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

Sissyl's page

7,957 posts (8,873 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 8 aliases.


1 to 50 of 7,957 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Thejeff: The problem of basing it off economic need is that it becomes an economic drain on the person in question. Take the hemophiliac. Should he be forced to spend every dollar he might ever get his hands on to survive, with the state only going in when he absolutely can't survive without help? Is it reasonable that a poorer hemophiliac should have to pay far less for the exact same treatment?

You could also have a hat with a very long tube where you could keep the money.

thejeff wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Doesn't seem like a problem to you guys that a significant part of the population has extra expenses simply to deal with the absolute basics. If there is a disparity, shouldn't this be compensated via taxes?

I'd rather we all had as few taxes as possible and everyone were able to pay for this stuff by themselves... But that's too unrealistic an expectation, so the government does have to provide free education, health care and other basic needs (sadly, the quality of public services varies quite widely from place to place).

If the only extra expenses someone has to afford is paying a bit more for bigger shoes or having to buy a second serving of fries, then that person is doing fine. The problem is when they can't afford to pay for food, potable water, electricity, health care, education, etc.

I don't mind paying more if I consume more. That's only fair. I just prefer to pay straight to the producer rather than paying the government, who then pays the producer.

Sissyl is trolling the statist liberals here, not actually thinking taxes should pay for extra food for larger people.

More generously, using a Reductio ad absurdum argument to hopefully make us realize that government shouldn't be doing so many of the things it is doing.

You know me so well, thejeff. Thank you for understanding. It's not quite the truth, however. Regarding how society should deal with different people having different needs, it is a complex issue whatever way you look at it. Thing is, BOTH views that "men should pay more for eating more food" and "you should pay the same since you're paying for a service" are quite defensible. Unless, of course, you take the approach that any different needs are the sole responsibility of the one with those needs. Hemophiliacs are an interesting case: The substances they require to survive are famously expensive, weighing in at millions per year. If you DO want the state to pay for that, you also have to decide on a point where it's not the state's business anymore, and further, you need a justification for the point chosen.

I am not quite as much of a Randian as some people here think I am. There are very legitimate areas the state should pay for, via taxes. I just find it strange that larger people get no sympathy from the liberal statists, when so many others do.

Randarak wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
He was. =) Sad thing was, Spider girl only got something like eight issues.
That's not correct. There was Spider-Girl that ran for 100 issues between 1998 and 2006 and then Amazing Spider-Girl run that went for something like 30 issues between 2006 and 2009.

Well, Sweden never got much of the Marvel lines. Anyway, it shows that it's quite possible to have Peter Parker retire.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you could know the general power of a wizard just by trivial means, and not seeing him in combat, that wizard isn't doing his job right. If you play MMOs, that's where you get the skull/red/whatever icon that says "Stay away from this one."

He was. =) Sad thing was, Spider girl only got something like eight issues.

Doesn't seem like a problem to you guys that a significant part of the population has extra expenses simply to deal with the absolute basics. If there is a disparity, shouldn't this be compensated via taxes?

Spider girl had a bit of a legendary run. Peter lost his leg in his final battle with Green goblin and retired. His daughter May had the same powers. It worked.

Lithium isn't going to be a very impressive trap. It would fizz a bit, is all. Potassium, however...

Yeah, yeah. We all know what really happened. The satanic panic of the 80s did manage to stop the spread of Satanism in the gamer scene - but the movement wasn't enough to cover the whole world. So, Australian gamers are all casting mind bondage on their fathers for more RPG books now.

ONE three-hour movie?

If lantern archons are what you use, it is quite enough to abstract them. At least until the AoE spells start flying or someone decides to whack the archons. Simply make the attacks and be done with it. For even more efficiency, colour code the dice so you can roll one d20 and the proper damage dice of a certain colour and do all of them at once.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So bigger people should just suck it up and pay more for clothes, shoes, food, etc etc etc?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Generally if I check how much my character is carrying, it turns out the backpack takes safely in excess of 1,000 lbs.

Consider this: a restaurant's expenses for the customer are the costs for meat, veggies etc, salaries for the staff, energy and insurances, the location, ad campaigns, etc. Of all these, only the food costs more for a big eater. Should men then be forced to pay a significant markup for insurance, ad campaigns and so on?

Another way to view it is that the customer pays to get fed. Is it reasonable that someone bigger should pay more for the exact same service?

Ummm... I sat down to try to build the Huge earth elemental Fighter/Druid/Stalwart Defender in this thread... just wondering where Huge elemental form came from, given that 8th level druids just get medium elemental forms?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A level 16 wizard? Well, he can't use wishes or imprisonment (yet, unless via scrolls, of course), but generally, an 11 level disparity is not something you will manage to deal with. Consider this: He knows where you are, since you have his book. All he needs to do is pop in while invisible and summon a few beasts with Summon Monster VIII when you are sleeping. If he even cares enough about you. Now, the book: he is not going to fall for explosive runes on it. It has been compromised. He has other spellbooks. How you die is merely a matter of how sadistic he is and the quality of his imagination. When depends on how important you are. If, well, if really isn't an issue. And, as was noted: Kiiiiinda rooting for him here as well.

Complete Book of Elves had a neat little story about what revenge can mean, and why rings of regeneration are not your friend.

Mackenzie Kavanaugh wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
If we're debating physiology and sex (yes, sex, not gender), then how much should women pay for their restaurant meals? Given they have a lower average weight than men and, again on average, eat less than men? Is it fair that they have to pay the same price as a man for a portion that they don't need as much of? Would it be fair that men should pay more for the same service than women (getting fed)?
Actually... the exact opposite was historically a genuine problem, where restaurants, knowing that there is an inherent variation in the size of steaks and other such food portions, would intentionally give the smaller portions to female patrons, while charging the same amount. I witnessed this happening countless times while growing up, and unlike my mother, refused to put up with it and would often complain, especially when it was clear that the portion I had received, for ordering the exact same meal as my father, brother, etc, was only 2/3 the size.

What would you consider a fair solution?

If we're debating physiology and sex (yes, sex, not gender), then how much should women pay for their restaurant meals? Given they have a lower average weight than men and, again on average, eat less than men? Is it fair that they have to pay the same price as a man for a portion that they don't need as much of? Would it be fair that men should pay more for the same service than women (getting fed)?

When you have buses with two-seat rows, the ugly method is to sit in the aisle seat with your bag in the window seat. To combat this effectively, all everyone has to do is target that bag seat for preference, even if the entire rest of the bus is empty. Always remember to say thanks when they move, too.

Again, as Aranna says, age is a good concept that would keep things fresh.

So I called Message Board Troll.

The next poster, also a resident, wishes I hadn't.

A good backstory is something that gives the GM a clue to what you want your character to be ABOUT. Most characters can be described in terms of conflicts, at least outside the gaming medium. Can a relatively powerless person succeed where the great heroes of the ages did not, merely due to his strength of character? Can a person deny the wanderlust within him and what price will he pay for not doing so? Can a wanderer accept his heritage and assume the mantle that is his? What will a prince do when given a chance to help his kingdom even if it will risk his soul? I assume all these should be relatively familiar.

But in RPGs, we get characters whose main defining trait is "I can do 1d12+567 damage when I power attack". I don't know about you, but to me it feels like a pretty big waste. I know many don't agree with me.

If you have a backstory to write, try to find a theme, a conflict. Is your character's focus on the conflict between wilderness and civilization? Is it about duty and doing good? Freedom and security? Trust and vulnerability? So long as you take care not to make that ALL he or she is, it's a good way to find a backstory that works to build off.

Ignoring rules lawyers makes them die inside? You sure? Because that solves a few issues I have neatly. :-)

Xxx must not know how to wash slaves...

Maybe Finland has bigger seats? After all, the Finns are right at the top of the average height ranking...

If I were to do it, I would work through the iconics to see what would make them more arabian in flavour. Most of the other parts to having an arabian setting would be fluff, as in cultures, laws, descriptions, and so on, or easily reskinned crunch like weapons. Generally, they would not use as heavy armours. I would suggest using the 13th age rules with some other arabian setting (Al-Qadim, Curse of the Burning Sands, Caliphate nights, etc). It wouldn't be too difficult.

Well, not quite, Tormsskull. It's okay if you want something to be important to your character. You could tell the GM so, but making a list of stuff that is okay to mess with is not. Whatever you don't set up as important to you IS fair game.

A powerful mother isn't necessarily an ally, and even if she is, you might well be roughly that power level yourself when you interact with her. As for the relationship between the mother and your character, well, such an NPC could fill many roles in a campaign. Harsh, individualistic, territorial, it would be someone quite useful. Now, the GM can never be entirely sure how you imagine her, but if you describe her well, the GM can make a decent attempt - and you would have created her together. When you do meet her in the campaign, she might have changed in some way within what you described. Say, she since adopted an orphan. What would your character think of this? Would she think of it as the mother mistreating the new disciple? Would there be jealousy that mother never treated her as kindly? Would the character have her angry feelings toward her mother pre-empted and have to deal with them? What would this mean if the mother asked her for something? Was there some other reason for the mother to adopt an orphan?

Using, even slightly changing, the backstory is something that should be done with care, but why give up an opportunity to create something good together?

But if you have to communicate about every single little detail before changing it, you are by necessity going to lose every possible sort of twist, reveal or point to doing so in the first place. So, thejeff, while communication is a good thing, it doesn't necessarily help here.

What you can do is give the GM something to work with. Put in an old comrade in arms who fell down a waterfall and disappeared, a mystery of some kind your character has gotten into touch with, some unsolved issue. Next, you put in the things that are important to you and state them as clearly as you can. Too much of this will get your backstory unused. For other things, assume the GM can do as he pleases, and hopefully you will get the best possible use out of your backstory.

Backstory is spotlight time. Honestly, so long as the GM doesn't treat it crudely, I am fine with it. A kidnapped sibling would be a good thing, if only the character is then used beyond "someone the BBEG kidnapped to get you to ...."

Thing is: The GM is in charge of the world. Your backstory is a part of your character, or at least the backstory as you understood it, but where things have gone since then is strictly GM territory. You get to say your PC was raised by a skilled potion-making woman, you don't get to keep her service in potion-production in the campaign, at least not automatically. You get to say your father had a mighty magical sword when you were young, you don't get to have that sword, at least not straight away. And so on.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, if it is the fact that nothing in your backstory can be changed, a misunderstanding of your character, reinterpreted, expanded or otherwise changed, indeed INCLUDING THINGS YOU NEVER TOLD THE GM WERE IMPORTANT TO YOU, the ONLY sane response for the GM is to avoid your backstory entirely, like the plague, and not try ANY sort of plotline connected to it. After all, any sort of idea touching on it might change something you consider sacrosanct, leading to you getting the GM to stop GMing, mid-session if necessary, right? Honestly, at that point it is probably better not to use backstory at all.

A large part of it is whether you see it as "screwing with the player".

If everyone agreed with me... There would be some changes... Oh yes...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I made an Exalted character once... A dragon blooded diplomat. She never exalted, so instead she was sent by her family to rein in her stupid but skilled warrior brother who exalted as a chosen of fire. On their first trip, the brother challenged a sleazy diplomat to single combat despite my character's warnings. She fled from the inn they were staying in, thereby severing her ties to her family, just before the inn was burnt down the night before the challenge by the challenged. Her family kept seeking her, but she fled far enough not to be found. Play started and went on for years, game time and real.

Then one day, she meets her mother. She wonders why she ran. Butbutbut... My brother died... My responsibility... Silly daughter, he was a chosen of fire. He survived and killed the would be assassin easily at the challenge.

I was gobsmacked. I never thought he would. I never once made the rather obvious connection. With this, my character's family, with a very strained relationship, became an interesting part of the campaign.

However, the GM never changed what I wrote.

I think it is important to distinguish between what the character thinks his background is and what it really is. It is right up the fantasy alley, after all: You are not the son of a pig farmer. In truth, you are the lost child of a great knight yadda yadda. I wouldn't contradict the backstory... But the backstory is a perception, not the objective truth.

The only problem, thejeff, is that there is no way from here to there. I have yet to see anything beyond censorship to solve the issue. Getting some companies to produce less will shift their market shares to others (since it apparently is profitable).

So if a ban is the only way you will get less at all, are you still going to oppose a ban?

Well, possibly. I mean, either you have a person with few obligations to their job, community, family, whatever already, i.e. someone who can go gallivanting off into the countryside to beat up lizards sleeping in basements, in which case there is a reason for them to be so unattached. Or, you start with someone who has all those attachments, at which point you need to sever the attachments before the character can run off to beat basement lizards.

Different strokes, I guess.

And it doesn't answer the question of which types of fanservice that objectify women, and who decides that?

Backstory is something between a weapon and a horrible heap of sludge, usually. Demand none as a GM, and you get NOTHING, characters that sprung into existence at the starting bar. Demand a little, and you get stuff like "I am the last prince of an elven kingdom that just fell and I saved myself by jumping through a portal to the world we play in" or "I am a frost druid from the frozen north who travelled a thousand miles to end up in a tavern at the edge of the burning desert". Demand a lot, and you get heaps of aunts, siblings, abandoned hobbies, relationships to teachers and parents, FOR EACH OF A HUNDRED OR MORE FAMILY MEMBERS.

What I want in a backstory is some kind of conflict you put some thought into, a reason for adventuring, and hopefully some relationships to one or more of the other PCs.

I have suggested it before: Dump charisma. Remove it entirely from the game, make roleplaying a non-mechanism process. Set Intelligence or Wisdom as base stat for the Cha skills, let bards and sorcerers cast off Int or Wis, clerics channel off Wisdom, and do the few other adjustments it would take.

The decrease the point buy by one sixth, so 8/12/17/21 point buy becomes the new method.

Watch everyone dump Int instead.

SotC does not deal with fighting a creature's arms or the like as separate parts. If that is what you want, it's probably not too difficult to implement. No, in SotC, you climb all the way up the colossus to a special mark, usually on the head, where a hit can kill the creature. There has been a few tries to implement this, at least one very good. Anyone know a link?

As I said, Aranna, there is nothing preventing you from starting a service for people who don't want to see such fanservice where they can look up which anime series don't contain it. Then all who want not to see it can be certain they won't. Do it yourself, market this service to the various anime syndicates, set up subscription models or marks of decency that all can follow, whatever you choose can be done just as you wish it.

TSBP is merely a CR 34 environmental hazard.

Only works if he can actually cut your throat.

Dragons... Have... scales, and they are soooo big, and breathe freakin fire! Such... muscles...

The next poster had a similar view of dragons, but it is ruined by one single flaw.

A wet forest doesn't burn. The Stolen Lands don't seem to conjure images of Australia. :-)

So, if you want a lesser forest fire, feel free. A chase sounds great, to my thinking. It is an abstraction of precisely this. Don't forget to have a bunch of bandits harassing them both in melee and with arrows. It is about killing them, so let them spend resources for a while, then have them attack. Preparing the route with traps is also an of course.

It just gets eaten by my head shell, so I am considering giving it up.

The next poster has an urgent message for some of us! Hurry!

I quote Schlock mercenary: Getting rid of a gerontocracy is always good, clean fun.

That opulence would be far greater in a flourishing country.

"No no no, Alissa. AMH is our healer now, he'll be awesome at healing us. Won't you, AMH?"

It DOESN'T NEED rose tinted glasses. The sodding place is already pink and other pastel colours.

*headbutts the gobbo, then slowly pushes the gobbo off her horns and dropping it in a pile of refuse*

Well, not for long, funny how that works.

1 to 50 of 7,957 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.