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

S'mon's page

431 posts. 3 reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 431 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Our group for the first two books was Bard/Summoner/Urban Ranger. That worked well, albeit the Summoner class seems inherently overpowered - too easy to use long-duration summonings for all sorts of activities, eg earth elementals to scout out the rooms of dungeons - the Summoner speaks Terran. The Eidolon can climb, fly, fight really well, etc. Bard and Ranger both seem effective but not overpowered.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Pathfinder Beginner Box also has some stuff.


I'm running Curse of the Crimson Throne; a chunk of book 2 (AP #8) fell out in play. #1 and #3 have been ok.


My group just got TPK'd by Nualia in the catacombs, having lost one PC to the Thassilonian trap, some terrible die rolls and she carved up the other two with 5 hp left. Also lost Shalelu Andosana to double-turncoat Orik Vankaskerkin, who turned back to Nualia's side when he saw which way the wind was blowing.

Do you think there's any way to continue the campaign with new PCs, or should I scrap it? I'm kinda down at the loss of all the plot threads & NPC relationships from the dead PCs. If I smash up Sandpoint with a goblin invasion that would make Book 2 un-runnable.


Tsailanza wrote:
S'mon wrote:
Longer term romantic-interest characters tend not to be so overtly physical, that goes for the female ones too - eg I think Ameiko Kajitsu catches players' interest more than NPCs who look like Seoni.

I would just like to say that while I understand your point, I think it is unfair to imply that a character like Seoni would be taken less seriously just because she has a more sexualized appearance than Ameiko. Same goes for male characters. Big muscles and a Malibu tan do not automatically make an NPC a shallow, silly creature unworthy of affection that extends beyong a one-night stand, unless the GM chooses to portray them that way.

Hm, I think on average what I said is true. But there are certainly exceptions; eg in my Rise of the Runelords campaign Titus Scarnetti has a sister Alicia, who is a very sexy character indeed, but she's also taken seriously (to the extent that one PC is engaged to marry her), I think because she's also very smart and capable, in her own way. The PC was attracted to her by her brains as well as by her looks and demeanour, and by their similar natures, both being roguish bad boy/bad girl types. IME that's very common - intelligence is probably the most important single attribute.


Kamelguru wrote:


It was mostly a notice of how people perceive strength, both as the stat and in relation to real life comparison. It started with me being irked over ** spoiler omitted **

Considering the ease and speed with which my barely trained self can swing 35lbs kettlebells around, and a good sword is supposedly balanced, that just seemed off. Like how Bruce Lee had to slow down and ease up to let the camera follow and not hurt other actors.

Yeah, it wasn't very impressive. Would have looked more plausible if Clegane had wielded a big axe or somesuch.

On PF, it just sounds as if the 'lift over head' numbers are a bit high relative to the 'carrying capacity' numbers.


I'd say a sunrod would definitely have a smell, probably metallic, but not a particularly strong one. Everburning torches are magic and scentless.


Wiggz wrote:
All of this was in reference to the poster who claimed a friend 'prayed the gay away'. I was implying that if simple prayer was enough to 'cure' him then he MIGHT not have been genetically predisposed in the first place even if he thought he was...

Most likely he was somewhat genetically/inherently disposed that way, but not as much as some other people, who would not have been reorientable. We like hard bright lines, either/or, but that often doesn't fit reality.


Well, this thread has changed my mind - I no longer want any female Iconics to have an art update. :)
OTOH I thoroughly agree about banning Bratz dolls, or My Little Hooker dolls as a Simpsons episode once called them.


zagnabbit wrote:


Having a world that is half clvl 1 is not practical for me in my game. City guards are routinely lvl 3 Warriors. Officers may be Fighters even. "Seasoned Veterans" can be level 5 Warriors, the "Elite" units are In the 7-10 range.

Curse of the Crimson Throne #1 has Korvosan Guard as War-2; likewise in Magnimar City of Monuments the Magnimar guard are War-2, as are the Sandpoint regular guard in Rise of the Runelords. So that seems to be the Golarion baseline, although the guard in GMG is War-3 and the soldier is War-1.

You can have a world where half the population are 1st level, 25% 2nd level, and have plenty of 2nd level characters to fill positions such as town guard where one might expect above-average prowess. The adventures tend to have mobs of generic townsfolk and such be War-1, which stats out pretty much identical to Com-2; either 1st or 2nd level is useable as a baseline for demographics.
BTW in 3e DMG 40% of the population are unclassed noncombatants, children etc, and these are officially not part of the listed populations at all; not sure what PF's approach to that is.


Chengar Qordath wrote:
S'mon wrote:
I don't design cohorts - I create NPCs. If the PC has Leadership feat & high enough Leadership they can then attempt to recruit suitable NPCs encountered in-game, eg Trinia Sabor in Crimson Throne.
Assuming it's not a campaign that's heavily scripted, like an Adventure Path, how would respond to a player saying something along the lines of "I'm planning to take leadership at some point in the future: is there a way to include a (not-outlandish thing the player would like as a cohort) in the campaign so that they would be available when I take leadership?"

If I'm running a sandbox, I'd probably tell the player whether thing X existed in the campaign and if so I might let them attempt to find and recruit thing X. Or if thing X was already part of the PC's backstory, then that would probably be fine. All the current cohorts IMCs were created by me though, and I generally much prefer that to PC-created cohorts. For one thing it means I'm confident I know how they think, I have an internal aspect on them.

I'm generally very very wary of allowing full-progression caster cohorts, though, unless they are the same class as the PC.


zagnabbit wrote:


I like Golarion, I like the mental challenge of fantasy world building. I've just come to recognize that every group of PCs I've ever DMed for are virtual DemiGods by 14th level.

Sure; that's why most APs close out at 15th, so the players can enjoy being demigods a little while before retirement. If I'm running a sandbox campaign in my own setting I tend to run it 1st-8th or 1st-10th, with NPC demographics to fit.


zagnabbit wrote:

The reason experienced DMs scale up the city guard, is we've all seen whathappens when the players realize they're unstoppable.

Any GM who's having 10th level PCs taken down by regular city guard patrols (arbitrarily upscaled) is a pretty crappy GM IMO. Of course 10th level PCs can ride roughshod over regular troops, typical goblin lairs, etc. That doesn't mean they are all-powerful, though a 20th level PC party might be (leaving aside Baba Yaga, Treerazor and such Epic threats). I'm running Curse of the Crimson Throne, so I see a lot of Korvosa demographics. The regular City Guard might be 2nd level, but there are crack squads of 5th-7th level guys too, including PC types, who can be deployed if necessary. If that's not enough, well there are the Hellknights of the Nail if you need to call in plenty of 7th-10th level types, there are the Acadamae mages, the Queen's elite Gray Maidens (Fighter-8) and so on.

Golarion has well established level demographics as per ISWG - lots of level 1-5, plenty of 6-10. 11-15 are rare though, and 16-20 are extremely rare. Overall the level spread is well designed to challenge PCs in the typical 1-15 range of most APs.


Dracoknight wrote:


It kind of confuses me what the matter actually is and all i see is just opinions flinged left and right like they were facts.

I think most people are just giving their opinions.


I wouldn't put total population above half a billion sentients (including goblins and Underdark dwellers), and 200-300 million probably more likely. I don't think it's anything like as high as post-industrial-revolution Earth ca the mid twentieth century, which is what 2-3 billion would indicate.

For level demographics; the GMG and Pathfinder APs tend to have 'typical' people be 2nd level NPC class, though 1st level NPC class is common too, for novices, incompetents, green recruits etc. I'd suggest these both be about equally common for the adult population, then halve numbers each level higher. 50% level 1 and halve number each level higher also works.


Landon Winkler wrote:


As a GM, part of introducing a romantic interest is describing that NPC in a way that the player (or hopefully their character) finds attractive. In my experience, physical appearance plays a major role in that, particularly in the jump from "friendly NPC" to "romantic NPC."

Oh, sure - and I have had the occasional male 'beefcake' character in my games, eg Prince Konn of the Tigerclaw Uthgardt, played by Dolph Lundgren as 'He-Man' - http://frloudwater.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/2261480-karse.html :) - but he wasn't intended to be a serious romantic interest, just a short term 'engagement'... Longer term romantic-interest characters tend not to be so overtly physical, that goes for the female ones too - eg I think Ameiko Kajitsu catches players' interest more than NPCs who look like Seoni.


wraithstrike wrote:

I always let my players design the cohort. It is one less thing I have to do, and since I am normally a better optimize than most people I play with it is to my advantage to let them make it.

I don't design cohorts - I create NPCs. If the PC has Leadership feat & high enough Leadership they can then attempt to recruit suitable NPCs encountered in-game, eg Trinia Sabor in Crimson Throne.


Ben Parkinson wrote:
Quite a few people seemed interested in this blog post - Go to blog Teaching Changemakers using Kingmaker - where we were discussing the potential of Pathfinder for developing vision, creativity and leadership skills among youngsters in Uganda.

It occurs to me that the main challenge your youngsters are likely to face in future life leadership positions is the balancing of kinship network/extended family demands with their other responsibilities; whereas this is something completely absent in default Golarion - everyone seems to be an American-style individualist with a nuclear family or no family at all. Is it worth including 'family' in Kingmaker as an issue, or would that make things too complicated?


Historically gold was typically worth 10-20 times as much as silver. Not just in medieval times; in classical Greece it was typically a 20-1 ratio, falling to 10-1 during the influx of Persian gold in the later classical era. More recently 'Gold standard' economies, and holding of bank reserves in gold, lead to gold value inflation, which we still have currently.

D&D/PF wages tend to be inflated by comparison to medieval Europe, but not always wildly different from Classical-era; for long periods a silver coin was indeed the standard daily wage of a heavy infantry soldier such as Roman legionary or Greek hoplite. Some prices though are wildly inflated, and could typically be divided by 10 or converted to silver for a more historical feel.


Leadership IME isn't broken if all Cohorts are real NPCs created by the GM, recruited in play, and played as real people - the goblin cohort counts. It's broken if the GM lets the player create an NPC cohort to perfectly compliment their character.


Re the Misgivings, a PC IMC is local, the nephew of Kendra Deverin. I didn't say anything when he met Aldern. On reflection I'm going to do it that only the Varisians know about the haunting rumours or call the old manor that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@OP: I would contribute to a male-romantic-interest thread (Sir Jereth Rogare, Hellknight of the Nail, in my Curse of the Crimson Throne game was pretty cool, in a Judge Dredd/Robocop sort of way), only 'beefcake' is the male equivalent of female 'cheesecake', ie it's all about the visuals, and I can't get past the terrible thread title. If you weren't going for that, you should have chosen a better title. Sorry.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
Do you feel that some of the female iconics as presented in their class entry (i.e. the "iconic" iconic picture) are being objectified?

Eh, no. I think they're all clearly subject of action, not object. I haven't really seen seriously objectifying FRPG artwork since the 3e D&D era with companies like Mongoose and the Avalanche Press book covers. I think Paizo artwork is gratuitously sexy (good for sales) and the costumes often impractical, but it's nothing like '90s Clyde Caldwell stuff, or even Larry Elmore (much as I love Elmore).


(I do sometimes make up gobbledigook when speaking in character in an alien language - more an SF game thing though. Works great in Star Wars.)


Emery1000 wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
S'mon wrote:
Well, I had Ameiko & Lonjiku talk mostly in Tian, so the PCs couldn't understand it amyway. :)
building on what Latrecis says, i'm curious when speaking "Tian" do you speak in an asian culture language or wing it? Tian not being an actual language and all
yea what he said, like do I just sa, "they are speaking in another language" or do I just go to google translate and make something up?

"They are speaking in another language", maybe "It sounds like Minkaian/Tian/cetera". No I didn't make up gobbledigook or type Japanese - it's a text-chat game.


fine_young_misanthrope wrote:


To put that question in perspective, I don't read DC BECAUSE so many events "kind of" happened. I read Dark Horse because whatever happened, Happened! This happened. We can recon the crap out of this latter. But, this really happened to the characters you love

Hm. I don't think Paizo's approach is really aimed at you, no. There is no single canon continuity. At best it may be that the comics will all stick to one comic continuity; you could fix on that and ignore the other stuff. Or likewise with the novels I guess.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, I had Ameiko & Lonjiku talk mostly in Tian, so the PCs couldn't understand it amyway. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like the approach of having the comics and audio dramas in different continuities, it's like having different GMs running their own campaigns. :)


zagnabbit wrote:

Seoni is the Most Iconic Iconic ever.

The first images of Valeros and Seoni converted me to Parhfinder. That first Seoni pose is very sexual without being gratuitous. Valeros's pose is sexual too, according to my wife.

Seoni is just one of those people who exudes sexual magnetism, it would not matter if she were dressed like a Ninja, hood and all, she would just convey that. Trying to remove that element of her depiction is just not possible.
I think that after this amount of time and the sheer volume of Seoni art that I'm immune to her "hawtness", but she is still one of the most compelling images in all of the RPG art I've amassed over the years. There may be an element of Cheescake to it, but I would be surprised to read the artists view her as a sexual object. She is just "more" than that.
Her tightly reigned personality, emotional fortitude, obsessive behavior and tremendous personal charisma combine into an enigmatic being. She's beautiful yes but she has been consistently portrayed as being far more than pretty.
She is also exotic, almost a Mythical Creature. No other Varisian looks like her, her skin tone, hair color, eyes and tattoos make her much more than unusual, she is truly unique. So the "she should be dressed more like this...." argument holds no water with me. Varisians stay with their nomadic family groups, Seoni does not. Varisian women are notoriously sensual yet Seoni is not sexually forward. Yet her mode of dress is guaranteed to put her at the center of attention in virtually every situation. She is the long term planner, the schemer, the enigma.
She can cast Endure Elements and Mage Armor every day. So practicality is right out the window.

Let her be who she is.

Amiri, is probably the single best depiction of a barbarian in all of RPG history. She's tough, poor, uncultured and maybe a little mean. The people who want her in armor are forgetting that the iconics don't live in the "Monty Haul" campaigns where every barby has a Mithral Breast Plate at...

Interesting analysis of Seoni - I will use that in future, thanks. :) I agree with you on all the Iconics except Amiri; she's not just a typical Kelid, she's a PC and will have access to wealth, gear etc. An Iconic 3e/PF Barbarian should wear a chain shirt - it's Iconic. :p

(Also I think I'm a bit sick of the whole Britney Spears bare midriff thing, it only looks good on a tiny minority of women and my eyes have suffered quite enough over the years...)
I agree about the Oracle's priestess garb, to me that's a clearly appropriate depiction of a non-armour class (I would probably cover her belly too given the choice, but no big deal); same with the Witch.


One thing - going by Gamemastery Guide and most of the adventures, it seems to me that in Pathfinder a typical person tends to be 2nd level, not 1st level, and they tend to average 7-8 hp, whether that's because they're a Com-2 with Con 10, or a War-1 with Toughness. Most typical soldiers/guards seem to be War-2 with around 13-15 hp. This fits a lot better scaling with typical animal hit points than 3e's 2 hit point Commoner-1s, and supports having the bear trap do the listed damage.

If in your game the typical healthy adult is a Com-1 with 3 hit points then I think this is exactly the sort of thing that should be rescaled to avoid the 'world of cardboard' effect.


I don't have magic item shops IMC, Curse of the Crimson Throne. I have crafting require rare components with limited availability, plus all charges require castings into the charged item - 50 fireball spells for a 50 charge wand of fireballs. I use random rolls for the available magic items, which change monthly - around 20 items for Korvosa, a large city, on Gather Info Diplomacy DCs of 11-30.

This all works fine; signature items that level with the PC (+1 per 3 levels, say) are also fine. The system assumes the PCs have '+' items at higher levels, but doesn't require that they're kitted out with exactly the items they want for a particular build - it's your choice whether charop through item purchase is a part of your game.


Bakaninja wrote:
This being the case, would it make any sense for the PC to have been friends with Nualia?

I don't think Nualia is a very nice person - hence all the murdering... it would make sense to me that Nualia was far too wrapped up in her own 'woe is me, I am too beautiful' thing to think of being friends with another, younger, girl. You could also do it that Tobyn is Chelish, this PC is Varisian and they occupied very different social circles and wouldn't come into contact much; although Nualia did have that Varisian bad-boy...


It's a dire bear?

Yeah, it seems a bit much to me. Maybe 2d4?


Evidence suggests answer is Level 10...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
Keep in mind that right now, there are threads talking about the hypersexualization of women in Pathfinder by citing characters like Seoni and ignoring characters like Kyra. There's a thread looking specifically...

NB: DIFFERENT PEOPLE WANT DIFFERENT THINGS. Some people want more Kyras, some want more Seonis, some want more Vencarlo Orisinis. Obviously Paizo cannot please everyone! That's not the point, and it's not illegitimate for people to post their wishes even where those contradict the wishes of other people.


Landon Winkler wrote:


But many of us on the board are GMs and this is something well within our power to fix. It's easy enough for them to add some male love interests in their home games.

Yeah, I add potential male & female romantic interests, and other PCs, to both the APs I'm running. In Curse of the Crimson Throne I added heroic Hellknight of the Nail Sir Jereth Rogare (the anonymous dude on the cover of Book 1), who has had a major part in rescuing a female PC from induction into the Gray Maidens, then solving the mystery of the Blood Veil and leading the assault on its source, before riding off into the dawn light with his comnrades in arms at the end of Book 2. In Rise of the Runelords new characters of mine include Alicia Scarnetti, Titus's glamorous & loose-moralled sister, who is about to be in a shotgun wedding with an equally promiscuous PC... :D

I'm sure I'd keep adding to the APs and making them my own whatever Paizo do. More canon romantic interest male NPCs would still be good, though. I guess it doesn't need to be 50-50, but at least 33-67 would be nice. :)


Albatoonoe wrote:

Nudity isn't inherently sexual.

No, but Seoni's outfit and depiction certainly is; it looks specifically designed for sexual allure over practical considerations. She could be wearing less cloth and be a lot less sexy. IRL example would be bikini design vs nudity: bikinis are typically designed to look sexy, whereas nudity isn't inherently sexual, as you say.


Deadmanwalking wrote:


The Erastil thing is from comments by James Jacobs, and more officially Inner Sea Gods (which revises a number of errors in deity articles like the Paladin of Asmodeus thing as well as Erastil's sexism).

The Demons being matriarchal to Hell's patriarchy is implicit in Lamashtu being the most powerful of them and, while I believe it's gone into in a couple of books, but again, I know it mostly from comments by James Jacobs on these boards. And as the creative director, his opinion is controlling on matters like this.

I quite like the matriarchal demons idea, might use that. I found the idea of Devils as patriarchal odd, given that most of the leading NPCs in Cheliax seem to be female. This is the kind of thing that bugs me re making most of the powerful NPCs (good & evil) female - it's done with no consideration for setting implications, so you end up with 'patriarchal' Asmodeus backing the House of Thrune, when nearly all the senior Thrune (& other Chelish) noble characters I've seen are female. I'm sure it can be justified in-setting; but I would like to see a justification. Eg: maybe the Chels think women are less subject to diabolical influence, so that Thrune being female-led acts as a sort of counterweight to potential Hellish corruption?

Re Erastil - as with other gods, my favoured approach is to have the cult vary geographically, so Erastil in the River Kingdoms, the Lake of Mists & Veils, and Mendev might be patriarchal, while in Cheliax or Nirmathas he's egalitarian. The Kingmaker write up for Erastil can be canon for the area covered in the AP (which seems less egalitarian or gynocratic than (former) Chelish territories), while the ISWG write-up can be canon for lands around the Inner Sea.

Sorry for the OT... :)


Ashiel wrote:
Paizo's sexist now because...

No one is calling Paizo sexist (not even rpgnet, last time I looked!). And you are a very silly boy/girl/aberrant entity. >:)


MrVergee wrote:

My homebrew clergy of Korvosa does not quite reach Haladir's levels:

Ezekiel Sollux, high priest of Sarenrae is a level 9 cleric;
Larella Semyr of Shelyn is a bard2/cleric5.

The Pantheon of Many has some priests of different faiths, but none higher than level 3. So I guess I'm a lot stricter when it comes to handing out levels.

This thread got me thinking, so I started a post in the Golarion Products forum asking whether the NPC levels in Guide to Korvosa should be lowered for PF play.

My own approach has been to keep Darb Tuttle at 13th, since the Church of Abadar seems dominant in Korvosa, with at least one 9th level underling. The churches of Pharasma & Asmodeus have leaders of at least 9th level (ie they can Raise Dead PCs - but not dead NPCs, judging by King Eodred!) while other church leaders are likely to be in the 6th-8th range for casting purposes, though they may have the occasional Aristocrat etc level on top. Saranrae's high priest is probably 8th level, while Durnhelm the PC Barb 1/Clr 5 of Gorum may well be the highest level Cleric of Gorum in Korvosa. :)


I was just thinking about this in relation to Guide to Korvosa specifically, since I'm running CoTCT. I'm not thinking about APs, where the levels of encountered NPCs are set to give the PCs a good challenge, but rather the background NPCs.

In ISWG it discusses NPC levels on Golarion, and suggests that level 11-15 characters are rare, typically a handful in any given nation, while level 16-20 characters are legendary individuals of great power. Hoever 3.5e material seems to adhere pretty much to 3e D&D norms, where very high level characters are a lot more common. So Korvosa is a city state and just a Large city, not a Metropolis, but has some high to very high level characters (eg Toff Ornelos is listed as Ari 1/Wiz 16) who hardly seem legendary in the setting. Personally I like the PF approach to NPC levels a lot better; for one thing it stays closer to the roots of the game.

So I was wondering if there is any guidance/recommendation on conversion, lowering NPC levels? Do other GMs have any particular formula or approach they take?


Jessica Price wrote:


The idea isn't to "sanitize" anything -- it's to make sure that a wide range of women exist in our material, because we're not interested in limiting who someone can be -- or the way they can dress -- because of their gender.

Just want to say that I think this is a good approach by Paizo. I don't see many players who object to the existence of scantily clad female characters (unless given one as a pregen), but a lot of players (me included) do want fully clothed female characters, too.

I guess my views are just that (a) female warrior types like Amri should by default be properly armoured, same as male warrior types and (b) on Seoni specifically, her highly sexualised appearance is ok by me in principle for a Sorcerer/Sorceress character, but doesn't seem to fit well with her personality as presented - taken together it comes across as incongruous. I guess it would make more sense & be easiest just to have her act a bit more flirty/sexy in the comics etc, while keeping her iconic look unchanged.


Lord Fyre wrote:

I don't know if others have noticed, but since the Skull & Shackles adventure path, Paizo has had a shift in art direction to more egalitarian and realistic clothing. One of the results of this is that the fanservice-y costumes of Amri,Seoni, Alahazra, and Feiya are becoming increasingly "out of step" with the fashions of the world setting.

Regardless, of your opinions on "fanservice,"... My question is, do these characters need an art update to dress them more "realistically" for the Golarion setting?

Hm... Personally, if it were up to me I would definitely change Amri's outfit to something approximating sensible armour. Barbarians wear light armour, so a chain shirt that covers her stomach* would definitely be in order.

The others aren't much of an issue for me, though Seoni is so 'hawt' it can actually be a little distracting... :) - I do have some trouble believing she's actually an adventurer, but it's a minor issue. Feiya looks pretty much exactly how I'd expect a young witch to look, no problem there. Alahazra I'm not sure about - I know the pic of her scrubbing the deck in that get-up in Skull & Shackles Book 1 looked *really* silly, but I think that was deliberate. Overall it seems an ok 'high priestess' type look, I guess I'd leave it.

TL;DR: Give Amri decent armour coverage. Consider giving Seoni a less stripperific outfit for dungeon-delving. Feia & Alahazra are ok.

*NB I once had a female player freak out because she was given a pregen warrior PC with a bare-midriff picture. She was really upset, I guess it was a 'trigger' as they say nowadays. She lectured me that a bare stomach makes a woman feel vulnerable. And certainly IRL your stomach is the second thing you want to armour up before going into battle, right after your head and ahead of your upper torso.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
@S'mon: I'd actually argue that CotCT avoids the gender imbalance almost entirely (see my post about it on the first page for details), but it seems to be an isolated incident in that regard, and I agree with your point more generally.

I just went back over your list - I'm currently running CoTCT and we're one session into Book 3, so this was very handy. :) Good list, though my group definitely had *no* interest in Laori Vaus, she's lucky they haven't attacked her yet! :D Krojun is the one character I've got my eye on for the later books; Sabina Merrin is cool but I'm not seeing any likely place for romance within the scope of the campaign.

I agree that CoTCT is well balanced. If I came over harsh upthread, it was because I've been running CotCT awhile, and only recently acquired a bunch more APs. Initially I just expected them to be much like CoTCT, so I was a bit shocked, first with Skull & Shackles, then with the others, at the huge imbalance you've noted.


Ashiel wrote:

You know, it's funny to me. Paizo includes more powerful female characters, female characters who are important to plots and games rather than scenery, and generally just representing more female characters in a game that is oft-criticized for being a "male-game" in a "male-dominated" (you can interpret the quotation marks as half-sarcasm) subculture.

And the result of that? Paizo suddenly hates strait women.

They don't hate 'strait' women (or gay men). They just don't think. This is just one of the many things they don't think about; I've complained elsewhere about the tendency to make most of the powerful NPCs female (as a political statement, according to Jaccobs) while giving zero consideration to what this implies for the societies depicted.

I still enjoy their stuff. I buy loads of it. I do like it that potential romance and relationships are included in many of their adventures, the way they are in the source fiction. It's just ironic that one of the most Politically Correct gaming companies in the industry make adventures that run best with all-straight- male player groups - indeed my gay male player for one AP has his PC courting a female NPC, since there are no real male romantic interest NPCs, as I said. If a player wants a male romantic interest NPC, I have to create him myself.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Been buying and reading a bunch more APs recently. From everything I've seen in the APs, Paizo have absolutely zero interest in catering romantically to straight female PCs. Partial exception for Curse of the Crimson Throne (Vencarlo Orisini although he's old; maybe Grau Soldado - who isn't officially statted though, so even that's a stretch). James Jacob's tendency to make most powerful NPCs (good & bad) female by default exacerbates this; it means there's little opportunity for a relationship to develop spontaneously either.


Lonjiku was still at positive hp? I'd probably have Sheriff Hemlock slap the offender in jail overnight while he investigates; everyone says Lonjiku provoked him; Mayor Deverin comes to see the barbarian, gives him a school-ma'arm "Don't do that" talk, and has him released if he promises not to do it again.


Ashiel wrote:
RJGrady wrote:
I believe the soul comes into existence when you roll the character's ability scores.

Does that mean that if you decide mid-way through character creation you'd rather play a bard, that you just aborted your character's life/soul? :P

If the OP is concerned about raise dead and when aborting is murder in D&D, I hope that he doesn't look at remove disease anytime soon which specifies that it also removes parasitic entities in the host body. Fun fact...that includes unborn children...

I'm not sure that's RAW!


LazarX wrote:


I've yet to see a reason to address the question for my campaigns, and until the necessity arises, I won't bother.

I've been GMing 30 years, this week was the first time it came up in one of my campaigns!


One issue: while the PC classes are somewhat balanced in combat, out of combat they have widely divergent abilities. A Bard and a Fighter are not in the same room when it comes to social challenges. You can moderate this a bit by emphasising roleplay over diplomancer dice rolling, and don't make NPC friendlinss dependent on Diplomacy rolls (Diplomacy was a terrible skill in 3e, pity PF didn't modify it IMO). This might annoy a player who's invested resources in diplomacy (etc) at the cost of combat effectiveness, but if you've told the players upfront that it'll be a roleplay-heavy game that might be ok.

All the APs are designed to mix combat with other stuff. Skull & Shackles looks like a good one for delegating most combat to NPC followers and focusing on RP and leadership issues; Jade Regent to some extent also. But Paizo isn't likely to publish a 'no fighting' AP for PF, it deviates too far from what the system is built for.

1 to 50 of 431 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.