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

Steve Geddes's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber. 10,582 posts (12,244 including aliases). 16 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 11 aliases.


1 to 50 of 1,965 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Gregg Helmberger wrote:
But when your revenue starts contracting because you're moving fewer units (and ask any FLGS if that's what's happening to Pathfinder) then you DO have to make a change. No market stays static, and companies either adapt or die.

It's a little out of date now (I think it was February/March 2016) but this issue was discussed when one of the ICv2 reports came out reporting best selling RPGs for a quarter.

The point was made that although Pathfinder may have lost market share, there was good evidence its sales and number of players was still increasing in absolute terms. This was the "rising tide lifts all boats" scenario and, if true, it provides a counter argument to the idea that PF should respond to 5E at all.

I'd bet a substantial amount of money that paizo don't care whether 5E outsells them, as long as they're selling enough Pathfinder books to keep the lights on, pay employee wages and hopefully make a little profit to do new things.If 5E brings more people to the hobby (and there's reasonable evidence it's doing that) PF can benefit, even if some pathfinder players drift away. They've been drifting away since the CRB was released, but there's new people joining all the time.

I personally think the D&D genre is currently in a great place where players tired of PF's complexity can move to 5E and people who tire of 5E's lack of splat books can shift to PF. No doubt many will support both.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Berk the Black wrote:

In most of the campaigns I've been in, monsters are not the only things causing trouble for the party. Personally, I think the group of cult Humans and Dwarves is one of the best things in Deadly Foes. And not all human(oid) foes wear their ideology so blatantly on their sleevs. I applaud the Pathfinder line for introducing figures like Nobles, Government Officials, and Commonfolk into the fold. My gaming group is pulling out those minis almost as often as any monsters. Finally getting a decent set of them has been a huge boon to our tabletop gameplay.

I realize that gamemastering and play styles are different among different groups, but if secondary markets are any indication, the NPC minis put out are popular. Some of that may be due to the fine rarity selection job done by Paizo and Wizkids on these pieces. I did notice that after I took out all the cultist, There were only five PC types left in the set, and they were all rare. That was a perfect balance for me, usually I'm trading away the extras, where I find that less often the case with monsters (and cultists and guards).

It probably wasn't apparent, but I agree completely with this sentiment. Wizkids are doing an excellent job filling a needed market. And, although it's hard to tell 'from the outside looking in', I think Erik is doing a stellar job guiding their choices of rarity in that regard. Over the entire PF Battles line I can only think of a handful of minis I think were the 'wrong' rarity and there's no doubt good reasons for most if not all of those choices.

In saying I prefer monsters over civilised-humanoid-types I was speaking personally - I recently did a stocktake and have a shade over 2500 minis with almost a thousand individual sculpts. I was saying that I don't want any more, not that Wizkids shouldn't produce any more.

(The same is true for the non-combatant figures like villagers, livestock, etcetera - they have zero value to me, but I agree it's been a sorely neglected niche with a substantial pent-up demand. I think that's reflected in the secondary market).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I was here. I was as puzzled by human behaviour then as I am now.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
My players don't trade out their magic items. They save them if they get a better one, or pay to have an existing one upgraded. I'm kinda proud of 'em for that. Plus it helps there are no magic marts in my campaign world. The magic they have is found in loot piles of BBEGs or other powerful opponents. And even then they're pretty rare.

There are no magic marts but they can pay to upgrade items they've found. How does that work? They seem functionally the same to me.

EDIT: That's genuine curiosity, in case it reads as an accusation. I'm not saying it's inconsistent, I just wonder how it works in practice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Got at least one of everything - 2 rope tricks which is a little odd but also two pillars, which is more useful.

I really like the keketar protean and the pit fiend. It's great to have a giant crab and cave fisher too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
Wrath wrote:
I'm running 5th ed at the moment, where you cant buy magic items.
Yeah, I noticed that. Made me wonder why money was a thing at all.

It seems to me that the 5E expectation is that the money they find adventuring funds the various downtime activities of the PCs. (One of which is craft magic item fwiw, but the intention appears to be that one's loot will go into things like building strongholds and so forth).

The 5E DMG does provide rules for buying magic items - however my impression is that most 5E DMs prefer making them unbuyable. They're also very much on the quick-and-dirty end of the spectrum and don't even pretend to be any kind of economic simulation.

"Pretending to be any kind of economic simulation" is one of my pet peeves with D&D/3.x.

It isn't. It isn't even a good pretence, but because the pretence is there I keep wanting to take it more seriously.

For 5E, since my preference is usually for games that aren't focused on downtime, I'd rather just hand out less loot.

I think that approach is becoming very common.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Rub-Eta wrote:
Wrath wrote:
I'm running 5th ed at the moment, where you cant buy magic items.
Yeah, I noticed that. Made me wonder why money was a thing at all.

It seems to me that the 5E expectation is that the money they find adventuring funds the various downtime activities of the PCs. (One of which is craft magic item fwiw, but the intention appears to be that one's loot will go into things like building strongholds and so forth).

The 5E DMG does provide rules for buying magic items - however my impression is that most 5E DMs prefer making them unbuyable. They're also very much on the quick-and-dirty end of the spectrum and don't even pretend to be any kind of economic simulation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Headfirst wrote:
Using her account to make whatever you say the actual, legitimate direction for the company and the product, what do you announce as Paizo's next book?

Sandpoint Boxed Set.

Or "Powers of Varisia" a hardcover further detailing Magnimar and Korvosa plus those settlements within their respective spheres of influence.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Cat-thulhu wrote:
Why must Cthulhu always be emerging from the water?

If you've let him get out of the water, there's not much point in setting up a tactical map. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I suspect you're right in terms of RAW. I personally don't think things "should" work by RAW though (in 5E, anyhow. I think it's arguable in PF). I like the way Sage advice approach these things: "Nothing's going to break if you allow it, so yes".

If someone wants to build a shield-thrower, I'm going to look for ways to make that work, rather than see if the designers have anticipated it. They're already hamstringing themselves with the d4 damage dice, I don't want to make it impossible for them to enjoy the benefits of having a magic weapon.

If a player came to me with this, I'd definitely come up with a feat for it too, to alleviate some of the penalty their concept is imposing (probably grant proficiency with shields, boost the range a tiny bit and increase damage dice to 1D6 or something). If they end up as effective as a hand axe and shield warrior, they're hardly going to dominate combats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Lisa Stevens wrote:

Thanks to all of you for supporting the company so we can continue to have this amazing job making gaming products! As Paizo approaches its 15th anniversary next year and I approach my 30th anniversary in this crazy business, I am really appreciative that I am able to do this for a living for so long. And it is all because of you crazy folks. :)

-Lisa

I'm still a participant in RPGs largely because of Paizo and the great people who are so generous with their time on the forums. So thank you for all the shiny stuff each month, but also thank you for making such a great community to be a part of.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Chris Lambertz wrote:

This is a great question! New flagging options are pretty deeply embedded into the forums architecture, and the Tech Team is quite backed up and unlikely to be able to implement this before we decide how to we're going to treat political threads going forward. However, I feel the following might be more effective:

Quote:

"Breaks other guidelines" becomes "Reason not listed"

o When selecting prompt in the modal the user is presented with the option to flag as normal or to provide feedback in text box that is passed along to community@paizo.com as needed (This prompt text should say, "Help us understand whats happening" or similar)
I am curious to hear what folks this about this—from my perspective it seems more user friendly than a call to open up an email app/tab to contact us at our inbox, and that folks might be more compelled to explain their reasoning behind flagging (occasionally we come across "Breaks other guidelines" posts that are fairly ambiguous).

Definitely a good idea.

I often fall back on 'breaks other guidelines' and then feel I should send an email explaining why - which is no doubt often just a time sink, since (hopefully!) it's usually obvious.

One of the big advantages of the flagging system imo, is that we can do something in response to those posts which seem objectionable without piling into the thread and thus making even more work for the moderators when they get to tidying it up. I think this feature would feel like doing even more. With luck it will reduce the number of posts that start: "This is going to get deleted but...."

It might be good to have a little "You will not receive a personalised reply to this feedback but it will be read." notice beside the comments box.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I'm pretty sure I will associate Wes with the phrase: "emotionally splendid male" from here on in.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Goth Guru wrote:
Ported over, where?

To the newly created 5th edition (and beyond) subforum.

There's a few active 5E threads remaining in the fourth edition forum, but they'll move those over gradually as workflow allows.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Chris Lambertz wrote:
Sure! I've ported all threads modified since September 2016. We can chip away as we have time, but if you find more nuanced threads that might be-less-than easy to identify by their thread titles for us to move, feel free to flag it.

Thanks, Chris.

That's even better. :)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Brother Fen wrote:
Why should Paizo have a dedicated 5th edition forum? They don't owe WoTC or you one.

They already have one. It's just got a name that won't show up as easily if you're looking for 5E.

I terms of why, I suspect it's because Paizo recognise that liking 5E doesn't make you any less of a paizo fan. Nor is it harmful to them in any way to provide a place for the paizo community to talk about other companies' games.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:

What kind of tone of Starfinder game are you interested in?

Do the Job/Heroic: Do you want something like a Shadowrun game/Traveller game/Firefly episode where you get a morally-ambiguous job from a sketchy person and you do it for money? Or would you rather have a heroic game where you are following cyber-dogs to a child that fell down a well and into the clutches of a group of monsters that made the child their king and are using all their resources to keep you from their king, even if there is no money in it for you?

Lawless/Great Empire: If you shoot a bad guy dead, do you want to get away with it or would you rather have a price on your head and holo-posters with your picture on it?

Core Races/Some Races/Lots of Races: Do you want a focus on the core races, another dozen or two races (all balanced against humans), or do you want a thousand races (not necessarily all of them balanced against humans)?

Political Intrigue/Shooting Gallery: Would you rather spend session after session where you engage in talking before shooting or would you rather fight automated systems in a malfunctioning space station?

Normal Sci-Fi/Gonzo Sci-Fi: Do you want something like the 4th seasons of Babylon 5 where you are fighting a normal, average human group (government/organization/etc) that wants to hold onto power or would you rather have genetic laboratories that mesh house cat DNA with a dragon and a jellyfish to make a glowing tabby that spits fireballs?

Obviously the best answer is "All of the above" but I am looking for a general focus. Please share your preference. And if there is something you are looking for that I didn't mention, please share.

Heroic.

Lawless.
Core Races.
Shooting Gallery. (Though see below).
Normal Sci-Fi.

In terms of combat-roleplaying (or political intrigue/shooting gallery, as you put it) my preference is actually for a third way - more focussed on exploration of the universe and its' weird places than on its occupants.

I'm also much more interested in interesting plots than either roleplaying or combat. The mix of the last two doesn't matter to me provided they are in service to progressing some overarching story with mysteries to solve and secrets to learn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Do you do any teaching?

What's a typical 'workday in the life of a paleontologist' like?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I believe that use of a name is different from use of a concept. Note that the OP is specifically talking about using not just spell names but also the 'spellcasting system' (so presumably including things like material components, casting times and so forth).

A spell name in isolation would be usable unless it was a registered trademark (so that's why other companies may well be using the same names for similar concepts from time to time with no issue). However any individual spell as the whole concept is still intellectual property and can only be used under license (including the OGL, but other arrangements are possible).

It would be fine for a novel to reference a magician flinging a "magic missile" but if you went on about how it always hit, that it didn't do much harm but as you grew more powerful you could cast more and more of them...You'd be better off just renaming it - exactly as Pathfinder tales authors do.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Skeld wrote:

I think untangling the 5e threads from everything else in there is a manual process.

-Skeld

Yeah, I think the suggestion is just to rename it, not move all the 4E threads elsewhere.

At the moment it's the "4E plus some other stuff" forum. That's becoming less and less useful - "5E plus some other stuff" would be better (and will just get betterer over time).


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Milo v3 wrote:
If anything the fact that Villain Codex did so well with generic-setting organisations makes me think more why Adventurers Guide has to have such setting-tied organisations. It's obvious it doesn't have to be Golarion-tied for paizo writers to create interesting groups and yet...

I don't think anyone says it has to. My impression is not that paizo felt forced into the experiment but that they wanted to.

Presumably it's based partly on the idea that taking out flavour you don't like is pretty easy whereas making up canonical golarion flavour is pretty hard. I presume the thinking also was something along the lines of: "All these villain codex entries would be much more usable for people using golarion if they were set there. For people who don't use golarion, they'll either like our flavour material and use it in their chosen setting, modify our flavour material or discard it completely and just take some mechanical gizmos. Irrespective, it doesn't really matter if it's generic fantasyland flavour or golarion flavour they're sorting through".


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Prude.

Spoiler:
To be read in the spirit of: "Doesn't matter what you do, you can't win." :p


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

These three companies need to get out there and aggrandise themselves more, IMO.
I backed it anyway - thanks for making it easy to do a good thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
You might notice that Pathfinder Novels don't use proper OGL names such as tiefling, flumph or bag of holding.

*ponders a world in which "flumph" is considered a proper name*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Post Deleted: Nevermind - got google to work for once :p


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Crusinos wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Crusinos wrote:

So, what resulted? Her followers, seeing only one hope for economics and ignored by a candidate, mostly didn't vote on the Presidential race.

I ended up voting third party for the same reason. Just assume I'm going to vote for you because of your party? No thank you.

That makes sense if you think there's no difference between the two candidates. If you have no preference between the major parties' candidates and are dissatisfied with both, you may as well lodge a protest vote with a minor party. I personally find that difficult to understand, since I think they were clearly very, very different so I struggle to see how one could come to the view they were equally desirable. Every voter makes their own decision though.

For outcome? I honestly did see no difference. No matter who was elected, my area was likely screwed. We've dealt with a long economic recession. There are people soon to hit adulthood that don't remember a time before it. And there's no sign either party is going to do anything about it.

I don't have to discuss the Republicans. Anyone on here knows why they wouldn't improve things.

The Democrat party had Democrats running against Obama in some areas. No matter what, as far as I could see the President would be dealing with a divided, depressed Democrat party and a united Republican party. No matter what they wanted to accomplish, likely the Republicans would end up running the show simply because the Democrats did not have things together this election.

At least, that's how it looked from the ground, when I was standing there with a ballot in front of me and trying to make a decision. Whether or not it's entirely factual is open to speculation.

I think you had to resort to informed guesswork, just like anyone else. Apologies if that came across as critical - I didn't intend any judgement, just surprise (because I think they are vastly different people and that therefore they would likely be vastly different presidents). I didn't mean to present anything as a fact though.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
I was not involved with developing Strange Aeons, so if this is indeed the case, then I guess my concerns about not aping Forgotten Realms/Tolkein/cliches as far as elf isolationisim hasn't been spread through the department here at Paizo, and that might be the last straw and I might just give up and give in and throw my hands up in the air in frustration and maybe just play videogames instead.

What can we, as customers do to stop that? (In a positive way).

I obviously think paizo are terrific all-round, but you personally are a massive, positive influence on the way I think about RPGs (and you've written all but one of my favourite first level adventures).

I don't want to encourage you to keep doing stuff you don't enjoy, of course, but I think it would be a terrible loss to the gaming community were you to move on to other things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

This thread is intended as a general "forum" for talking about playstyle. That primarily includes, but is not limited to:

  • Roleplaying-to-combat ratios
  • Rules vs. flavor
  • Powerful and flavorful builds
  • Evil parties vs. noble parties vs. slightly sketchy parties
  • "Sandbox" (open route, open destination) vs. "railroad" (set route, set destination) vs. "freeway" (open route, set destination)
  • Silly vs. serious
  • Genre choices

Currently, there's a discussion about dungeon delving that started here:

kyrt-ryder wrote:

Can some of you old timers explain the appeal to dungeon delving?

I know personally speaking I infinitely prefer an open world motif.

As a player, my preferences in those categories are:

  • Combat over roleplaying but story is greater than both.
  • Flavor over rules.
  • Flavorful over powerful builds
  • Noble parties or slightly sketchy parties are fine. Evil parties dont work for me.
  • Sandbox is my preference. I don't really see the distinction between the other two - they just seem like different forms of railroading. I think I'd prefer railroad over freeway.
  • Serious over silly (I rarely enjoy playing in a silly game)
  • The only genres I enjoy playing in are "traditional" western fantasy.
  • Dungeons > Urban > Wilderness - as far as adventure settings are concerned. (Combined with sandbox is why I like megadungeons)

Putting a game together, I think it might be fruitful to ask your players a similar set of questions before deciding on the campaign.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I've now deleted the post that included the following, so nobody except you and I will know what's going on, but meh... I figure this might be useful to talk about anyway.

Bandw2 wrote:
though, I think I may be misunderstanding some of what you're saying because you appear to be using several words incorrectly.

I have a degree in maths and philosophy (majoring in logic) so I was meaning them in a technical sense. Granted I didn't put much effort into spelling out the analogy. I'm confident I'm using the words correctly - though I accept that any analogy will be flawed.

Quote:

"Our gaming preferences are axioms, not conclusions."

for instance, Axioms are stuff like "milk comes from animals", something that is evidently true, and conclusion is something you need to try to understand. are you trying to say our preferences are extremely simple, because that's what I've been trying to denounce since day 1.

An axiom is something we accept without proof. It doesn't have to be simple, it's just not something we accept as the result of prior argument.

Mathsy stuff:
One of the most famous from Euclidean geometry, for example, can be written in many ways. One formulation is:

"If a straight line crossing two straight lines makes the interior angles on the same side less than two right angles, the two straight lines, if extended indefinitely, meet on that side on which are the angles less than the two right angles."

Not only is that not simple, but it's not even obviously true (and one can construct quite reasonable and interesting geometries by assuming it is false.

Whether one chooses to accept it or not is a brute fact, it's not some consequence of prior argument and you can't persuade someone else to go along with you. Having adopted your chosen axiom, you will be led to a variety of inexorable consequences and some of those will contradict the consequences derived by someone who takes a different view on the axiom.

There's no right or wrong about it - it's totally arbitrary.

So, for example, as a player I have the following preferences:

  • I prefer fantasy RPGs and settings with pronounced differences in power level between casters and martials.
  • I prefer randomly generating constraints for my PC (typically stats, but I've played random race/class systems too).
  • I prefer games where PC generation is part of the game rather than a pre-game activity.

Those are not things I've argued my way to, those are facts about me. Obviously they are inconsistent with other things which other people value (such as equally rewarding mechanical choices one makes, ensuring PCs are of equal power level). Other people have different preferences, which amount to accepting different axioms.

My point is that if you like a game where flavor is immutable, you shouldn't fall victim to the trap of thinking that's correct. There are any number of beliefs which may lead you to desiring such a thing but they aren't "correct" - at best they can only be said to be mutually consistent.

Similarly, people like you who prefer flavor to be mutable are reaching that conclusion based on some underlying views as to what you like (essentially what makes a game 'fun').

The post you quoted (that I've now deleted, sorry) was advocating putting forth one's views and preferences in non-judgemental ways. Rather than saying "it's a crap way to run a game", it's better to just say "it's a game I wouldn't enjoy". The benefit being none of us are attacked, nor have to 'defend' our preferences yet we still get to talk about it and thus avoid unwittingly entering into situations likely to cause friction down the track.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
WormysQueue wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

I don't really see much advantage in asking a player who is choosing based purely on mechanical gizmos invent a whole bunch of flavor they're not interested in.

If you were really faced with someone who wanted to take some mechanical option which was contradictory/unmotivated according to the 'default' flavor and didn't want to reflavor things - would they really be a good fit for your game? It seems to me that they're fundamentally looking for something different and that the disconnect is probably broader than just the issue of 'how essential is the flavor text to a class'?

I absolutely agree but that's why I'd like to have a simple label to differentiate between those styles so that everyone directly knows if my game might be for him. Needn't be roleplayer vs. rollplayer, but in fact I fear that no matter the label, there will still be players feeling offended by being excluded this way.

Because no matter how I frame it, in the end it says: I have no interest playing with you. And even if it saves them what might be a disappointing game experience because of my preferences, they'll probably not like to hear this.

There is always the risk in saying "I don't want the same thing you do" that it will be read as "You want the wrong thing".

I think that being dispassionate, fact-based and overly-wordy is the answer, not looking for a term but rather a paragraph. When you try and distill it down to one word, you will lose nuance. It's even worse with terms which have a lot of usage but no consensus (like rollplayer) or which have multiple meanings (like roleplayer).

I think explicitly saying that, if you choose a class you are choosing all of the flavor material as well is better than saying "I'd prefer people not make choices based purely on mechanical grounds". The former is a judgement-free statement of preference (although I grant it is likely to invite the follow-up question "why?"). The second tries to legislate the player's motivation. To me, at least, it sounds accusatory. Not to mention the fact it's impossible to know for sure what motivates anyone else.

Personally, I think it's also worth acknowledging the weaknesses of your chosen path ("Yes, I am restricting player choice and creativity") rather than trying to counter or focus on something else. It also provides them with a fact-based, judgement free metric with which to measure whether they want to play in your game or not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I don't really see much advantage in asking a player who is choosing based purely on mechanical gizmos invent a whole bunch of flavor they're not interested in.

If you were really faced with someone who wanted to take some mechanical option which was contradictory/unmotivated according to the 'default' flavor and didn't want to reflavor things - would they really be a good fit for your game? It seems to me that they're fundamentally looking for something different and that the disconnect is probably broader than just the issue of 'how essential is the flavor text to a class'?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Bandw2 wrote:

PB doesn't mean much if you're just a wizard and can definitely make an 18, but what if you also wanted 18 strength for no reason other than flexing magic at the enemy. etc.

7 10 10 18 12 7 on a wizard is to me equal to 18 16 16 14 12 10 on a fighter, which is ALSO equal to 18 10 10 18 12 7 on a wizard. no PB or rolling is going to handle such a complex system, just like most of the game we decided to let human brains do the balancing instead of a system.

Would you see a big difference if the second 18 was CON instead of STR?

(I'm wondering if a superior pointbuy system would make buying different stats cost more or less based on your class).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I've seen a few 'pick your stats' games and can appreciate the advantage. I'm mainly just curious as to mindest, but figure it would be good to have options in my back pocket in case I'm ever in a group who are averse to rolling. (It seems to me that if the fear is just "I don't want to roll crap" then a 20PB option after rolling or something would prevent that. If it's more "I want everyone to be the same, then 'choose what you like' doesn't seem to fit the bill either).

In a 'choose your stats' game I'm golden - I can just roll in order and choose that. When I play with people who prefer pointbuy though I have to be more flexible, so the more options I've heard of the better.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Bandw2 wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

How does the 'pick what you like' work in groups opposed to rolling due to PC imbalance?

I would have thought it would lead to an arms race (or an agreement to all choose some particular pointbuy). My thinking was that if you dont like rolling because you dont want to be worse than everyone else you'll choose very high stats. Or is it more the extreme disparity rather than inequality itself? Would 'roll and take pointbuy if you dont like the result' alleviate some of those concerns?

it's more of a shame game than an arms race, people an embarrassed to be "that guy" who got 2 18s and what not. beyond that you have everyone discuss the stats at session 0 so they all figure out what they should get.

Cheers. How do you think they'd go with "roll for stats with an agreed upon 'floor'"?

I'm not trying to persuade or anything, I'm just curious whether that would remove the main issue of rolling crap whilst others roll well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
Or you could not try to misinterpret what he's saying in order to stretch the benefit of the doubt.

I'm not trying to misinterpret anything. I'm reading what he said here (which is an opinion about mechanics that Erik himself considered so its hardly out there or unreasonable).

I'm not basing my interpretation on anything other than what's in this thread though. I think there are many legitimate ways to model red Sonja. I think the issue of the chainmail bikini is a sad, sexist relic from the 70s (?) and i wish they would abandon it.

You didnt answer the question though. Having adopted the view that a chainmail bikini is not armor (in your belief that taking that mechanical route avoids 'cheesecake') why does she wear it?

I really think the problem is with the art. Once thats there, any faithful representation is going to have sexist undertones. Either women are encouraged to wear sexy armor mechanically or a suppoosedly strong, independent woman has made this silly, unmotivated choice of running around in useless 'armor'.

As i said, i prefer erik's solution (partly because it would hopefully stop a proliferation of such characters) but i dont think trying to portray an inherently sexist subject a different way makes one guilty of 'defending cheescake'.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
A bikini doesn't give you more armor than actual armor just because it may look sexier.

I'm pretty sure that isn't his point.

I think he's saying that PF's method for modelling armor is not very simulationist anyhow. There's a simple, mechanical system (just add some numbers together) and that how you might describe your armor is not always related to how high those numbers 'should' be.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Paizo have a profanity filter for a reason - they don't want you to post certain words on their site.

Working out "clever" ways to circumvent that is downright disrespectful and just adds to the moderator workload in an entirely predictable way.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I want to favorite your post to acknowledge it, but don't want to agree with you being bad at getting out what you want to say. :p

I'm often pretty bad at reading comprehension, so you know...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Haladir wrote:
I disagree about mysteries: Having them unanswered is a whole lot more interesting to me than tying everything up with a bow!

It's obviously just preference with no correct answer, but to fully explain - it's not the mystery I have a problem with (I quite like James' goal of opening up two unanswered question every time paizo answers one). It's the 'this has an answer but we're never going to tell you what it is'. I don't really find Aroden's death to be a mystery, it's been solved - it's just that the solution is a secret I'm not privy to.

There are no doubt many currently open questions that James knows the answer to and which I never will, but from my perspective they are indistinguishable from those he knows that I will learn, so they all seem like mysteries.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

For my part, I wish creators did give regular updates when projects run late, but I don't want frequent ones.

I think it would make sense to say "We'll update every four weeks" (or "two months" or whatever) and then make a brief post spelling out what had happened in that time (even if it's "We're waiting for the printer" or "Chuck is still sick" or "Still can't give any firm delivery date").

It doesn't seem to me that would take a lot of time and it at least counters any impression that nothing is happening. For the record, I am not losing any sleep over the delay - slower and better beats on time and rushed in my mind.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Sorry, I didn't mean that to sound like a criticism - it's just a fair way from the 'default assumptions', so that may have been why it wasn't obvious to you that there were some other abilities which recharged on a short rest. It sounds like you didn't really have many.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Lady-J wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
i took the durable feat in 5th edition we never short rested ever.

Maybe I don't really understand the Durable feat, but it just seems to prevent poor rolling when spending Hit Dice to heal.

But you never took a short rest? So many great class features re-charge on a short rest!!! :-O

it was when 5th first came out every one exept me were avid 3.5 players so the only rests we ever took were long rests and long rests fully heal you so theres no need to roll hitdie to regain hp thus making the feat completely useless
Healing up during a short rest is fine, but I like how it recharges bards, clerics, fighters, monks, paladins, warlocks, and wizards.
i thought only warlocks got stuff back on a short rest

Nope!

After 5th level, bards regain Bardic Inspiration, clerics regain Divine Channels, Druids regain Wildshape (and some get Natural Recovery too!), Fighters regain Action Surge, Monks regain Ki points, Paladins regain Divine Channels, Warlocks get all their spell slots back, and Wizards get Arcane Recovery.

is that from newer books? cuz i dont remember that from the core book

No that's from the core book.

One of the balancing features across classes is when their abilities recharge - after a short rest is obviously better, but the degree to which it is better does depend a lot on the playstyle of the group and the structure of the adventures.

The default assumption is half a dozen encounters with one or two short rests (so one would expect to play through three encounters and then the SR abilities would recharge, then another three before LR abilities are recharged).

It's not always possible to take a short rest - some of the internet discussion assumes those are 'encounter powers' a la 4E, but due to the hour that it takes, that's not really true.

With the DM running the game you were in, it sounds like those classes whose abilities can be used after a SR lost a bit of their oomph. 1.2 encounters a day means what - every five days you had two encounters but the rest were single encounters? There's pretty much no reason for everybody not to spend all their powers each battle in that sort of campaign, which means the warlock's rapid recharge doesn't really balance their extreme lack of spellcasting slots.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Digitalelf wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
I'd like to make sure he's done "reading my mind" though.

While I obviously can't speak for GWL, don't you think it's possible (if not highly probable) that GWL was speaking with a broad brush concerning WotC's marketing of 4th and 5th edition?

I mean not to be snarky, but just because YOU personally were not effected or influenced by WotC's marketing strategy concerning those editions, well, there are pages and pages of evidence on these very message boards that many gamers were.

There are times when using a broad brush to paint something is appropriate.

Just sayin'!

It's one thing to say "4E put many people off with it's marketing and 5E has been much more successful at avoiding that problem" and another to say "anyone who has a different opinion than I do about the pedigree of 5E has been fooled by the marketing".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
*Thelith wrote:
That is just an upgraded version of point buy. I personally believe if someone wants to roll instead of *insert alternative point buy system* they should have that right...it is a dice rolling game after all.

I think it depends on the group - I don't think a player has the right to dictate how their PC should be generated if the group as a whole has strong ideas. Everyone has a right to input into how the game will be run and if there are two strongly held, diametrically opposed views it at least gets sorted before anyone goes to the trouble of putting in too much work. (One or other of the extreme views will need to compromise to some degree or to go somewhere else).

FWIW, I've played in a couple of PBPs recently where the DM wanted us to use pointbuy instead of rolling. I found it easy enough to generate the randomness I like - one of the DMs found a list of every possible array, I randomly chose from those 55 or whatever options and then randomly allocated the resultant array (Str is the 1d6th number, Int is the 1d5th remaining number, etcetera...)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
How does the 'pick what you like' work in groups opposed to rolling due to PC imbalance?

"Pick whatever stats you like" is appropriate for people who want to portray a character they have in mind (someone more well thought out than "invincible sword princess) and to experience a story in which that character plays a part. Especially for people who feel obligated to RP their stats (I'm guilty here) you'll find people with a "pick what you like" approach regularly choosing at least one stat with a negative modifier or leave a stat their character depends on lower than it probably should be because it fits the character. My last "pick whatever" character was a changeling monk with a 10 strength, 11 constitution, and a 14 charisma. As a GM who regularly plays this way, I just ask people to pre-clear their character sheets and if someone's chosen stats are way out of line with the rest of the party I would make a note to that player.

It's not a good approach for a group that sees Pathfinder as more of a tactical board game where you fight monsters, or for a group that's not interested in playing characters that are conceived of before the game, or a group that wants to play characters primarily defined by being good at things.

I wonder if this is a significant factor in the PB vs rolling crowd. I'm extreme in that I prefer to roll my stats in order and then choose my class, so I'm definitely in the latter camp.

I think I could still work with 'pick what you want'. I'd just go for an array (like 16 15 14 12 10 8 or something I thought would be middle-of-the-road for the group) and randomly allocate those prechosen stats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

How does the 'pick what you like' work in groups opposed to rolling due to PC imbalance?

I would have thought it would lead to an arms race (or an agreement to all choose some particular pointbuy). My thinking was that if you dont like rolling because you dont want to be worse than everyone else you'll choose very high stats. Or is it more the extreme disparity rather than inequality itself? Would 'roll and take pointbuy if you dont like the result' alleviate some of those concerns?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Sundakan wrote:


Basically what you're saying is you don't like succinct language because you want people to measure up to whatever random standard you have set for whether someone is a "real roleplayer".

It's not other people that are the problem.

Isn't "things that annoy me" always going to be subjective? (I doubt the standard is random).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
*Thelith wrote:
Everyone rolling is equal opportunity... everything in the game is decided by rolling dice...why should your stats be any different. Again, I understand it for pfs and online or whenever you can't truly verify rolls and I am not arguing against that. In a game based on rolling dice... why remove opportunities to roll dice? One column of 3d6 instead of 15 point buy, I'd definitely take my chances...because to me it is more realistic, and offers a chance at truly being a "hero" which is what every PC is supposed to be.

My point was that rolling doesn't guarantee mediocrity - that depends entirely on how many points you choose to use.

FWIW, I share your preference (and I would too). My point is that it is just preference. There's no objective way to judge them (other than one is more random, one results in more evenly powered PCs - but which of those is most important to you is just preference).

In terms of framing the choice, I think if you want to generate your PC by rolling you're better off not thinking in terms of 'I want a chance to be awesome!' you should more be thinking 'How will I feel if my attributes suck relative to the rest of the group?' If you think you won't enjoy it, you'd probably be better off not rolling (or using some of the roll-but-rule-out-crappy-results methods).

EDIT: Forgot to mention:

*Thelith wrote:
Everyone rolling is equal opportunity... everything in the game is decided by rolling dice...why should your stats be any different.

The common reply is that rolling poorly in other areas of the game has very limited downside (and is generally balanced by the times you'll roll very well). So if you have a night of rolling single digits on your d20, there will probably be weeks when your dice run hot. With poor stats though, you suffer through an entire campaign.

Again, I embrace that (and think that's what people should consider when deciding whether they want to use dice to generate stats) - but it's pretty easy to see why other people wouldn't like it. Many want to play heroic characters and don't want to be the sidekick - they don't want to show up week after week with their single 14 attribute, standing next to the player who didnt roll below a 13.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Maps, Modules, Pawns, PFS RPG, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

For me it's a general tendency to take someone's opinion and treat them as if they hold an extreme, hyperbolic position:

"I like to build an effective character" becomes a munchkin, powergamer, rollplayer or any other one-dimensional caricature.

"I like the use of DM fiat" becomes make-believe storytelling where none of the rules are ever followed.

It's really easy to attack the extremist view of just about anything and almost nobody holds extreme positions (pretty much by definition) so the conversation descends into fruitless "show me where I said...." on both sides, rather than exploring some alternate views. :/

1 to 50 of 1,965 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 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.