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

ShinHakkaider's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 1,269 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,269 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Distant Scholar wrote:
Those are bigger than HERO System Fifth Edition Revised? I am impressed.

Considering that there's video out there of that book STOPPING BULLETS? I'm impressed indeed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bob Bob Bob wrote:
If you really think it's poor GMing to use the fixed numbers provided by the book and numbers derived from actual stats and skill points instead of scaling every challenge the party faces to the member with the highest modifier for that challenge, I have to disagree. Vehemently. Someone who puts skill points into a skill wants to be better at it, not make everyone else worse.

I totally agree with this.

I also agree that a GM who is just spamming arbitrary DC changes needs some work.

But I really also believe that you need to take into consideration the power level actually at the table. In some cases raising the DC is needed. Other times GM Fiat is needed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
baron arem heshvaun wrote:
Star Wars the Force Awakens taking over ALL IMAX screens for four weeks in December.

THANK GOD Lowes Lincoln Center IMAX has reserved seating.

No waiting out in the cold on lines for hours on end. YAAAAAAAAAY!!!!


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The critique that I mentioned earlier : HERE


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

And history shows that over 6 million didn't. Including most of Spielberg's father's family.

But, by all means, let's tell the Jewish man what stories of the Holocaust it's ok to tell.

No one telling him what stories he should tell.

But I do remember reading a similar critique of Schindlers List from a Jewish site. I'll try to find and post the article when I get home. So as much as you may protest Spielberg despite his fame and notoriety isn't the arbiter of all things Jewish.

As I said before I don't think anyone is saying that it's a bad film. Not even close to bad. I've just become LESS enchanted with it because of what I stated upthread.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dragonchess Player wrote:
Schindler's List is also an example of a great movie that couldn't be made in Hollywood (and it wasn't, being shot entirely on location in Poland and Germany with mostly non-Hollywood actors, other than a few roles).

I'm curious as to what you mean by this because it sounds like you're saying that because a film isnt shot in Hollywood proper or uses American actors that it's not a Hollywood film.

Steven Spielberg is as Hollywood as Hollywood gets. The movie was financed and produced IN the Hollywood system by both Universal and Spielberg's own production company, Amblin.

About the film itself, when I first saw it decades ago I was impressed and moved by it. But upon revisiting it several times afterwards I can say that I'm less impressed with it for the same reason that I'm not that impressed with stories told about the tragedy of "The OTHER". The people that the story is about are seldom given agency in their own stories and are treated as objects to be pitied or objects to be horrified at when horrible things happen to them.

It's a solid technical achievement, I still do like the movie a bit and the fact that Ralph Fiennes didn't win the Best Supporting Oscar for his performance was galling but it was typical emotionally manipulative Spielberg. The least he could have done if he was going to make it a pity party he could have given the "objects" of the pity some agency and actually TELL their stories instead of the focus on Schindler and Commandant Goeth.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Damon Griffin wrote:
How exactly did Dr. Doom get to be God? I had no intention of trying to follow all the different series that tied into that, so I've just been reading the few whose settings I thought would be interesting: Thors, Squadron Supreme, Years of Future Past and 1872..or '74, or whatever year it is. And there's no setup for any of them, you just get dropped into a...

WOW. Thejeff did a pretty good job of skimming the surface of how, but this whole thing actually has it's roots in Jonathan Hickman's Fantastic Four run (as well as the Fantastic Foundation aka FF) then carried over into his runs on BOTH New Avengers and Avengers. He's been laying out a pretty complex story of opposing philosophies and how heroes deal with facing inevitable defeat and destruction of everything that they care about. As well as the lengths some of them will go to try and save their world (s).

Really strong characterizations of Reed Richards (and his compulsion to SOLVE EVERYTHING), Tony Stark (and how is futurist thinking often backfires HORRIFICALLY) Black Panther (his conflict between wanting to do what is RIGHT but having to do what is NECCESSARY) and Namor (who simply doesn't have that conflict AT ALL.)

New Avengers is the stronger book but really to get the full picture you should read both as they kinda merge in the last 4 or 5 issues and lead directly into SECRET WARS.

I'm not reading any of the side titles myself just the main book. And they main book is fantastic. It is by far the best of Marvel's event books in the last decade. EASILY.

That's just me though.


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

But to just go somewhere to not like something and tell them daily how much you don't care for it -- that I don't get. I don't do that to the music groups I don't like or that have changed. I don't do that to TV shows I don't care for.

Maybe it's me. Maybe it's the Internet Age. I just think that I'd rather spend my free time doing the things I like and supporting the products I like rather than trying to discourage others from liking it or tearing it apart.

This isn't "If you don't like the game then go away!" This is "Maybe step back and consider that there are better ways to spend your time."

Play and have fun.

This pretty much sums up exactly how I feel.


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


I don't think there was any love in Fantastic 4

People need to repeat this again LOUDER because the Josh Trank obviously never got the message.

This is why I want it to go back to Marvel Studios.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Pan wrote:
Do you folks have inside knowledge of the rights contract? Is there a clause saying if a film sucks you give up the rights?

I dont think that's part of the contract BUT I think that if a licensee doesn't do anything with the character for a set amount of time the rights revert BACK to Marvel. Which is how Daredevil wound up back with Marvel after being with Fox.

And why I think that if Marvel wanted to do another Blade movie theyre not worried about New Line because it's been over a decade since the last Blade movie.

There's also the idea of the smart play.

Fox has made 3 Fantastic Four movies with varying degrees of financial success.
This last one looks like it's going to flop magnificently. When you have to downgrade your estimate from a 50-55 million dollar weekend before release, then to a 40 million dollar weekend on Thursday and now it's looking like MAYBE a 28 million dollar weekend? That's REALLY not good.

Granted, the international Box Office may help out a bit but at this point Fox has to be considering going to Marvel Studios for a deal of SOME sort. Because they just CANT get this particular property right.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Pan wrote:
Yeap, pretty sure Fox will put F4 on ice for a few years and try again. Sony doing it with spidey right now.

Not really. Sony made a deal with Marvel Studios to include Spider-Man in the MCU. Which is why despite Spidey being licensed by Sony he IS appearing in Captain America : Civil War.

A new Sony financed by Marvel Studios controlled (in terms of creative content) Spider-Man movie is coming out in 2017(?) I think. But as of right now? Spider-Man is part of the MCU.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Blackvial wrote:
Fabius Maximus wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:

The guy who wrote Wrath of the Titans is writing it...so I don't have much faith in this being good. So with the history behind this...I am keeping my expectations low.

He also wrote a few episodes for The Walking Dead and the surprisingly good Mob City.
and who knows he might have gotten better since wrath of the titans

Or maybe he wrote an excellent script and it got butchered by the director and whoever else got their hands on it after he handed the work in.

Unless you have someone who is an auteur to guide a movie from inception to execution youre not going to get a one persons pure straightforward vision / version of a movie.

Someone with Christopher Nolans clout maybe. But the guys who are going to be making these movies aren't Christopher Nolans. After they hand in the script, not matter how much the producers / directors / stars like it? Theyre gonna change it to suit their whims. Some of those changes will make the script better but mostly they just make it worse.

True Story: I was interning at a production company in NY back in 1994 when the word was Shane Black had sold a script for what was then an unheard of FOUR MILLION DOLLARS. People had begun faxing the script around (I'm sure if it was before or after the script had sold) and the other interns and I made copies of the incoming script (which I still have sans about 3 -4 pages that got lost).

I read that script on the way home on the F train and the while walking down 108th Street in Forest Hills, in the elevator of my building and finally in my apartment when I got home. When I was done I was like JESUS CHRIST. Theyre NEVER going to be able to make this movie as is. It's too violent and too crazy. But if they did? It would be one of the best action movies EVER. That script? THE LONG KISS GOODNIGHT.

And sure enough it sold to either New Line or Warner. I think that at that point New Line hadnt been taken over by Warner Bros yet (I could be wrong).

My point is this, the movie that was eventually made was still good, but only had a passing resemblance to the script that I read. There are big parts of set pieces that were excised, characters eliminated, character arcs changed. They could have shot it as was and really the only thing that they would have had to worry about was possibly a NC-17 for violence. A couple of nips and tucks would have gotten that back down to a hard R.

Again, my point is this: THAT script sold for $4 MILLION DOLLARS and they still changed it in my opinion making it a lesser movie.

I'm pretty sure that they're not going to spend that kind of money on the D&D movie script. Nor did they for Wrath of the Titans.


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


I love Pathfinder, and I love Paizo for it's inclusiveness, it's respect for diversity and LBGT rights. But I'll always, always speak up when I see a hiccup in the system, and I expect anyone else who loves it to do the same - or how else or the Devs going to know what works, what doesn't and what plain sucks?

I agree. But there's a big difference between "Yeah I dont think that this works the way that it should and here's why." and why a fair amount of people on this board carry on about caster disparity and other points as if someone personally insulted their mother.

At a certain point it's either time to let it go, fix it yourself or play another game. And then there are a few people who show up just to take pot shots at the devs and designers because...you know Internet Tough guys. Pathfinder DOES have issues no one is saying that it doesnt. ANY game has issues. But the way that it's been on this board lately kinda makes it difficult to talk about the the game in ways that we like without the usual suspects showing up to thread crap.

The thing is: people here aren't going to be happy no matter what. Paizo could take the most common points that people have issue with "fix" them tomorrow using posters actual fix proposals and by the evening of THAT SAME DAY the knives and pitchforks will be out claiming that they did it wrong or that they didn't listen to input.


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


I must also add, these boards have contributed to my declining interest in the game. So many naysayers and Paizo haters in these threads now days, it's depressing to come here.

When I first came to the boards, everyone was friendly and helpful and creative. Now its all casters disparity and Paizo suxors.

YUP. THIS.

I've been here since before the Dragon / Dungeon - Pathfinder transition and while I've gotten into my share of heated debates / arguments the general negativity about Pathfinder has grown ALOT. I dont know if it has to do with 5E coming out and people feeling like they can go back to playing the flagship RPG and not settling for a second stringer (for the record this is NOT how I view the games. I play and support Pathfinder. I do not nor will I probably ever play or support 5E).

I feel like this, I come from a time where interaction with developers and designers just didn't happen. So anything wonky in our games we fixed/patched ourselves. It never once stopped us from enjoying our games. Anything that stands in the way of how things worked at our table was an issue, which is one of the reasons why I never liked Organized Play (the other reason was the people that you would get playing Organized Play. While I'm sure a lot of them aren't the anti-social people I would run into, looking at how people carry themselves in the rules fourm and how they talk to and about the developers and designers pretty much reinforces my my decision in not being part of that particular sub set of the community).

And to be honest and Im almost ashamed to admit it, I would get a kick out of SKR when he'd bring it to people who were just being dickish. He was the ONE guy around here who really kind of suffered no fools gladly. I feel bad that he's gone and while I didnt agree with everything that he said he said it in a way that made me think "Well, Okay...I kinda she why that would make sense. It's a different way of approaching it and not how I'd do it, but I totally get it..."

And to me that sort of approach WORKS. I'd be a lot more tolerant of peoples ideas of how the game can be patched and fixed if it weren't wrapped in passive agressiveness/hostility/arrogance. I like options and I like the idea of using those options to craft the particular game that we as individuals want to play. I'm open to options from the community, but not when that community is acting like a bunch of over entitled sociopaths.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

To answer the question?
No gamers typically do not. There are exceptions but that's what they are. Exceptions.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Skeld wrote:
Bill Dunn wrote:
I'm not enjoying the boards nearly as much as I used to though. But that's a function of the community around it rather than Paizo itself.

This is a good summary of how I feel. ** spoiler omitted **

-Skeld

Yeah. I'm not one to penalize a company for it's community but for a long time I've said that Paizo online community was one of the better ones out there. That started changing for me personally about a year or two ago. And now I still browse but I'm not likely to engage as much as I used to and I definitely stay off the rules forums.

If these people are an example of what PFS is then my decision to stay away from any Organized Play is well warranted.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Also apparently we're in the EMPIRE STRIKES BACK phase because WOTC and D&D 5E has racked up a pretty impressive amount of ENnies tonight including Product of the Year and Best Publisher while Paizo only scored TWO silvers for Pathfinder Unchained and Inner Sea Pawn Box...


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

How do you know it'll be the last one? How can you be sure that 2017 or 2018 (or 2019 or 2020 or 2021...) won't hold your dream AP?

I totally understand taking breaks and skipping APs -- didn't get WotR or Giantslayer myself. But to claim 'last' makes me wonder if you're dealing with some serious cancer or something and don't expect to live more than 1-2 more years? :(

LOL.

I know it's my last because it's in my nature to walk away from things and not really look back. I dont know if youre into comics at all but when DC decided to abandon their old continuity and go New 52 that was my jumping off point. Even after reading DC comics for over 30 years. It was just time for me to walk away. And I havent been back since. I've been an AP subscriber since the beginning and while there have been several AP's that havent really interested me (Legacy of Fire, Skulls and Shackles, Serpent's Skull and Iron Gods) none of them have been AP's that I can honestly say that I have NO interest in running or using in any capacity.

Hell's Vengeance and now Strange Eons back to back? No interest in running or playing an Evil AP and a full on Lovecraftian AP? No thanks. And with that it's a jumping off point for me with the AP's. I already have enough of them (17 after Hell's Rebels by my shelf count) to choke a donkey. That coupled with a bunch of 3rd party mega adventures that I'd eventually like to run (Slumbering Tsar and Rappan Athuk)? Yeah I think it's totally time to stop and two AP's with themes and subjects that I actively DO NOT LIKE is the perfect opportunity to walk away.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Aaaaaaaaand that's it for me. Looks like Hell's Rebels will be my last AP. It's been a good run and I was running out of shelf space anyway. Not interested in an evil AP and definitely not interested in a Lovecraftian one. Good news for those who are though. Enjoy!


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I like Pathfinder still.

I like the wealth of options even though they can be a little paralyzing at times.

I like that the world is defined mostly through the adventures and not huge gazetteers that feel like history and geography homework.

And I dont play in nor will I ever play in PFS so I dont care as much about RAW as much as I do RAI or what actually works for my particular group. Yes we defer to the rules but if we find that a tweak to a cumbersome rule makes things better for everyone we go with that.

I like the amount of support for the game.

That being said I'm probably going to stop both of my subscriptions (AP and RPG) because JESUS it's been seven years and almost 100 issues of AP's.
After Hell's Rebels, unless the AP after Hell's Vengeance (not a fan of evil PC's so this may be my jumping off point...) sounds interesting I'm done.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Grey Lensman wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
But after that last...uh..green lantern...whatever it was, if that schmoe can be jordan, why can't this guy have a chance to f%## up a movie?
I really liked Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordan. What I didn't like was that the directing, storyline, pacing, script, and cinematography all sucked moose dick.

Yeah. His acting (and everyone else's) was fine. It was the rest of the movie that sucked.

As for this guy, I haven't seen a single one of his movies so I can't really say one way or the other if he would be any good.

no, it really, really wasn't. It was an awful movie. It exists solely to be an example of how not to make a green lantern movie.

Yeah I really try not to bash things or even talk about things that I dont like or care for but I had a really hard time understanding how they made a movie that bad.

I mean I'm not even a Hal Jordan fan (Kyle Rayner was my Green Lantern. Just like Wally West was my Flash not Barry Allen) but the trailers got me excited and interested and hopeful. Hopes that were eventually dashed on the rocks of mediocrity and boredom...

eyes well up with tears

I thought we could be friends...

As long as you weren't part of HEAT. Those guys need to be dragged out into the street and be subjected to their own threats.
who?

THIS kinda glosses over the ugly details of the threats to Editors and Ron Marz (the writer at the time).

This event and certain elements of the RPG community was the beginning of me understanding that its okay to love your hobbies but absolutely DESPISE the fandom. Which for the most part is how I feel even today.


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

What really got me reading DC books initally were Wolfman & Perez New Teen Titans, Mike Barr's Batman and the Outsiders, Mike Grell's Warlord and Levit's Legion of Super-Heroes.

Then Crisis happened and was AWESOME. Then Byrne's (who I was a HUGE fan of at the time) Man of Steel / Superman / Action Comics run. Then George Perez on Wonder Woman and then Giffen/Bierbaums on Legion of...

In my case: Then Crisis happened and was AWESOME and screwed everything up. The Titans went into decline, partly flailing around with Wonder Girl who'd never known Wonder Woman. The Legion kind of imploded, again with the loss of Superboy. Both Infinity Inc & the All Star Squadron fizzled with the loss of Earth 2.

The new Wonder Woman was really good. The Giffen/Bierbaum Legion was good, but uneven and ultimately doomed.

Crisis originally hooked me on DC and simultaneously trashed much of what it had led me to love about DC. I'm still bitter. :)

That's funny because while I'd read Legion before the 'FIVE YEARS LATER' run I felt like I was getting in on the ground floor and so because of that I feel like that was MY Legion. Uneven yes, but the story of the Legion vs. the Dominiators is probably my favorite Legion story.

There was definitely some good stuff in there, but the drastic change in tone hurt and it was also hurt by another reboot (or two? The whole Glorith/Mordru thing. All still dealing with the fallout from losing Superboy.)

It tried to hard to be dark and edgy and though parts of it worked, parts of it really didn't. The Giffen stuff generally better than the Bierbaum's IMO. There was also apparently a lot of editorial interference and changes in plans - both for the reboots and for the outcome of the SW6 plotline. Even at the time it all seemed very confused to me. Like they couldn't keep track of where it was all going.

Yeah I totally hear where you're coming from. At the time when I was reading it I had NO IDEA what was going on behind the scenes. Only afterwards in interviews with Mark Waid, Giffen and a few others did I find out about all of the stuff with Superboy.

I was reading it with almost no previous bias. I mean there was some stuff that wasnst seamless but I chalked that stuff up to me not being aware of some continuity based detail(s) and shrugged it off.


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

What really got me reading DC books initally were Wolfman & Perez New Teen Titans, Mike Barr's Batman and the Outsiders, Mike Grell's Warlord and Levit's Legion of Super-Heroes.

Then Crisis happened and was AWESOME. Then Byrne's (who I was a HUGE fan of at the time) Man of Steel / Superman / Action Comics run. Then George Perez on Wonder Woman and then Giffen/Bierbaums on Legion of...

In my case: Then Crisis happened and was AWESOME and screwed everything up. The Titans went into decline, partly flailing around with Wonder Girl who'd never known Wonder Woman. The Legion kind of imploded, again with the loss of Superboy. Both Infinity Inc & the All Star Squadron fizzled with the loss of Earth 2.

The new Wonder Woman was really good. The Giffen/Bierbaum Legion was good, but uneven and ultimately doomed.

Crisis originally hooked me on DC and simultaneously trashed much of what it had led me to love about DC. I'm still bitter. :)

That's funny because while I'd read Legion before the 'FIVE YEARS LATER' run I felt like I was getting in on the ground floor and so because of that I feel like that was MY Legion. Uneven yes, but the story of the Legion vs. the Dominiators is probably my favorite Legion story.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Grey Lensman wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
But after that last...uh..green lantern...whatever it was, if that schmoe can be jordan, why can't this guy have a chance to f%## up a movie?
I really liked Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordan. What I didn't like was that the directing, storyline, pacing, script, and cinematography all sucked moose dick.

Yeah. His acting (and everyone else's) was fine. It was the rest of the movie that sucked.

As for this guy, I haven't seen a single one of his movies so I can't really say one way or the other if he would be any good.

no, it really, really wasn't. It was an awful movie. It exists solely to be an example of how not to make a green lantern movie.

Yeah I really try not to bash things or even talk about things that I dont like or care for but I had a really hard time understanding how they made a movie that bad.

I mean I'm not even a Hal Jordan fan (Kyle Rayner was my Green Lantern. Just like Wally West was my Flash not Barry Allen) but the trailers got me excited and interested and hopeful. Hopes that were eventually dashed on the rocks of mediocrity and boredom...

eyes well up with tears

I thought we could be friends...

As long as you weren't part of HEAT. Those guys need to be dragged out into the street and be subjected to their own threats.

Yeah admittedly that's part of why I was pissed about Hal jordan coming back. I feel like they felt that they were vindicated in threatening the lives of both Ron Marz and his child. I hate those HEAT people more than any part of fandom and I HATE fandom in general.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
But after that last...uh..green lantern...whatever it was, if that schmoe can be jordan, why can't this guy have a chance to f%## up a movie?
I really liked Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordan. What I didn't like was that the directing, storyline, pacing, script, and cinematography all sucked moose dick.

Yeah. His acting (and everyone else's) was fine. It was the rest of the movie that sucked.

As for this guy, I haven't seen a single one of his movies so I can't really say one way or the other if he would be any good.

no, it really, really wasn't. It was an awful movie. It exists solely to be an example of how not to make a green lantern movie.

Yeah I really try not to bash things or even talk about things that I dont like or care for but I had a really hard time understanding how they made a movie that bad.

I mean I'm not even a Hal Jordan fan (Kyle Rayner was my Green Lantern. Just like Wally West was my Flash not Barry Allen) but the trailers got me excited and interested and hopeful. Hopes that were eventually dashed on the rocks of mediocrity and boredom...

eyes well up with tears

I thought we could be friends...

I started reading GREEN LANTERN with Emerald Twilight so yeah, Kyle for the win. I think that I still have almost that entire run of Green Lantern. For the most part the main DC characters (Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash and Green Lantern) were all kind of boring and unrelatebale to me. What really got me reading DC books initally were Wolfman & Perez New Teen Titans, Mike Barr's Batman and the Outsiders, Mike Grell's Warlord and Levit's Legion of Super-Heroes.

Then Crisis happened and was AWESOME. Then Byrne's (who I was a HUGE fan of at the time) Man of Steel / Superman / Action Comics run. Then George Perez on Wonder Woman and then Giffen/Bierbaums on Legion of Super-Heroes.

I NEVER liked Hal Jordan or Barry Allen. In fact when Geoff Johns went on his silver age tear to bring these characters BACK that was the beginning of the end for me and DC. New 52 only served as the definitive Jumping off point for me. The only comic that I purchase regularly from DC now is ASTRO CITY and that's not part of the DC universe so I'm fine with it.

But Hal Jordan? Meh.


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

So I suppose I'm one of the few that actually enjoyed the Green Lantern movie?

I also enjoyed the Green Lantern animated show which I think was by Bruce Timm.

The Green Lantern Animated show was actually good though. I liked it quite a bit. I mean it was no YOUNG JUSTICE but it didnt have to be.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
But after that last...uh..green lantern...whatever it was, if that schmoe can be jordan, why can't this guy have a chance to f%## up a movie?
I really liked Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordan. What I didn't like was that the directing, storyline, pacing, script, and cinematography all sucked moose dick.

Yeah. His acting (and everyone else's) was fine. It was the rest of the movie that sucked.

As for this guy, I haven't seen a single one of his movies so I can't really say one way or the other if he would be any good.

no, it really, really wasn't. It was an awful movie. It exists solely to be an example of how not to make a green lantern movie.

Yeah I really try not to bash things or even talk about things that I dont like or care for but I had a really hard time understanding how they made a movie that bad.

I mean I'm not even a Hal Jordan fan (Kyle Rayner was my Green Lantern. Just like Wally West was my Flash not Barry Allen) but the trailers got me excited and interested and hopeful. Hopes that were eventually dashed on the rocks of mediocrity and boredom...


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

And they could have gotten Idris Elba.

I don't think that Tyrese can pull off John Stewart. Doesn't have the acting chops.

Granted, Tyrese doesn't have the resume but then again super hero movies are not Shakespeare (maybe with the exception of the THOR movies...).

As for not having the acting chops? See John Singleton's BABY BOY (2011) and ANNAPOLIS (2006) where he plays a Naval Officer who clashes with James Franco's trainee character.

Does he have what it take to play a hard nosed military type? Absolutely. Hell I think his character in the movie was Marine before he came to Annapolis. I might be misremembering thought so dont quote me on that one.

Honestly i'm fine with Tyrese as that would bring some name recognition to the movie. While Idris Elba is well known, MILLIONS of people know who Tyrese is because of the Fast and Furious movies.

My pic though would probably be THIS d00d: NATE PARKER

While he hasnt been in anything of note, he has the presence and the acting chops (particualrly in BEYOND THE LIGHTS and RED TAILS).


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

I've read that he has said that he would rather win a Grammy than an Oscar.

I'm not sure he has to worry about winning either. :P

Well being that he started out as a singer and has already been Grammy nominated I'd say his chances of winning that Grammy one day is actually pretty good. He has pipes and can definitely more than carry a tune.


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

I don't promote things very often, but this was too good to pass up. My wallet is already hurting, but you all need to jump on this.

Behold Ma'al Drakar, the Dracopocalypse:

Party annihilation

SWEET JESUS IN A JUMPED UP SIDECAR.

I had no interest in this Kickstarter (I have three full utility drawers of unpainted BONES 1 & 2 miniatures. When I say that between the both of those kickstarters I spent well over $600? I'm not even exaggerating.).

BUT I MUST HAVE THAT..."MINI".


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Krensky wrote:
I assumed Microverse and Underworld were entailed in the FF license or complicated by the old Micronauts license.

YUP. Marvel no longer has the Micronauts license, in fact I think IDW may have recently picked it up so nope Marvel had to rename thiers the Quantum Realm...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
Quote:
WOW. We're totally at almost opposite ends of the spectrum then because THE RAID (and by extension THE RAID 2: BERENDAL) is one of the finest action films ever made IMHO. Sometimes a streamlined story without much convolution is just what's needed. You didn't watch the movie all the way through so you probably missed Rama's big complication and one of the best two on one fights in any movie in a LONG time. The Raid DID have a story and it DID have characters. Just none that you were interested in and that's fair. But to me objectively they're both good but as much as I like Winter Soldier? The Raid is much, MUCH better on the action front.

My girlfriend and friends were crazy excited to see The Raid so we all set down to do so. At some point I got up from the couch and helped our host with making dinner. After that I took the occasional glance at the screen, enough to get the story, and I DID watch that endless 2 on 1 fight. Endless is the best word I have to describe it because that's how it felt. At some point my brain went completely numb because it was like watching a dance (another activity I was never able to connect with) - there were well executed motions and all, but nothing that happened mattered. They were just pounding each other into slow, agonizing submission.

Not that I take offense at a long action scene - I really loved the corridor one-shot scene from Daredevil, for example - but it has to be dynamic and constantly on the move. That scene was just the same thing over and over and over again with no side gaining a noticeable advantage on the other until it was sort of over.

A good action scene is like a good story compressed to a few minutes. "Bob was getting the upper hand, when suddenly Alice drew a knife! Terrified, Bob tries to run but Alice is too fast. They struggle, Bob giving everything he has, but Alice still manages a slash across his chest, drawing blood. With a surge of heightened strength Bob knocks the knife out of her hands...". Had I written a...

Again...WOW. There absolutely was a story being told in that fight and it definitely wasnt the same thing over and over again but I'm not even going to bother to try to argue the point. I get it you didn't like it.

That being said, I'll just leave this quote here and walk away from this discussion on action films:

"The Russo brothers were big fan of The Raid, Joe admitted they studied the action scenes in that movie: “Our DVD players and apple tvs live at quarter speed.” The Raid inspired them to have more hard hitting action in the film, "

Excerpted from this article...


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


Its difficult to say "I don't like the way you play the game, I think it is silly and I have no interest in playing it that way," without coming across with a negative tone.

My thing is, does that even need to be said at all? Even in a conversation about gaming, a simple "Your gaming style and mine aren't really compatible. But hey as long as you're having fun it's all good." establishes more good will than the above statement.

You say the first thing to me and my first thought is "Well I'm glad that I don't play with you because you obviously have the social graces of a complete and utter sociopath. DUECES."

The second shows that you're an actual human being with empathy and while I might not want to play Pathfinder or AD&D with you there's a remote probability that I might play something else with you.

EDIT: Let me be clear - by "You" I mean the person who would say something like that and not necessarily Tormsskull. Unless Tormsskull WOULD actually say something like that. Then...Yeah I'm talking about you.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:
and Winter Soldier is one of the best action movies I've ever seem.
I'm only being partially serious here and dont get me wrong, WINTER SOLDIER is my FAVORITE of the Marvel movies and it's a great action movie but if the above is true? You need to see more movies.

Always true :)

I liked Winter Soldier for a tense and exciting story with one huge twists and many smaller ones, for very solid characters, and for big visceral action scenes that relied on practical effects to make each blow feel real.

But... I suspect I might not be a very good action enthusiast. For example, The Raid, much praised as one of the best action movies ever, I was too bored to watch all the way through. I just can't care about an action scene if I don't care enough about the story and characters to want to know who wins. The Raid has neither, while The Winter Soldier is strong on both fronts.

WOW. We're totally at almost opposite ends of the spectrum then because THE RAID (and by extension THE RAID 2: BERENDAL) is one of the finest action films ever made IMHO. Sometimes a streamlined story without much convolution is just what's needed. You didn't watch the movie all the way through so you probably missed Rama's big complication and one of the best two on one fights in any movie in a LONG time. The Raid DID have a story and it DID have characters. Just none that you were interested in and that's fair. But to me objectively they're both good but as much as I like Winter Soldier? The Raid is much, MUCH better on the action front.

I'm a big fan of fight choreography and an even bigger proponent of cleanly and coherently shot action and for the most part it seems like most American action directors are incapable of shooting decent action.

I was actually surprised at how well done the set pieces were in WINTER SOLDIER. As good as the final attack on the Insight Carriers was for my money the best sequence in the film was the attack on the freeway that leads into the first fight between Steve and Winter Soldier. The Russos did a FANTASTIC JOB staging all of that.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
and Winter Soldier is one of the best action movies I've ever seem.

I'm only being partially serious here and dont get me wrong, WINTER SOLDIER is my FAVORITE of the Marvel movies and it's a great action movie but if the above is true? You need to see more movies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Decent compared to what? sure there are worse movies, but if I take my rose colored Marvel glasses off for a minute, I quickly come to realize some of these movies, well, haven't won Oscars... for a reason...

If the Oscars is your barometer for quality then I'd say that your barometer is broken. There are some excellent films / actors who were not nominated nor have won Oscars. This does not mean that they aren't excellent films / actors.

Marvel hasnt hit a home run out of the gate each and every time. I'm personally not a fan of Iron Man 3 (even though it has grown on me a bit with repeated viewings) and Age of Ultron is definitely a weaker entry. But more often than not when plunk down my $14 -$20 to see a Marvel movie I can expect to be entertained.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MMCJawa wrote:
I don't think it's so much having large ensemble casts which is the problem, its having large ensemble casts + big fight scenes + laying ground work for various future movies. There just isn't much room to breath.

Yeah agreed for the most part. The first two things aren anything that hasnt been done before and done fairly well. Its that last thing that Marvel did really clunkily in AOU. I've seen it twice and will probably watch it a few more times but I remember even on first viewing it felt like there were parts that were just missing.

Then Whedon revealed that there was something like 45min cut out of the movie I was like "AH. So that's what happened."

Dont get me wrong I dont think it's a bad movie. You walk into something like AOU and expect spectacle and not you know REMAINS OF THE DAY or even LONE STAR. But it felt like an advertisement for upcoming movies and an incomplete advertisement at that. There was a much better way to get the exposition on the Infinity Stones to us, the viewer, rather than through a last minute Thor data dump.

This new characterization of Ultron bothered me greatly. The change in characterizations for many of the Marvel characters havent bothered me all that much but the Villians have been pretty much who they have been in the comics (with a few exceptions of course, Looks over at IRON MAN 3...). Ultron is a BIG BAD. You're supposed to be AFRAID when Ultron shows up. ULTRON, KANG/IMMORTUS and THANOS (with special mention of Michael Korvac) are THE GUYS. Or at least that's what I explained to my 13y old son. He thought his old man was a kook until I let him read the Ultron Unlimited story arc from Busiek & Perez's run on THE AVENGERS.

Then he was like: "Dad, he killed an entire country then raised the people as an undead cyborg army. THAT'S CRAZY!! The movie Ultron was WEAK compared to the comics ULTRON."


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

For me it's not as much as team movie vs. smaller movie. My favorite MCU film is WINTER SOLDIER and that one has Cap, Black Widow, Winter Soldier and Falcon. It's smaller is scope than say the two Avengers movies but the stakes (both for the world and for Cap personally) are pretty damn high. It has a one HUGE action set piece at the end but by that time it's taken enough time to define the characters that we give a crap about them. I really think that we learn more about Natasha in this movie than in any other of her appearances and she might be the one character who has the most important arc in the movie.

Filmakers have been making ensemble films FOREVER, from even before Kurasawa's SHICHININ NO SAMURAI to THE DIRTY DOZEN, KELLY'S HEROES, to John Sayles films like CITY OF HOPE, MATAWAN and LONE STAR. These are GOOD films with LARGE casts so it can be done. And I think that theyre going to need to find a away to do it well by the time the first INFINITY WAR movie comes out. I trust the Russos (more so than I trust Whedon and I'm not a Whedon hater I just think that AOU was a subpar Marvel movie on almost all fronts. I STILL enjoyed it but...) to have it figured out before filming starts. With them doing CIVIL WAR then going right into INFINITY WAR it's going to be one hell of a slog for them...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:

I saw it Thursday night and I pretty much think that it's a better movie than AGE OF ULTRON. Not in term of spectacle but in terms of craft and not being a constant advertisement for other Marvel films.

I'm a big MCU fan but the farther away I get from AOU the less I like it because of the constant need to set up the future and not getting us to invest in the story that's being told NOW.

Age of Ultron certainly has some structural issues, but they do balance out with the payoff this lumbering structure is built to support - you get to see all the Avengers fighting and working together as a team. That's some seerious payoff, and despite Antman being a more than decent execution of its core premise, that just can't compete with Age of Ultron. In my objectively correct opinion, of course.

AOU has a disjointed narrative and the fact that I didnt really care about what was going to happen to ANYONE was an issue. The fact that ULTRON, one of the AVENGERS deadliest enemies came across like a snarky petulant child and not the threat that he should actually be. The fact that it was basically the first movie all over again without much of the fun and "OH S**T!* moments of the first movie.

Also?

Movie plot spoiler:
Quicksilver got killed by bullets. OUICKSILVER. Not only that, but ULTRON killed him not personally but by strafing him in a Quinjet. WHAT?!?

Yes I understand that he was just strafing either innocent civilians at that point but C'mon! If they were determined to kill Quicksilver they could have come up with a more meaningful way to do it.

Coulson's death (even though it was later undone) was perfect. It was up close, personal and quite honestly kinda brutal. It was also a character that had been around since the first MCU movie so we LIKED him. This death? MEH.


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

I saw it Thursday night and I pretty much think that it's a better movie than AGE OF ULTRON. Not in term of spectacle but in terms of craft and not being a constant advertisement for other Marvel films.

I'm a big MCU fan but the farther away I get from AOU the less I like it because of the constant need to set up the future and not getting us to invest in the story that's being told NOW.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:
Meh, if Evil Dead hadn't stood out from it's contemporaries, then Evil Dead 2 and Army of Darkness would ever have been made. It'd also zap Bruce Campbell, Sam Raimi, and Rob Tapert back into obscurity.

EXACTLY.

There had been nothing quite like EVIL DEAD at that time. I mean when there's pretty much another movie paying homage to the genre that created in it's title (CABIN IN THE WOODS) it had to have done SOMETHING right.

Also as to it's low budget, for what was done with it's obvious budget constraints and still to have turned out a movie that is referenced 30 years later? That's an achievement.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
Jester David wrote:
Readerbreeder wrote:
Jester David wrote:
Hama wrote:
Charlie Brooks wrote:
IMO, DC still has to prove that they can make one decent movie before I get excited about anything. And trailer aside, there are a lot of signs that this movie will be a mess.
Such as?
The fact it has six superheroes featured in it, with three coming into conflict for some reason, along with Lex Luthor, backstory on Batman, and more. It takes the main cast of Man of Steel (Clark, Lois, Perry, Ma Kent) and keeps those but adds over well over half-a-dozen new characters.

Except for the fact that the group movie is coming before some of the stand-alones, swap out a couple of names and you've just described The Avengers.

This is an honest question, so please don't read it in the tone of an outraged fanboy, but why does everyone seem to be so convinced that DC (and therefore any attempt at an extended universe) is going to crash and burn? Is it the grimdark thing? Because I don't see that as a deal breaker (or a permanent tone).

The big difference is they need to establish the characters. They need to present Aquaman and Green Lantern and Flash and Cyborg and make us care about them despite each character getting only a small amount of screen time.

Marvel gave most of its heroes their own movie, so people walked into the Avengers caring about Iron Man and Thor and Captain America. People are going to walk into SvsB and think of Wonder Woman by way of the Linda Carter TV show. And see Aquaman through the lenses of Superfriends (at best). There's so much less time to give the character a motivation, a backstory, character growth, and a reason for the audience to give a s***.

DC really seems to be rushing things. They're jumping right to the mega-connected franchise rather than slowly building to it like Marvel Studios did. Sony tried the same thing with Spider-man and that didn't work well. So far, most attempts to purposely build a movie

...

It's funny that you should mention the X-men movies as July 14th was the 15th anniversary of the release of the first movie. I know this because July 14th is also my 15th wedding anniversary. And yes, I did attempt to cajole my Best Man into getting to an early showing of X-Men.

His reply?

"Listen, if anything goes wrong and I dont get you to your wedding on time? She'll Kill you. But she'll Kill AND torture ME. So no we'll go another time."

Back on topic though, the first X-men movie wasn't very good either. And yes it had a bunch of characters to introduce and set up but basically it was the WOLVERINE & THE X-MEN movie. The core story was centered around Wolverine and Rogue's relationship. Everyone else aside from the Professor and Magneto was kinda just THERE. Jean served more as a romantic object than a character. and Cyclops and Storm? eh.
Not a fan of that first movie. There are good parts (the stand off at the train station between Xavier and Magneto) and some good lines ("How do I know it's you?" "Youre a DICK." *beat* "OKAY") but it wasnt what I'd call a GOOD movie.

Now X-2...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:

But it has a chance of being good, so long as it is *nothing* like Man of Steel. We'll see.

Being that it's being made by almost the exact same crew? I'm guessing more so the same than not.


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

The thing that sticks in my craw about the DC movie universe is this:

They had the chance years ago to go toe to toe with Marvel in terms of creating their own cinematic universe but they had NO faith in their own ability to do so.

They HAD Joss Whedon working on a WONDER WOMAN movie for them. And they scuttled it. It was him being off THAT project that allowed for Marvel to scoop him up to do the first AVENGERS movie.

They HAD George Miller working on a JUSTICE LEAGUE movie for them. But they didnt have enough faith in what he was doing or didnt want to shoulder the cost so they scuttled that. While not as financially successful MAD MAX: FURY ROAD is easily the best movie I've seen this summer and shows that Miller DEFINITELY had the chops to put together an entertaining action movie.

You know what lit the fire under DC/Warner? That first weekend box office tally for THE AVENGERS. When word of mouth came in and those box offfice records started to shatter? I'm pretty certain that execs at DC/Warner got REAMED.

That's why I don't have much faith in DC/Warner. Because they didnt have faith in themselves and they are most certainly playing catch up and playing it poorly. For the record I LIKED Man of Steel. Was it the most perfect representation of Superman? Nope. Still liked it and would have eagerly gone to see a straight up sequel. But no, instead we're getting BATMAN V. SUPERMAN. With Wonder Woman, Aquaman and (rumored Cyborg).

When that DC/Warner exec derided Marvel movies as being fun and that the dark tone of the DC movies represented something more "Realistic" It just made my decision to not take them seriously all the more valid.


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


I'm not a fan of ARMY OF DARKNESS

...

I...see...

I think it's grossly overrated as a piece of entertainment and avoid it like the plague. Let me put it like this of Sam Raimi's filmography I'm more likely to sit through Spider-Man 3 again than I am Army of Darkness. I don't begrudge anyone else's love of it but yeah not a fan.


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

I'm a fan of the original EVIL DEAD. I like EVIL DEAD 2 but see it more like a comedy remake of the first movie (which is pretty deadly serious). I think that most people when they think of Evil Dead as a comedy are thinking of the 2nd movie.

I'm not a fan of ARMY OF DARKNESS.

But THIS actually looks good and seems to hit all of the right notes. I'm interested in seeing how this goes.


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

That's a good point. But then, if you were a considerate human being you wouldn't talk at the theater, text at the theater, play games on your phone during the dark parts of the film, talk on the phone, turn off your ringer, scream things at the screen, stomp on people, bang seats, and do all the entertaining things that go on in everyday life at the theater that aren't kid related.

I agree, if you can get a sitter or do not bring your children to such things. But let's not say that it's those darn kids and their parents that are the only cause of distractions and disruptions. A lot of time, it's what people are willing to overlook or disregard. People are less willing to forgive other people's kids (I left mine at home, I didn't come out to hear kids, I hate kids, etc) than adults doing the same or worse.

I think if you look at my post upthread you'll see that I'm not willing to overlook or disregard anyone complicating my movie going experience.


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

Here's the thing, if you are at all a considerate human being, you wont do that to other people. When we had our son, unless we had a babysitter we either went to the movies separately or not at all.

Bringing a child to an intense R rated or loud action movie is kind of an irresponsible and selfish thing to do. If you can afford the price of the movie tickets and possibly dinner you should factor the price of a decent sitter in there somewhere.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Pan wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

SPOILER:
If it's a solid slug and not coated in teflon (which in the case of a shotgun slug would be kinda stupid)? Maybe. but you're still looking at the pure kinetic force of the impact possibly breaking a few ribs and causing some internal damage.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Then the problem isnt the kids, IT'S THE PARENTS.

And the thing is if the kids are being disruptive in all likelihood you're not the only person who's being disturbed by the behavior so call the parents on it. DIRECTLY.

I have no problem making other people uncomfortable who are ruining things for a larger group. We didnt start taking my son to the movies until we were sure that he could sit still for them. The average price for a movie ticket in NY is about $12-13. You better believe I'm gonna say something.

I've called out teenagers and adults before. And like I said by the time I've said something it hasn't been a disruption that bothers only me so OTHER people in the theater have had my back. Enough with the passive agressiveness, just deal with the issue firmly but directly.

1 to 50 of 1,269 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.