|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Darksol, it is completely irrelevant to the discussion whether the dusty rose prism is whatever. We are discussing the jingasa. One of the problems with the jingasa is the very fact that you can add it to other items, like the dusty rose prism. And yes, all things considered, Paizo probably should have taken down the dusty rose prism too. And reactionary, and fate's favored. All the small bonuses added together do become a problem. If the jingasa is a problem, then it is a problem no matter if it is the only problem or not.
The "woe" crowd here has an interesting situation. First, they say that a +1 luck bonus to AC is not overpowered, not dangerous to the game, there are better things out there, etc. Then they try to convince us that the jingasa is now "eviscerated" now that it doesn't have the luck bonus to AC. Well, which is it? Is it overpowered and a problem (and if so, why protest the errata?) or is it nothing special (and if so, why whine that it is gone?)?
It's no false dilemma. If people complain about having errata in the first place, which was the exact claim I answered in my post, then that is a suggestion that there should be no errata at all. That would be disastrous to the game, in my opinion - which is what I gave.
Reactionary is half a feat. You can also take both, giving you a +6 Init before Dex. That is huge. It means your entire party (all sadly bullied as children) can go before any monster gets a chance. They do not, usually, get traits, hmmm?
As for the unfun of playing MERP, I am sure I can't agree with that. There seems to be quite a few people who like it and find it fun. And whether death should come only as a consequence of bad planning and strategies, well, that is an opinion you are quite entitled to. Different people want different things from the game.
This reminds me of my early days of Magic the Gathering. In the original set was a spell called Channel. It let you get mana for life, letting a deckbuilder do some quick damage, then channel/fireball to kill the opponent, leaving them with 1 life. If this was countered, they conceded. In short, it was pitiful and stupid. WotC banned Channel, setting off a storm of rage about how they hurt the game and should have banned Fireball instead. See, there was also Disintegrate that had mostly the same effect the Channel morons could use, but Channel itself was irreplaceable to them. After this ban, the game was much better.
The jingasa was too cheap for what it did, which was a unique AC bonus type in a slot where everyone could use it. If you did not have a jingasa, you were doing it wrong. End result, most adventurers had 2 AC more than they would without the jingasa and Fate's Favoured. Whoop de doo.
I am glad it's gone. Good riddance. Without it, the game can get a little bit better. Now for errata to Fate's Favoured and Reactionary as well. The best way forward would be to also errata away as much of the big six as possible too, but that is a bit too entrenched to be feasible, I think.
The only possible reward you have to offer is information. Let them find something out, and frame it as someone telling them what happened. That also allows you to use the El Shaddai and Dragon Age II solution to things going wrong: The one telling the story says "No, that was not what happened." Note that you really are not in a hurry to do this. Let the PCs explore something of what would have happened first. Done right, you can give them something they had no idea about, that makes the scene more complex.
The whole rights situation seems to me to be the perfect explanation to why intellectual property is a bad idea. Seriously, the fact that both interests own parts of the whole means no decent movie gets done? Where there could have been several, with budgets and with a hope of success?
Good thing we have intellectual property laws.
TOZ or whatever alias of him wrote:
This is basically saying that the task of GMing is not something that deserves any kind of respect OR gratitude. Since the GM wanted to do it, nobody owes him anything whatsoever, even basic courtesy like thanks for the job done. The entirety of thanks to be assigned depends on who asked for the campaign, which is, to me, b~*!$%%*. TOZ' time is an opportunity cost, i.e. Time he could have done better stuff with. I don't understand it. I just feel sad that people think this way.
A GM puts work into GMing, or the results are generally poor. A player only puts in time into the campaign outside the sessions if he or she wants to. If the player doesn't, nothing bad happens. In at least some cases, a player who puts in a lot of time between sessions then uses the newfound rules loopholes to disrupt the campaign.
Don't try to frame it as the players doing the GM a favour. You know, if you have GMed, how much work it is. Sure, it is done because the GM wants to do it... but the GM also assumed the responsibility for doing that work over a long time specifically to entertain the players. It IS a commitment worthy of respect. Whether you see that or not speaks mostly of you. Calling it an opportunity cost would likely mean I would prefer to see you do something else as well, if it was my campaign.
If a player points out an error I have made in the rulebook, I expect the player to have understood the rule in question. I expect him to state it clearly and accept my ruling of it. Like it or not, the rules are not always very clear, multiple interpretations are possible. Or there are conflicting rules. And if we are to have a discussion about it, that happens AFTER the game.
See, one of the most annoying situations I have ever been in was one player who did not understand the rules himself, and because he did not, he kept questioning my rules applications to the point that EVERY. SINGLE. Piece of rules effect was debated. And when I told him to show me what the rules said, he was wrong again and again. Eventually, I put the smackdown on his passive aggressive rules whining by saying that he, specifically, was not allowed to make rules questions during play AT ALL. It cost us several hours of rules whining before I did.
If you have a serious case of mercury poisoning? If I were to guess without looking it up: Dialysis, or even plasmapheresis. Big stuff.
Getting rid of mercury in general circulation in Western societies was a major milestone. Nothing good came of using it. Then suddenly lightbulbs got banned FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REASONS and WITHOUT A SENSIBLE ALTERNATIVE. So everyone has to get poison bulbs instead. Brilliant. The environmental lobby truly outshone itself there.