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

Stephen Radney-MacFarland's page

Designer. Pathfinder Society Member. 783 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 252 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Protoman wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Chris Ballard wrote:
Does the zealot have to worship a deity?
I'm a bit on the fence about that one, and looking into my magic scrying bowl, I think there will be stronger rules about this in the final iteration of the class, but for right now, for the purposes of the playtest, assume that you do not have to.
So what happens with domains? Are they stuck with alignment ones or pick any that suits character?

For purpose of playtesting, feel free to pick a domain you think will be interesting. I'd rather see a good spread (or an organic clumping) of chosen domains.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chris Ballard wrote:
Does the zealot have to worship a deity?

I'm a bit on the fence about that one, and looking into my magic scrying bowl, I think there will be stronger rules about this in the final iteration of the class, but for right now, for the purposes of the playtest, assume that you do not have to.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
Is there some reason why we don't have a psychic vigilante? I seriously feel like a vigilante class that can't give me a real close approximation of The Shadow, in the wake of Occult Adventures in particular, has missed the mark.
This has come up. Remember, this is the first iteration of the class...and the tools you are talking about has not seen release. Thus a lack of occult in this document.
Well, there is some occult in the document, as shown by the warlock's Living Shadow talent.

I did say lack. You can lack something while still having some of it. But I digress.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
kamenhero25 wrote:
I just realized, the Vigilante makes the best 'evil advisor' type villain ever. Their class features give them a good reputation, and the Dual Identity lets them have a good standing identity as an advisor to a lord and a super villain identity that can be the main villain.

To be honest, as a guy who enjoys GMing more than he does playing, that's one of the things that makes me super excited for this class.

Paizo Employee Designer

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

This has come up. Remember, this is the first iteration of the class...and the tools you are talking about has not seen release. Thus a lack of occult in this document.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM_Blake wrote:
"Does the danger of failing the task for which you're rolling count as danger that precludes using Take-10, or was the intent to only preclude Take-10 when there is some other source of danger separate from and/or external to the skill (or failure thereof) being rolled?"

And our answer is that it depends on the exact nature of the situation and the judgement of the GM.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
We weren't asking for "every instance" we were asking for general guidelines as to what immediate danger meant, what distracted meant, if the task at hand can count as either of those. I don't trust GM's when I see so many say they wouldn't allow take 10 on any check.

Distracted has a bit of wiggle room, I will agree, but it usually means your attention is focused elsewhere. It can also mean suffering the from the nausea of the distraction ability, but that is usually covered in the second and more common reason for not allowing a character to take 10. In immediate danger typically means combat, but it can mean other things at the GM's discretion.

And there is a difference between not agreeing with a GM's ruling, and not trusting a GM.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
DM_Blake wrote:

So, to translate into simpler terms: No FAQ required because Rule Zero...

This is quite unacceptable. We bought the rulebook, and keep buying supplemental rulebooks, because we want rules. Or at least guidelines telling us when it's a good idea to apply a rule and when it's not a good idea.

Saying "Oh, here's a fun rule but your GM is expected deny your use of it whenever he whimsically feels it would be more dramatic" is worse than having no rule at all. If we wanted that game, we could all just sit around playing "make-believe".

Why even sell a rulebook at all? The CRB could have been one page long and would have said "Everything is whatever the GM wants; you're all subject to his whims, fancies, and interpretations. Deal with it." End of rulebook.

"Design" is the middle word of "Pathfinder Design Team" but this non-answer is also non-design.

Very disappointed.

I understand you are disappointed, but quite frankly the rest of what you say is hyperbole.

There are rules for take 10, but the last thing we are going to do is try to cover every instance on when you can take 10 or not. The game is far too complex and has a narrative structure where we must trust our GMs to make the best decision possible during play. And we do trust our GMs as well as the players to make arguments as to why they should be allowed to take 10 at a certain instance. Creating a long list of yes and no for all the situations of the game would end up being nothing more than advice anyway.

That is at least why I supported the answer how it stands. No FAQ needed.

Good gaming!

Paizo Employee Designer

6 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Stephen reminded me. If you're an ANTIPALAIDIN... you lose your powers if you DO wear underwear. Further, Antipaladins are expected to line the inside of their armor with sandpaper. And none of that fine-grain stuff. COARSE sandpaper. It's how they stay angry.

It's not that you lose the power, it's that you get increased power due to the freedom that such lack of undergarments provide. Evil needs to swing freely to generate divine energy.

And hey, I like the coarse grind of my armor. The chaffing makes me feel sexy.

Paizo Employee Designer

17 people marked this as a favorite.

Sorry folks, for an expansion to the Pathfinder rules of this magnitude, you are going to have to wait for the release of Ultimate Underwear.

Boxers, briefs, undershirts, bras, thongs...and much, much more.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
redward wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
redward wrote:

As expected, Slow has also been bumped to 3rd level.

Any kind of developer commentary on the direction of this class would be appreciated.

Sure. They were put in the wrong place. They should be on the 3rd level list. That is all. Don't be surprised if you see something similar in a future version of another class.

Thanks, Stephen.

I know you've been burned by answering these kinds of questions before, but can we expect any kind of way to increase the Phantom's accuracy and damage beyond what's currently available to the class? Will there be any way for it to overcome DR beyond spending a feat on weapon proficiency?

Right now it requires a massive expenditure to make the Phantom viable in combat (recognizing that viability is subjective) and DR will invalidate its Strike abilities more often than not.

Right now I'm collating and taking stock of the class in its entirety. And I can tell you I'm looking at all of these issues and weighing the solutions. They will be resolved with the release of the class.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
redward wrote:

As expected, Slow has also been bumped to 3rd level.

Any kind of developer commentary on the direction of this class would be appreciated.

Sure. They were put in the wrong place. They should be on the 3rd level list. That is all. Don't be surprised if you see something similar in a future version of another class.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
doc the grey wrote:
Do the automatic ranks in the 2 class skills the phantom gains from their emotional foci come out of their normal ranks or are these bonus points that do not count against the total?

They do not come out of your normal ranks, you get them automatically.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nighttree wrote:
Now here's hoping the majority of the classes don't get ignored in all the excitement over the Keneticist 0-O

No worries on that front. We are keeping a close eye with great interest on all the classes in this book.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
alair223 wrote:
I can definitely see some GM's diabolically rubbing their hands together at that response

I do like supporting the diabolical. ;)

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey everyone. This forum is not to discuss your thoughts on the wonderful work of other publishers. Please keep the conversation on target about Occult Adventures and move discussions about other products to the appropriate forum.

Thank you.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
cartmanbeck wrote:
UllarWarlord wrote:

The document says that, like other incorporeal creatures, its deflection bonus while incorporeal is equal to its Cha bonus...

But it also says that it scales with the level, according to the chart.

Which interpretation is correct?

Yeah I'd really like to know this one too. Currently it seems as if the Phantom can actually gain three different, non-stacking Deflection bonuses to AC when in incorporeal form:

-As part of its base statistics block, it gains a +2 Deflection bonus to AC
-As part of the table, it gains an increasing Deflection bonus to AC
-As part of the description of its incorporeal form, it gains a Deflection bonus to AC equal to its Charisma modifier.

If these are all meant to stack, they should be untyped or Dodge bonuses, maybe?

Ayep, this all needs to change. The phantom gains an increase to either its natural armor (in ectoplasmic form) or its deflection bonus (in incorporeal form) equal to the amount on its chart.

In the starting statistics change "+2 deflection (in incorporeal form)" to "+2 dodge (in incorporeal form)." I will put this change on the OP.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dustin Ashe wrote:

There are still a lot of real-life spiritualists and spiritists around today, especially in South America. I don't know if it warrants changing the name of the class, but I just wanted to let you know that it's not just a outdated belief but a vibrant faith.

Some spiritualists might be thrilled or not at all mind to find out their beliefs are represented in the RPG hobby. Others, maybe not.

Yes, because many of these ideas are fantasy takes on real-world occult belief this is actually something we discussed, and took the approach that we always do. These are fantasy versions of of characters made for a game, and are not meant as a statement on real world belief.

In other words, this is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, events and incidents are either the products of the author’s imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.

We just like making cool things that people grok and love to play.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lukas Stariha wrote:
Under the proficiency section, "all light weapons, kukris, saps and scythes" are listed as their weapon proficiencies. Should "light weapons" be changed to "simple weapons"?

That should be simple weapons.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Awesome. I'm glad you like it.

As far as the list of emotional foci, this is a short list made for the playtest. As the playtest goes on, I'll probably post other emotional foci to try out (though these will not be PFS legal). The published class will have a more complete list of emotional foci.

So no worries. Vengeance is on my short list of emotional foci.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Howdy everyone,

I'm Stephen, and I will be the design lead looking over your comments and playtest notes on this class.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Of course I know when he is coming back. ::evil grin::

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I wouldn't compare the investigator to the barbarian...just saying. His function within the party is a little different.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Stephen wanted to punch Jason, his close coworker and friend, in the face with a metal gauntlet. What do you think shall happen to you?
To be fair, I heard a rumor that Stephen played a Crane Style monk in PFS. :)

No...it was in Jason's game. Sorry guys. ;)

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Cheapy wrote:

Poor MechE_. Unaware of the price he shall pay for bargaining with Stephen.

Stephen wanted to punch Jason, his close coworker and friend, in the face with a metal gauntlet. What do you think shall happen to you?

To be fair: 1) Jason picked the funding level...it's not my fault that he gives his life (or at least his face) so cheaply; 2) FOR THE CHILDREN!; 3) Jason kinda deserves it.

But yeah, beware bargaining with an antipaladin.

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh, and swift study is still an investigator talent...so no worries there either.

Paizo Employee Designer

9 people marked this as a favorite.

The attack and damage rolls are for melee attacks. The bonus to damage is not an insight bonus (it is just a bonus) that is why the sentence is parsed like that.

There are ways that you can get studied strike with ranged attacks, so no worries about that for the folk who want it.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LoneKnave wrote:
When you only have a standard (see surprise round), it's just a standard. Studying itself is activated with a swift.

That's not entirely true. You can take free actions during a surprise round (Core Rulebook 178, and the general rules on swift actions is that you can take them "anytime you would normally be allowed to take a free action" (Core Rulebook 188).

If you can take studied combat as a swift action, you can use it in the surprise round.

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Thank you, everyone, with a special shout out to those who contributed (even if you didn't contribute to Paizo). The event raised over $25,000 for charity and was a blast, so the real winners are the kids!

All of the teams were fantastic and terrifically fun to play against. A special shout out goes to the Removed from Play podcast, who were wonderfully good sports and sacrificed an truly beautiful Cygnar warband. I had a great time meeting and hanging out with them, and look forward to seeing them again at Lock & Load in a couple weeks.

Again, thank you all. Without your support, we couldn't have done it. You prove again that we have the best fans in the business!

Well, that's it for me. I have a Jason to punch. :)

Paizo Employee Designer

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Thank you, everyone, with a special shout out to those who contributed (even if you didn't contribute to Paizo). The event raised over $25,000 for charity and was a blast, so the real winners are the kids!

All of the teams were fantastic and terrifically fun to play against. A special shout out goes to the Removed from Play podcast, who were wonderfully good sports and sacrificed an truly beautiful Cygnar warband. I had a great time meeting and hanging out with them, and look forward to seeing them again at Lock & Load in a couple weeks.

Again, thank you all. Without your support, we couldn't have done it. You prove again that we have the best fans in the business!

Well, that's it for me. I have a Jason to punch. :)

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
graywulfe wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
So, please donate. I don't want to have to start medicating Stephen.
I will self-medicate, thank you!
With the blood of innocents?

Innocents? No. They are often weak and too easy prey. I like to leave a trail of evil men and women behind me. More of a challenge.

I'm a strange antipaladin in that regard.

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
So, please donate. I don't want to have to start medicating Stephen.

I will self-medicate, thank you!

Paizo Employee Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.
RFP_Omnus wrote:
You guys are doing such a great job. Paizo is a worthy opponent and the kids are the real winners. With all of that said... You are all doing so good at holding second. Its just adorable :)

Thanks, Omnus! You are right the kids are the real winners. As long as we raise a lot for charity, who cares who comes in first. See you this Sunday!

::waits a little bit...makes sure Omnus is gone, and speaks to the Paizo fans::

I'm glad Omnus is gone? The nerve. He comes into our house, and calls us adorable because we are coming in second.

Second!

When have we ever come in second?

Sure, we raised a lot of money. Sure the kids are already winning. Sure, Jason will likely get punched in the face. But now it's our pride on the line.

Personally, I've already put in $50.00...and I'm not asking anyone to put in more than they can afford, but every dollar helps. Every dollar will help us show those lead pushers who has the greatest gaming community in the world. Spread the word. Throw in a dollar, throw in five. I'm just one antipaladin asking you please...look into your hearts...help the children...

...and then help us bury our foes and spread their remains to the four corners of the internet until they are nothing but a rumor of a thing that dared stand up to our might!

But for the kids. Always for the kids.

Paizo Employee Designer

10 people marked this as a favorite.
CardKingdom_dan wrote:
Just thought you might like to see the competition that Team Paizo will be facing. Tremble before the mighty Team Card Kingdom. :) Check it out

I am trembling...with laughter.

Oh, wait, that sounded really crappy. What I mean is, that's a nice video. Well done and funny.

So how is that working out for you...being funny?

Oh...I'm sorry, that sounded really mean and condescending. I mean...

Screw it. Never mind.

We will crush you on the field of battle and then I will smite Jason with a gauntleted fist*.

FOR THE CHILDREN!

*because that is how chaotic evil rolls, baby!

Paizo Employee Designer

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Zark wrote:


edit:
and for the Children and for clobbing of Jason?

@Stephen Radney-MacFarland: If you don't get the Gauntlet can you use a fish instead? A Cod perhaps or a Herring? :P

Sure. No problem.

Hey, Jason. Want to take a walk with me to Pikes Place Market? There is something I need to show you.

Paizo Employee Designer

6 people marked this as a favorite.

...and clobber Jason?

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matrix Dragon wrote:
I have a feeling that Jason should have added a few zeroes to that face punching stretch goal ;)

Yeah, I was a little surprised he went that low.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
RFP_Susan wrote:
Hey guys! I feel I speak for all of team Removed From Play when I say that, when we win the Gauntet, we will totally let you borrow it to punch Jason in the face. :)

This is my kind of adversary. Welcome RFP_Susan! I'm sure Jason will thank you too. ;)

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Liz Courts wrote:
Something something OSHA, something something workman's comp...

Yeah...that might have been it. Jason starts talking about that kind of stuff, and he starts to sound like one of those Peanuts adults in my head.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Serpent wrote:
Stephen looks like someone from a Seattle-based 90s rock band. What's your instrument, Stephen? :)

A big [censored] sword. :)

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:

Maybe Jason should be allowed to punch back? :o

Think of the children, Stephen..

I'm fine with that.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

This technically counts as a tiara right?

(bonus it would help with all the punching)

Oh, it won't help.

Paizo Employee Designer

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Cheapy wrote:
My vote is that Stephen would be the prettiest of all the princesses.

I am a pretty [censored] princess! Anyone who says differently will get a spiked gauntlet to the face.

Paizo Employee Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I think I found the tiara I want.

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Tiara day? Okay, I'm game. I think I would rock a tiara. Hard. :)

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:

Hey Stephen: if we hit the $5,000 mark, will you make it a spiked gauntlet, and maybe at $7,500 you could perform the punch while also wielding a polearm?

;)

Ooooh. I like that idea. Hey, Jason, can we do this? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
(As an aside.. people seem really excited about seeing me get punched.. not sure how to feel about that...)

I'm not sure how you should feel either...I feel great about it. :)

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I just call you folks, "awesome." Sure, it is not very evocative, but It fits. :)

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Win or lose I'll punch Jason anyway...you just don't get to see it. ;)

Paizo Employee Designer

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Just think of Jason as an adorable piñata. The harder we hit him, the more candy will fall out! FOR THE CHILDREN.

Jason's made out of candy, right?

1 to 50 of 252 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.