettison Pathfinder on a game who's final version hasn't been released yet?

I saw all of these same conversations on ENworld back in 2007 - 2008 in regard or the 4E switch. People were saying that 3E was too complex, that only munchkins wanted to play it in order to power game and that they'd all eventually come over to 4E because it was D&D and effectively the ONLY real game in town.

And yet? Here we are...


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

Also this post I made describes a GM I had who was pretty terrible when it came to having any non-Western European ethnicity in his games. He made an effort to continuously belittle anyone that was non-white or played a non-white character.

Don't be a Damien.

HOLY CRAP. I just read that post and my condolences man.


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

I AM a STAR WARS fan and part of me cringed when I found out that JJ Abrams was going to be directing the new Star Wars movies. Until I remember reading an interview with him saying that he was a HUGE Star Wars fan. HUGE. It was the same interview where he stated that he wasn’t a Star Trek fan but felt that was a good thing to bring something fresh to the franchise. And thinking about the guy that directed my favorite two Star Trek movies, Nicholas Meyer who also wasn’t a huge Star Trek fan but approached the two movies he did like military thrillers with Sci-Fi trappings and made two great movies.

So that’s my concern with JJ Abrams and Star Wars, that he’s too CLOSE to it.

Still I have faith. Mostly because George and Rick McCallum aren’t involved. And it’s giving us a story that takes place after Jedi and introducing an bunch of new characters. With two of them people of color and at least three women. We know that Abrams can bring the action. Let’s hope that once again Kasdan can bring the story.

Also I think that it’s awesome that we’re going to see Luke, Leia, Han and Chewie again.

Also, and not entirely altogether unimportant, there’s the possibility that there will finally be a release of the original, unaltered Trilogy in anamorphic widescreen and HD.

Even if Abrams new Star Wars is dogcrap on a sharp stick? If I get the OT on Bluray or DVD unaltered and in anamorphic?

IT WILL HAVE BEEN WORTH IT.


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

There must be something very wrong with me as a fan since I really like to talk about things in fandom that I
actually like as opposed to getting a huge charge out of talking about/bashing things that I don’t.

I love STAR WARS and George Lucas isn’t involved in these new movies so I'm in. Lawrence Kasdan is one of the screenwriters and
after hearing about an amazing Indiana Jones script from that was supposed to have been the next Indiana Jones movie that Ford loved, Spielberg loved
but George wasn’t excited about? So instead we got the Crystal Skull? Makes me all the more excited for this movie.

I recently started re-watching CLONE WARS and it really made me appreciate what Lucas was TRYING to do with the prequels. While the prequels
themselves were less than good the ideas and themes that he was trying to get across made for fertile ground so that other better storytellers could run with the ball.

I'm not a STAR TREK fan in that I'm an expert on the canon of the various shows. To be honest my exposure to STAR TREK TV shows are the excellent Filmation animated series, a few reruns
of the Original Series, the wildly uneven Next Generation and Deep Space Nine (My personal favorite).

My real love for STAR TREK comes with some of the movies. The Motion Picture bores me to tears. Wrath of Khan is an AMAZING military thriller set in space. Search for Spock is decent, I disliked the Voyage Home, I disliked The final Frontier and again LOVED Undiscovered Country another excellent military thriller in space. You'll note that the two Star Trek films directed by Nicholas Meyer are my favorites.

The Next Generation films fare poorly. Of the 4 of them only First Contact is one that I would consider both a good and entertaining movie.

I LIKE the reboot films. I own both of them. Even though INTO DARKNESS is pretty flawed and never really earns any of it’s “big” moments past the assault on Starfleet HQ, it’s still an impressive action film. I don’t have a problem with it effectively being an alternate timeline version of the Star Trek that we know and I think that time travel is a STORY DEVICE that’s used to tell the type of story that the writers want to tell. I have no problem with the use of either version of time Travel as long as within the story being told the version used is consistent. The movie LOOPER directed by Rian Johnson is a good example of this. It’s established in that movie that doing something to your present self DEFINITELY effects your future self and takes great pains to SHOW the audience how that’s not always a good thing. And it’s a rule that stays consistent to the end where a character has to make a CHOICE between self-preservation and DOING THE RIGHT THING.

But getting bent out of shape because the writers of the new Star Trek (who admittedly, I’m NOT huge fans of) using the alternate timeline method to justify the existence of the reboot itself? I don’t know… I thought that it was a pretty clever way to let the fans know that theyre NOT invalidating everything that has come before and that THIS new STAR TREK is it’s own thing.


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

So here's a question as someone who is a Star Wars fan but really only regards the movies as canon.

I saw Stargate in an industry screening years ago. I didnt think it was a great or even a good movie. I know that there were several popular series that people really liked. I havent seen those nor do I care about them.

If I go to see the reboot (if there's a director or screenwriter attached to it that I like/follow) why should the canon matter to me? and if it should are you saying that I should somehow watch all of the series before I see the reboot? Because that's a surefire way to send a casual viewer in the other direction.

I mean these movies have to straddle a line. Yes they want the fans to enjoy it but they also want people who have never even seen Stargate to enjoy it as a movie as well. I'm a fan of certain things but sometimes catering to the existing fanbase is an exercise in futility.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
The reason to NOT buy is, for me, because I bought 4th "just because", and that isn't happening again. The driving force behind the reasoning above, that core rulebooks are the most profitable part of a RPG, followed by player splatbooks and introductory books about old settings, and not any sort of adventures or setting books with any sort of depth, is that people buy the core rulebooks of each new edition "just because", and that is a sad, sad anomaly. Screw that. Did that already, got burned, not doing it tomorrow.

OTOH, you can get the Basic rules free, play that version and see if that hooks you enough to want more.

That's a far cry from "just because" and I don't see how you'd get burned.

I plan on downloading the free rules just to look them over but have no intention of buying the hardcopy rules. I think I'm done with edition treadmills especially D&D's. If 5E or NEXT is still going strong in two years and doing really well I might play or think about running a game but beyond that? Not really excited for it. I'm not a fan of rules light systems. I'd rather have something and not need it than to need something and not have it you know?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cayzle wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
Seriously, for all of the hype about 3e, TTRPG in the 2000s and beyond is a nice niche hobby compared to the phenomenon it was in the '80s.
Because there were no competing RPGs in the 1980s. All that pent-up demand was satisfied by the 1E system.

Wait...What?!?

Were you actually around in the 80's? Because while D&D was the most popular I distinctly remember playing a whole lot of other games alongside D&D. Some of those games? Were other TSR games! TOP SECRET. BOOT HILL. STAR FRONTIERS. MARVEL SUPER HEROES.

DC HEROES, VILLAINS AND VIGILANTES, CHAMPIONS, PALLADIUM. GURPS.

So are you just forgetting that there were these other games out there? Some of which are STILL around today?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sissyl wrote:
Book of erotic fantasy was rather okay. The horribad parts of it were the illustrations. There was so much that was oh so much worse. People act as if bad quality is some kind of threat. It never was. Nothing prevented anyone from reading reviews of books before buying them.

EXACTLY.

The way that I got turned on to the "Good" 3rd party stuff and steered away from the "Bad" stuff was mainly through reviews and word of mouth. But people also like to pretend that these things exist on a scale where the material was horrid or AMAZING.

I bought a lot of 3rd party stuff. Most of it WASN'T bad. A lot of it was just utilitarian. You just USED IT. Some stuff like the Fast Forward Games stuff was really not good. It was as if the people putting together the material didn't quite get how some things in 3x worked? But the good stuff that came out of the OGL was more exiting and fun and impacted my game more than the bad stuff did.

That's just my experience though.


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

You know the Book of Erotic Fantasy is everyone's whipping boy when it comes to talking about the OGL. But I'll take 100 of those if in the end I still wound up with a BOOK OF THE RIGHTEOUS, or a MUTANTS and MASTERMINDS or a SPYCRAFT or PTOLUS or the BOOKS OF ELDRICH MIGHT and the rest of the Malhavoc or Green Ronin or Goodman Games or Necromancer games offerings.

If you really want to talk about a company's product that was bad, FAST FORWARD GAMES.

1 to 50 of 1,005 << 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.