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 Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 4,257 posts (12,366 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 8 Pathfinder Society characters. 21 aliases.


1 to 50 of 420 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If Starfinder sells well, perhaps we'll get one, maybe in the Campaign Setting line, to help bridge the two...

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Snowblind wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
The utter lack of scaling on these features was a deliberate design choice - it's a feature, not a bug. 3.5 wizards and sorcerers spend a ridiculous portion of their first 3-4 levels as lousy crossbowmen rather than actual magic users. These class features were designed to change that, give low-level arcanists something to do in combat that made them still feel like magicians without actually powering them up beyond level 5 or so, where they did not and do not need the help. It's planned obsolescence to avoid widening the caster/martial divide even worse than it already is.
This line of thought is sunk by the fact that there are some features which are balls to the wall amazing from levels one to twenty. Why is stuff like a ray dealing 1d6 + 1/2 levels competing with +1 initiative/2 levels, a familiar, at will elemental damage swapping, swift action teleportation and the ability to circumvent truth magic? Even worse, those really good level 1 abilities are more often than not grouped up with other options that are also amazing.

It's not a "line of thought," it was the explicit reason given by Jason Bulmahn during the PFRPG playtest. The fact that not all of them actually balance doesn't change the fact that that's why they exist and don't scale.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The utter lack of scaling on these features was a deliberate design choice - it's a feature, not a bug. 3.5 wizards and sorcerers spend a ridiculous portion of their first 3-4 levels as lousy crossbowmen rather than actual magic users. These class features were designed to change that, give low-level arcanists something to do in combat that made them still feel like magicians without actually powering them up beyond level 5 or so, where they did not and do not need the help. It's planned obsolescence to avoid widening the caster/martial divide even worse than it already is.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

...this is what watching American electoral politics from the outside is like, isn't it?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Snark aside, anytime I see anyone post about "a fighter" I want to roll my eyes hard enough to do damage to my sinuses. Fighters don't exist in the abstract. Between archetypes, continual feat expansion, new class abilities and so on, you can't say anything about what a fighter is or what he can do until the actual character is sitting on the table in front of you.

For example:

Cuthel wrote:
Fighters cannot fly for example. Unless you have a potion of flying, Boots of flying, a Flying carpet, Leadership feat and a flying monster companion or animal training etc. Fighter cannot go invisible, unless he has a ring or potion.

Except that there are feats and archetypes that permit fighters to both fly and turn invisible. And expand their skills/rank, get the equivalent of a good Will or Reflex save, become immune to mind-affecting effects, and so on, and so on, and so on. My next fighter character will, by 8th level, be able to basically ignore displacement and mirror image at will, thanks to feats. "The fighter" is now as much a Schroedinger's creature as the wizard is, but somehow the fighter seems to always *not* have the things he might want whenever someone talks about him...

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My current Pathfinder Society fighter 5/student of war 2 has the following total skill modifiers, which are (except for a +2 bonus for masterwork thieves' tools and his armor check penalty) solely the result of skill ranks and feats:

Bluff +9, Climb +6, Diplomacy +9, Disable Device +13, Knowledge (arcana) +20, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +16, Knowledge (history) +15, Knowledge (local) +22, Knowledge (nature) +15, Knowledge (planes) +20, Knowledge (religion) +20, Knowledge (other) +10, Linguistics +8, Perception +13, Survival +4

But that's cool, I know fighters have nothing to do out of combat, so I'll just be over here, making the wizard cry when we are both rolling knowledge checks.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rogar Valertis wrote:
It depends on Starfinder's ability to INCREASE the player base. I worry that Starfinder's players will just be Pathfinder's players for the most part, and they will decrease the amount of product they buy for PF in order to accomodate the new game. In this scenario (one I hope will not become reality) Starfinder will be successful at the expense of the older game, more or less what happened with Wharhammer Fantasy and Warhammer 40k (after a fashion).

The biggest defense built into the plan against this outcome is the scale of Starfinder's initial release. Another set of APs and one hardback a year isn't likely to be a bank-breaking investment for most gamers. WHF and WH40K were each released as full lines, with competing rulebooks and so on. I don't see the same thing happening here.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
They could just give us a pilot class for star/space ships and mechs.
As long as it avoid the "I can Pilot everything", yeah.

I cannot for the life of me figure out how "I can only pilot freighters" would make for a better gaming experience.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Luthorne wrote:
Waterhammer wrote:
I want to see units of measurement in metric. I like the use of (U.S.)standard measurements in Pathfinder, it seems to fit, but for a sci-fi kind of thing it's weird to not use metric. I have d20 modern/future and it always seemed strange that the game was not in metric.
I don't know if 1.524 meter steps has quite the same ring to it as 5-foot steps. Also we all know that all real science fiction should use units based off of Planck units. Obviously.

When I've bothered to make this conversion in the past, for genre reasons, I've always just declared that 5 ft = 2 meters for conversion purposes. Humans can move 12m (6 squares) per move action, dwarves 8m, etc. It's close enough for government work.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hmmm...

Soldier, engineer, adept, vanguard, sentinel, infiltrator.

That ought to cover it nicely.

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Current Starfinder headcanon: in the bowels of Absalom Station, in a dizzying labyrinth of tunnels and sealed tubes, a warren of underworld scum, hardscrabble refugees and nameless ne'er-do-wells has built a small community beneath the water reclamation system and the station's hydroponics labs. Thanks to the perpetual leaks and condesation on every surface, this area is known as the Puddles.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

...

Touche.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

One thing I keep coming back to is how stat dependency will have to change for Starfinder. d20 and its variants assume melee combat as a baseline - monsters hit you with claws and teeth, you hit them with sword and shield. Future tech turns that assumption on its head. Space fantasy places what would be classed humanoids squarely in the driver's seat as far as opponents go, and both sides spend way more time shooting at each other than stabbing one another. Melee combat obviously does happen, but in the words of one who has seen things from one side of the galaxy to another, "ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side."

The SF design has to approach combat from the starting assumption that fights will be at range. We need more focus on how cover works, how much damage ranged weapons should do, and how semi-auto and full-auto weapons will change how many attacks a typical combatant is likely to get. Right now, the semi-auto feature on some blasters in the Tech Manual gives you a free Rapid Shot, and then another additional shot if you have Rapid Shot. If we assume baseline blasters will be priced at costs that make them feasible for beginning level characters (which seems really necessary), we're looking at potentially 3 ranged touch attacks, all made at the highest Dex bonus a PC can manage, because it benefits both attack bonus and touch AC.

I know there's not really a question in all that, I was just wondering if you, Owen, or any others of the fine Paizo team had any thoughts about it.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:

My first question is, how long ago did Golarion vanish? Is it within the lifespan of anything current?

Given that immortality is a thing in Pathfinder, I'm betting it is. However, it won't matter: there's a significant swath of time missing from basically the entire universe (no records, no memories, etc.), during which period Golarion vanished. It isn't even known how long the gap of missing time is.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't get the sturm und drang over brawling armor. A set of +1 brawling armor and an amulet of mighty fists +1 together are 20K, and you're getting the same +3 to attack and damage that you'd be getting with a +3 weapon that's 18K. Upgrading to a +2 amulet puts your total cost at 32K, which is exactly what a +4 weapon will cost you. It's still the best deal in the game for unarmed attack and damage, and self-evidently way too cheap before.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The guy in the donut shop after they were forced to flee from the observatory. First he thinks Wilkes is harassing her, and when he realizes they're out in public together, he starts treating her like garbage too.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

To be perfectly honest, the auttaine, chlorvians and zvarr would all be pretty easy fits into Golarion without needing much updating. The proximity of the Worldwound to Numeria makes coming up with a background for the auttaine extremely easy to do, the chlorvians could be from any large forested or jungle area from the Mierani to the Mwangi, and the zvarr are basically dragon-people, so you can pretty much put them wherever you want.

The tretharri are a bit harder, because I don't know how you avoid linking them to Akiton and the Shobhad, but maybe there is a Mwangi enclave not far from the Doorway to the Red Star?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am more than a bit fond of the balanced medium armor special ability. Enhancement bonuses to saves are surprisingly rare, and I can easily see trading out a few points of AC for a boost against an important Will save.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The Worldwound Incursion remains my single favorite AP installment of all time, and Chronicle of the Righteous is top-five in my favorite campaign setting books for any game system I know. Amber Scott has more talent in her left big toe than most of us accumulate in an entire lifetime.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LuniasM wrote:
a Long Math Explanation

You should double check your numbers, my friend. With monstrous physique II and heroism up with the other stats you listed, the total attack bonus would be:

7 (BAB) + 9 (Dex) + 5 (weapon) + 1 (Weapon Focus) + 1 (size) + 2 (heroism) + 1 (ioun stone) = +26/+21, or +22/+22/+17 with Spell Combat (for some touch spell) and Power Attack. Assuming the extra +1 bonus went into keen and we're talking about a Fencing Grace or Dervish Dance build, that's a total DPR of 61.29.

Liberty's Edge **

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Golarion drow are deep indigo, which is not a human color variation. Playing a character with brown or black skin is not the same as reskinning to look like a drow.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Since I think we all know what RAI is, the question is simply, "Does the sentence allow you to parse it in a way that makes it work the way we know it's supposed to?" The answer is yes: by saying the archer "can deliver," it is granting permission to do so. It's not broken.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Such a long way from those early cave raptor days... Leveling up is kind of awesome.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lilith wrote:
Quinn x Aric. Callin' it now.

I propose "Vigilator" for this ship name.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Piccolo wrote:
swoosh wrote:
Piccolo wrote:
Oh, and the premise of this thread is the silliest thing that I have ever seen in this forum, hands down.

Straight swords are extremely common in martial arts fiction, yet the premiere martial artist class in Pathfinder cannot functionally use any straight sword.

Doesn't seem that silly.

It is when you consider that in no edition of D&D since 1977 has the monk ever been allowed to use a longsword.

In D&D 3.5, monks using longswords was an explicit feature of their flagship setting. It did require one feat to accomplish, but that was it.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm waking up to ash and dust
I wipe my brow and I sweat my rust
I'm breathing in the chemicals
I'm breaking in, shaping up
Checking out on the prison bus
This is it, the apocalypse

Liberty's Edge

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

"CITIZEN GOSS! YOU HAVE FAILED THIS NATION!"

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rob Godfrey wrote:
can a Rondelero Swashbuckler use slashing grace? I mean does the buckler 'occupy the hand'? If so it seems a twf focused archetype would suffer.

Bucklers do not, in fact, "occupy the hand" for the purposes of Slashing Grace.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Child of AnA is the "arcane paladin" people have asked for off and on since before Pathfinder even came out.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The penalties from both Rapid Shot and spell combat apply to all your attacks in a given round. So any series of attacks that involve both Rapid Shot and spell combat will be at +6 across the board.

You can't get more than one attack on a turn where you use ranged spellstrike without also using spell combat, so there's no way to only use Rapid Shot and ranged spellstrike just by themselves.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm really not talking about Rule 0, no matter how much you might want to keep throwing up that strawman.

It comes down to one extremely simple point:

There are no rules for how NPCs gain levels or classes (outside of Leadership). None. No matter what method is involved, it is a house rule. Moreover, retraining is solely for PCs. (The retraining rules are written in the second person. NPCs are always referred to in the third person. PCs are always referred to in the second. That's a fundamental style guide rule.) You cannot point to "hard rules" for how easy or difficult it is to gain levels in any class for any non-cohort NPC, because they simply do not exist.

The only characters that have a chance to "break" a tech-level setting in a given campaign are the PCs, unless the GM decides that one or more NPCs are going to, and then they are going to do it regardless.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Heretek wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
Though I've not heard anybody claim that it's always better than a regual Investigator (unlike some other classes and archtypes).
It is though.

I'll go even further, actually. I think you need a pretty good and specific reason to make an investigator who is not an empiricist.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:


You're making the incorrect assumption that a wizard has to know WHY it works. Nope. He has to know HOW. If he knows HOW...he can cast.

The failure in this argument, Ael, is that you're also making an assumption here. The rules are completely silent on what is actually involved with learning to cast. They don't stipulate whether one could (as you suggested earlier) just rote-learn a single cantrip or if a thorough groundwork of magical theory is in fact required to cast even a 0-level spell. Easy or hard, it's GM fiat either way, because the rules are silent on the matter.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Krensky wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
On the bright side, none of them have turned you to crumbly stone stuff either.
They wouldn't.

Yeah, Bobbi expositioned that the human-petrifying metal was insoluble and sank to the bottom, while the Terrigen compound dissolved in the water and was absorbed by the sealife.

Krensky wrote:

Well...

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
Does anyone feel like going back through the last couple of Season 2 episodes to figure out who was in the room with it when it turned liquid before?
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
The SCOTUS made an admittedly unpopular decision, but that's their job, and one of the basic principles for the past two hundred years in the United States is that when a court, especially the SCOTUS, makes a decision you disagree with, the decision is still made and still binding.

See also: Bush vs Gore, Citizens United vs FEC.

Everyone remember the armed mob that stormed the White House to throw Bush out after the SCOTUS overreach in 2000? No?

You do realize that this is an argument for MORE mob decision making right? :)

No. It's really really not.

It's an argument for recognizing that the system is more than the individual acts of the current government or sitting justices. That the system, however flawed and imperfect it is or can be made to be, still remains just about the best version of a government we as a species have managed to put together - and that to try to toss it aside because one instance of it did something you don't approve of is to be fundamentally, even treasonously un-American.

In the short term, American republican democracy can be volatile, can be petty and cruel and deeply unfair. But in the long term, it has repeatedly proven itself capable of recognizing and addressing those flaws, as well as trying to build in safeguards against them happening again. But that only works if you give it time to work, for the consensus to build against those flaws. Once it does, though, it sticks... and we're generally a better people for it.

Toss that aside, and we lose the system. The real reason the American system of government survived the Revolution without becoming, say, 1790s France was that we had a rather miraculous collection of elites who believed in the system long enough to let it work, for the consensus to build around the system itself. Without that, you get guillotines. Or Ft Sumter.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
The SCOTUS made an admittedly unpopular decision, but that's their job, and one of the basic principles for the past two hundred years in the United States is that when a court, especially the SCOTUS, makes a decision you disagree with, the decision is still made and still binding.

See also: Bush vs Gore, Citizens United vs FEC.

Everyone remember the armed mob that stormed the White House to throw Bush out after the SCOTUS overreach in 2000? No?

Liberty's Edge

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Two issues here:

First of all, assuming she did in fact take the oath of office as described in the Kentucky constitution (a fun read - makes you wonder why everyone was busy shooting one another back then), she has already violated an oath she swore to God - i.e., to faithfully execute her office "according to law." Her "Heaven or Hell" choice has already passed.

Second of all, the paperwork she's supposed to sign does not endorse or even permit any marriage to take place. It merely certifies that the couple in question has met the legal requirements of Kentucky law to become married. So her "religious freedom" is not being burdened - she is not required to endorse the marriage in any way. It's not compelled speech, and she's not saying she likes it; she's checking a box that basically says, "old enough, not already married, paid the fee." That's it. The reason her First Amendment defenses keep getting shot down is that they simply don't apply here.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm trying to figure out how to say this gently, Rynjin.

They did.

Weapon cords now offer precisely the effect they were originally intended to at a cost that is in line with the benefit they offer.

I get that you don't like that. It's still a fact.

[EDIT: And no, this is not me kissing Paizo's ass. I've actually thought it was the right call for awhile.]

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The same logic that requires only things called out as ranged "weapons" would mean that we literally cannot calculate the attack bonus for any ranged attack that is not labeled as a ranged "weapon," because the rule for calculating that attack bonus uses the same language:

The PRD wrote:

With a ranged weapon, your attack bonus is the following:

Base attack bonus + Dexterity modifier + size modifier + range penalty

So I think we're over-parsing here as far as distinctions between what is and is not a a ranged weapon.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Dervish Dance is significantly less restrictive about the off-hand than Slashing Grace is. There's no reasonable way to get from "carrying a weapon or a shield" to spell combat.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DM Beckett wrote:
Its also worth noting that a Buckler works fine for Dervish Dance.

That's an awful lot of wiggling you're trying to fit through the word "carrying." I wouldn't expect that interpretation to fly at most tables.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am also very pleased to have gotten this for free. Your customer service and class remain top-notch.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Could just switch to fighter and start accumulating static bonuses to overcome the damage loss.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I was more hoping one of us was going to have to wear a dress for a disguise, on account of tactics, and have the opportunity to tell the pig guys, "Leave us alone or I swear by my pretty floral bonnet I will end you."

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Samy wrote:
Lemoncherry Candyapple wrote:
Awhile ago, I read a post here about a woman who was a new player to gaming, and so her concept was that she was a woman who was always told the whole 'barefoot and pregnant is all you are good for' shtick, but that she fought hard and rose above it to be an adventurer. The GM was like "uhh... that won't work... Golarion isn't like that"

This is an interesting sidetrack to me personally, because (*for me*) one of the most empowering ways to feel social justice is to combat injustice. But when that injustice doesn't exist, at least on-screen, it's sort of anticlimactic. I mean it's cool and all to have a world where everyone is equal, but at times, I'd like scenes where the bad guy is like, "woman, shut up!" and I shoot them in the head.

Of course, ultimately it comes down to what is fun for your table, and I usually give up on my desires to feel those sorts of scenes so the other people at the table can feel more comfortable.

You're right, those sorts of scenes should be built at the table level, where the GM knows his/her group and knows what they've come to do. For some groups, "I have a broadsword and a serious beef with the patriarchy" is exactly the escapism they're looking for; for others, it's more like "I have to put up with this **** all day in my 9-to-5, the last thing I want to deal with is the same thing in my fantasy." YMMV.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Really like the look of all four races. :D And I was already thinking about a tretharri monk before I even knew what the tretharri were...!

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mr. Bubbles wrote:
Liz Courts wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
How does one show identification as a man for a stereotypically male dominated profession like an adventurer where acting like "just one of the boys" is almost the norm?
Why are you making the assumption that adventuring is a male-dominated profession?
Why are you assuming it isn't?

...she's not. That would involve saying something like, "Adventuring is not a male-dominated profession."

Liberty's Edge **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Meligaster's PFS pregen is N, even though he's actually NE. Bumping Seltyiel "up" a notch the same way would just be following precedent.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

One of my friends and I were discussing whether there needed to be a PC-level "noble" class, sort of an upgraded aristocrat. My position was no, because we already had one. Charismatic, widely educated on many topics, capable of giving inspiring speeches to his allies, trained in swordplay, and with a smattering of useful magics he learned at the well-heeled academy he attended? Yeah, we can do that. Just cross out the word "bard" at the top of the page, write "noble" in its place, and bingo! All done.

Liberty's Edge **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The iconics for OA were specifically designed to showcase a wider range of humanity than they have typically done before, which is why we have a young human, an elderly human and an overweight human among them this time.

1 to 50 of 420 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.