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

Shisumo's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 4,042 posts (12,151 including aliases). 1 review. 1 list. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters. 21 aliases.


1 to 50 of 354 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
KahnyaGnorc wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

There really isn't a GOOD reason :P

Plenty of legitimate reasons, but none I'd classify as good.

"They don't fit with the story I want to tell" is about as good as they come.
Depends on the fluff wrapping around the mechanics, really.

Having to rewrite the fluff of a system to make it work with the story you want to tell is basically indistinguishable from "it doesn't work with the story I want to tell" for my purposes.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:

There really isn't a GOOD reason :P

Plenty of legitimate reasons, but none I'd classify as good.

"They don't fit with the story I want to tell" is about as good as they come.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

You went there.

Boo, Erik. Boo.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

(To clarify: this story is smurfing amazing and it does absolutely nothing to curtail my need for a fully-fledged Vudra sourcebook - pretty much exactly the opposite, really)

Liberty's Edge

14 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

WHERE IS OUR VUDRA BOOK

GIVE IT TO MEEEEEE

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

As a guy playing someone with a masked identity (masked avenger swashbuckler) in Iron Gods right now, I can say with some authority that it neither requires taking over the campaign nor foisting an alternate identity on the rest of the group. It requires a certain amount of flexibility on the part of the player and some thought beforehand on why the PC would be interested in traveling with the rest of the party, but that's a good thing to do with any character, so I don't feel like it's demanding too much.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Legend lore tells us that characters of level 11 or above are "legendary," which is generally the point at which I start allowing Knowledge (local) rolls to know "specifics" of character's build (class, approximate level, noteworthy class abilities); this requires a roll against a DC of 15 ("particularly rare" creature) + CR, which is usually class level for PCs and class level -1 for NPCs, with better rolls granting more info as usual. Characters below that level can be recognized in their home communities with a Knowledge (local) roll, DC 15 + the community's Society modifier, but success grants only a name and a basic rep, nothing more.

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

I often make a point of not avoiding them, if the opponent in question has no reason to know how the PC fights. I think it adds to the verisimilitude, if bad guys waste actions or attacks sometimes, the same way PCs sometimes do. (And do they ever... I remember once running a game for several players I didn't know very well. They were ambushed by two sorcerers, one of whom was an elf. One of the PCs, playing a slumber witch, announced she would use her hex on the elf. I stared, then finally asked, "Are you sure?" And she said yes, and the elf of course ignored the hex because it was an elf. Players, man, I tell ya...) If PCs sometimes get overconfident, make mistakes or simply take reasonable-seeming actions that turn out to be bad ideas because of things they couldn't know, I don't see why NPCs wouldn't do the same things sometimes.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

"In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is."

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Alexander Augunas wrote:

Is it crazy enough to work? And if so, what should my vigilante identity's name be?

I kinda think you're obligated to go with El Zorro, man.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Awesome. Redemption stories are my favorite.

Liberty's Edge **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
GM Lamplighter wrote:

The idea that it rarely causes problems is frankly GM bias. Say a player delays - something that happens in almost every game I've ever been involved in. By moving all the goblins (or whatever) first and then rolling all of their attacks, you prevent the player from being able to come off delay after a goblin's attack or to react to the situation, which is what delay is for in the first place.

That's a completely different issue. If the monsters start to move and there's a delaying player, then ignoring that player's desire to step in is definitely a problem - but not one caused by grouping monsters together. That's a GM who's not paying attention to her players, and has nothing to do with the initiative issue; it'd be a problem regardless.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Deadkitten wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Barachiel Shina wrote:
They could simply have it where if you use an ability in social mode there is a chance of being found out. It could be a skill check against a DC by the viewer that rises higher as the Vigilante levels up, making it clear the character is gaining better experience at hiding it or misleading others. Success wouldn't mean you are found out, just that the viewer will have reason to believe there's more to you, and possibly a connection, to the "alter ego."
Yeah, this is one of the ideas we've been bandying around. We have several exciting potential ideas moving forward, but this is one of my favorites.
I'm just gonna go ahead and say, you should not have a class feature that is HARDER to use as you increase in level. If anything you should be getting better at it.

I think Barachiel is saying that it gets harder for others to ID you, not for you to hide.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Chess Pwn's got it. We're making sure we can't break (brake?) the combat side of the class, so they've only given us the combat pieces to work on.

That said, I think it would incredibly cool if each talent choice actually gave you two talent choices - one social, one vigilante - that switch off as you swap personas. There's no sign of that in the playtest at the moment (and why would there be, since we have no social talents to playtest) but I think that might make the identity make a great deal more impact on the character.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:

So the Vigilante by its very nature forces:

-The campaign to be a heavily social campaign

...which is why it's in the social campaign sourcebook.

Rynjin wrote:
-The campaign to be primarily set in a single city.

Not in the slightest. In the worst case scenario - a highly-mobile campaign, where the PCs rarely stop anywhere for more than a day or two - he loses one of his class features. Otherwise, when he's got time, he can move his renown around while the wizard is crafting.

Rynjin wrote:
-The campaign to almost never have social situations devolve into...anything else.

...because he's suddenly without his martial weapon proficiency and BAB? His light or medium armor?

Are fighters not allowed to get ambushed at night unless they have a way to sleep in armor?

Rynjin wrote:

But wait! Now we have a choice:

-The rest of the characters in the party to hang around the Vigilante's social persona in everything he does.

or

-The Vigilante to be in his own little solo game apart from everyone else.

Setting aside the issue that "social encounters" tend to be solo encounters for the party face regardless, how the party handles their vigilante companion is likely to vary significantly from vigilante to vigilante; it's certainly not something that the game forces on us. Even beyond the false dilemma, the idea that the vigilante persona and the social persona know each other and associate with the same set of people is actually incredibly common in the source material (is Seoni in love with Miles Castle, the wealthy patron of the party, or with the dashing avenger Whiplash who leads their dungeon explorations? Oh, if only she knew they were the same man!), so I don't really understand why "the partying [hanging] around the vigilante's social persona" is such a terrible thing.

Rynjin wrote:

And you don't see anything wrong with this?

...Not so far, no.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:
Kvantum wrote:
FaoladhSeirēn wrote:
I love the diversity Paizo brings to it's iconics! Body diversity can be added to that list now. Keep up the awesomeness!
Except for overweight female. But there is the upcoming Vigilante. A very odd choice, perhaps, but maybe going so radically against type would work.

Pronouns in the Vigilante playtest are male, so this is a no go.

Of course, "woman who disguises herself as a man" is a pretty old trope in such literature.

The concept I came up with from the instant I saw the playtest uses that exact trope, in fact.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Imbicatus wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
There are a lot of fun city-based campaign areas: Sigil, Greyhawk, Waterdeep, Absalom, Madripoor, Sanctuary, Lankhmar, Adrilankha, etc.
All of which have populations far too large for renown to work on. Even the smallest district of any of those cities has a population above 200.

For all that I am enjoying the vigilante so far, I really do think that the renown sizes are too small. It's especially weird that the sizes only really seem to matter for the social persona - "within miles equal to level" on the Intimidate side means you'll encompass an entire metropolis by 3rd or 4th level, while your social is still limited to something like a single city block.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Arcanemuses wrote:
My only concern is the warlock specialization. Will it eclipse the magus class because it has a more powerful spell list?

Pretty sure not even a little.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

It occurs to me that Indiana Jones/Dr Henry Jones, Jr might well qualify as a vigilante - and in so doing provide a possible archetype for what an "adventuring" vigilante might do in a traditional Pathfinder game. Just as the mild-mannered and somewhat soft-spoken archeology professor occasionally wanders off and saves the world from spirit-nuke-possessing Nazis (using a pseudonym to do it, even!), the adventuring vigilante might simply be someone who doesn't adventure "full time" for some reason, but nonetheless can grab his towel and be prepared for trouble when he needs to...

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Is there some reason why we don't have a psychic vigilante? I seriously feel like a vigilante class that can't give me a real close approximation of The Shadow, in the wake of Occult Adventures in particular, has missed the mark.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
Given that such ownership was an explicit selling point of the series,
Of your story, not of the freaking intellectual property!

Which, since I'm still playing the game, isn't over yet.

Quote:
I don't have to understand any such thing. I may not own the entire Mass Effect universe, but I do own my particular permutation of it.
Scott Betts wrote:
Quote:
Yes, but we're not talking about all the choices players made in previous titles. We're talking about one choice with three relevant options. I really don't see how that is an unbearable set of writing constraints.
All three choices were written to be fundamentally universe-altering. Destroy removes the Reapers and all AI from the galaxy, removing all possibility of the cycle restarting and wiping out at least two intelligent races. Control puts what is essentially an all-powerful force in the hands of (arguably) the most noble mind in the galaxy, making any kind of widespread conflict fundamentally implausible. Synthesis dramatically alters the makeup of every creature in the galaxy, both in terms of how they work and their physical appearance, and makes the very concept of artificial intelligence redundant/meaningless.

The canon-pedant in me requires that I point out you've got the Destroy ending exactly backwards. It doesn't prevent the cycle from restarting, it guarantees it. And the changes are fundamentally galaxy-altering, not universe-altering, which is almost certainly why the story is taking us to a different galaxy.

Scott Betts wrote:
These are enormous changes, any of which by themselves could define the flavor of an entire fictional universe. It isn't reasonable to try to write and produce the same video game story set in all three of these. It certainly isn't reasonable to act like it's owed to you.

I appreciate your assessment of my rationality, Scott, but to be perfectly blunt, hogwash. I could write around the differences in the endings in probably dozens of different ways, depending on what kind of story I wanted to tell. An example:

Our hero, Commander Vaquero, is exploring his/her ship during the game's intro sequence. He/she encounters the ship's engineer, Lt. Techie, in the engineering room.

Cmdr. Vaquero: Tell me about the Transit Drive, Techie.
Lt. Techie: Of course, Commander. In the aftermath of the Reaper War, engineers and scientists from across the galaxy began studying the Reaper's remains to gain new insights into their technology. This allowed us to unlock entirely new applications of the mass effect...
- or -
Lt. Techie: Of course, Commander. After the Reapers were transformed into the Shepherds at the end of the war, they began working with engineers and scientists from across the galaxy to reveal new insights into their technology. This allowed us to unlock entirely new applications of the mass effect...
- or -
Lt. Techie: Of course, Commander. In the aftermath of the Synthesis, engineers and scientists from across the galaxy began working with Reapers to gain new insights into their technology. This allowed us to unlock entirely new applications of the mass effect...

The synthesis physical changes require, at most, an extra set of skins be designed for the character models, and that only if they don't handwave it away with a line about how "the physical appearance changes were a temportary aftereffect of the Synthesis Wave" or something.

If this is a problem I can solve in 30 seconds, I'm pretty sure Bioware can manage it too.

Scott Betts wrote:
Of course, none of this may end up mattering if the "Backup Plan" theory holds up. If the game is told from the standpoint of someone who left before the Crucible was turned on, and if Andromeda was immune to its effects, they could choose to simply ignore the endings entirely.

And frankly, that would be spiffy-keen with me. I'm not demanding that they include my choices; I want them to avoid invalidating them. That's seriously not that hard a task.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
*Yes, I wiped out the quarians on my first playthrough. That playthrough was, for various irrelevant reasons, one that did not have an imported game save, so someone had to bite it, and only one species was acting as an unrelenting aggressor.

I know, I know, it's not as if the Geth wiped out billions of Quarians in the Morning War. They are pure as the driven snow and totally, completely innocent in the whole thing and still baffled as to how all those dead Quarians suddenly appeared around them.

It's BS. BioWare chose to tell a really one-sided story to make the Geth look good. Doesn't mean that there are not unreasonable Quarians (oh, are there ever), but how the story was told was a smear job by BioWare, worthy of the Washington press corps.

The key word there is "unrelenting." The Morning War may or may not have had fault on both sides, but the undeniable facts are that the geth stopped fighting and the quarians didn't. This is especially true in the actual scene where you have to make the choice, because Shepard and Tali both warn Gerrel that they are about to commit auto-genocide-by-geth if they keep up the attack, but none of the quarian ships break off - even when they start getting blown thoroughly out of the sky.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
You need to understand that just because you chose to partake in a particular kind of entertainment doesn't mean that you own the creative product wrapped around it.

Given that such ownership was an explicit selling point of the series, I don't have to understand any such thing. I may not own the entire Mass Effect universe, but I do own my particular permutation of it. One of the most important pieces of the pitch Bioware offered us was that our Cmdr Shepard was unique and important, the driving force and decision maker for essentially the entire galaxy. Stripping that away is breaking the promise they made to me, and badly damaging the emotional investment I have in their world.

Scott Betts wrote:
At a certain point, it becomes impossible to account for all the choices given to players in previous titles - as choices involving the same subject matter come up successively, the number of universe permutations around that subject matter increase exponentially.

Yes, but we're not talking about all the choices players made in previous titles. We're talking about one choice with three relevant options. I really don't see how that is an unbearable set of writing constraints.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Krensky wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:


It is very, very unlikely that the end of ME3 will be retconned. It is likely that one of the three endings will be considered canon. Safe money is on "Destroy", poor odds on "Control", and "Synthesis" gets a Certificate of Participation and a pat on the back.
I've got five bucks that says they import your save and modify dialogue for whichever ending you picked.

Pay up.

There won't be any save import. If there is a world state import it will be via a questionnaire.

They managed it for Dragon Age. Not sure why they wouldn't do the same for Mass Effect.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

This is certainly not an old war I want to refight, but I have to admit, I never felt like my choices "didn't matter" or that the ending was simply about RGB. The only thing that was missing from my first playthrough was the knowledge of what happened next - there was a climax for certain, but almost nothing in denouement. I cured the genophage; how does that impact the krogan in the aftermath of the war? I decided that the quarians would never be able to let the war end*; where does that leave the geth in a world where the Reapers have been tamed and repurposed? I knew my choices had made a difference, I just wanted them to go ahead and show me what those differences were. Which the Extended Cut nicely provided. End of issue, as far as I was concerned.

On the other hand, if they choose a canon ending - and most especially if it's Destroy - that will feel like agency being stripped away and my choices didn't matter. Whether it would be enough to make me not buy it and play, I really doubt, but it would nonetheless piss me off.

*Yes, I wiped out the quarians on my first playthrough. That playthrough was, for various irrelevant reasons, one that did not have an imported game save, so someone had to bite it, and only one species was acting as an unrelenting aggressor.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Bluenose wrote:
So your character becomes a collection of magic items with a Leadership feat that gives them a human cohort to carry them to where they might be useful.

...which is to say, he's a character in some version of 3rd ed d20.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:


It is very, very unlikely that the end of ME3 will be retconned. It is likely that one of the three endings will be considered canon. Safe money is on "Destroy", poor odds on "Control", and "Synthesis" gets a Certificate of Participation and a pat on the back.

I've got five bucks that says they import your save and modify dialogue for whichever ending you picked.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Rednal wrote:
Part of me suspects they're going to have a tier for creating iconic characters, allowing interested backers to have a hand in it. XD Either way, we'll start finding out soon enough!

Looks like you're right, but I'm not sure how to go about doing it (or whether it's worth the $150 to me - although I really am pretty tempted).

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Kevin Mack wrote:
So will this Ap have any sort of iconics made for it?

I'm seriously hoping we get some Legendary Planet Heroes alongside the adventure path itself, and that those characters are the iconics for the AP's art...

That might be too much to ask, but a guy can dream, can't he?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

5th level wizard casts fly.

What do I win?

Liberty's Edge **

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

I can't provide any quantifiable numbers, but I can personally attest that I absolutely love the inclusion of the monster statblocks in the module packet; it makes things much, much easier to handle, especially when running cold.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

I hope you make it that far. May the Amber Die show you favor, and your heroes find their end in glory!

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Nefreet, without the grid, what's your justification for requiring movement in 5 ft increments?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
TOZ wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Which, honestly, more people really should be clicking on.
I can only click so many times! :(

I refuse to click on the FAQ button for a "dispute" that consists of (one person) vs (everyone else).

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Tectorman wrote:
Legalistic: Source?

Blood of Fiends, I believe.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
First World Bard wrote:

Mark,

Get a chance to play the WotR card game set yet? If so, any thoughts?

After I finish Jade Regent, WotR is probably the next AP I run, and so Linda doesn't want to play it for spoiler reasons.

I'm currently running WotR, but two of my players can't be there one week each month, so I've decided we're going to play WotR ACG on those days to keep the feel of the game going. We'll see how it goes!

Liberty's Edge

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Please for the love of all that is good and decent, let's not go there.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

The Shoanti have a pretty heavy Native tribes vibe going on.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
knightnday wrote:

They also aren't done yet. There are portions of the world, and the gods and people therein, that haven't been touched on.

Not everything is going to be there for everyone right off the bat; that doesn't mean that they are never going to follow up.

Which is all fine and dandy, but you may want to actually look up "inclusiveness", and reconsider just how long Pathfinder/Golarion has ostensibly be in existence. It' either a "pick and choose" setting or a "a little bit for everyone" setting. Can't be both, and by it's very nature, Golarion is not a "a little bit for everyone" setting.

Well, if your criteria really are

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
It has a multitude of very important characters, ranging from black to white to asian to "green" and "purple". It presented strong and independent women, and men, and a broad range of motivations and personalities. Unlike Pathfinder, it didn't shriek in fear at including everyone, so there are things like Judeo-Christianity in there, or atheism, native americans, blacks, interracialism, heroes (and villains) of all sorts.

then I guess I'm still waiting for your argument, since Golarion has pretty much all of that.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

The elves only wish they were as cool as the Old Mage. Jatembe would beat the Winter Council like the spoiled whiny brats they are.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

I don't know if you could fix Serpent's Skull's problems, but it would be noble of you to try - and would be worth at least a few PDF sales to me, at any rate.

I'd be curious to see what you might do with Rise of the Runelords. It's classic - but is it untouchable?

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Zaister wrote:
So, seven parts. Does that mean six plus the prequel? Or seven parts and a prequel on top?

The latter.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

...and other butchers' aprons.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

The Order's PDF has some info on the builds each player used for their PC.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Consider the Virtuous Creed (Mercy) feat, since it's all but explicit in your character idea anyway and you might well find the benefit useful.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Sidebar: This was a contentious and vocal debate, but I think it's worth congratulating everybody for getting the question FAQ'd as quickly as we did, and with minimal need for forum moderation, especially as passionate as the debate was. Good work, folks.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Joe Hex wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
Once upon a time, I ran a Harrow reading in a PbP on these boards, and the coolest thing about it was that I actually did the reading, as I own the deck. I had the PCs choose their role cards and then laid out the spread - and the awesome thing was, I was able to use what I knew of the characters and the storyline to make the cards they chose and I laid out work very, very well. Harrow, like tarot itself, works very well as a kind of Rorschach blot, to pull out things you're already looking for; done with intention, you can get a great storytelling moment out of them.

Sounds great!

Would you advise, for, or against, using either a Preform (Harrow), or Profession (Fortune Telling)- skill check, and use the result as a means of how clear, or vague the results are?

(I really hope Occult Adventures has a bit on this, since it's a classic occult motif!)

Approached solely from my own perspective here...

My feeling on Profession (fortune teller) is that it's how you make money as a Harrower, reading the cards in a way that gets people to pay you for the privilege. It's sideshow trickery, a combination of good Perform (oratory) and Sense Motive skills. Nothing wrong with it, if that's your gig, but not a good way to represent an actual connection with supernatural forces.

A true Harrow reading itself should actually be a rare thing, especially without divination spells (like harrow) in the mix. If you're playing in Golarion, that's triply true, as it's the Age of Lost Omens. Regardless, though, "seers" that can actually see something are the sort of thing I would only have happen a few times in a given storyline or campaign, and their readings should always, always be open to interpretation and reinterpretation as the storyline unfolds.

If you want safe, reliable divinations, there are spells for that, and pretty basic rules to connect them to Harrowing. The cards should serve as largely a thematic element, relying as much or more on the dramatic sense of the player or the GM as on any mechanics.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Once upon a time, I ran a Harrow reading in a PbP on these boards, and the coolest thing about it was that I actually did the reading, as I own the deck. I had the PCs choose their role cards and then laid out the spread - and the awesome thing was, I was able to use what I knew of the characters and the storyline to make the cards they chose and I laid out work very, very well. Harrow, like tarot itself, works very well as a kind of Rorschach blot, to pull out things you're already looking for; done with intention, you can get a great storytelling moment out of them.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Muad'Dib wrote:

The show looks like the Black Widow Rom-Com skit SN did a few weeks back.

The difference is that the skit played the trope straight, and the badass woman warrior got reduced to the giggling lovestruck romantic object by falling in love with a "bad boy" and then her "best friend."

This time, the giggling lovestruck romantic object gets raised into a badass woman warrior, by falling in love with herself as a superhero.

Subverted tropes are the best tropes.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
-In what universe is Jimmy Olsen cool.

This one, apparently, and I'm so very okay with it. I find goofy/useless comic sidekicks that never grow completely obnoxious.

It took Xander Harris three seasons to grow out of being the Zeppo. Jimmy Olsen's had 75 years. It's about damn time.

1 to 50 of 354 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 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.