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

Sub-Creator's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber. 335 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 335 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Aarontendo wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
Changing Man wrote:
Blackerose wrote:
Every author/artist is more important to me than a fictional book. You can't forget behind the "business" is a human writing because they enjoy the material, and enjoy making people happy.

This. So very much this.

But then, these realizations don't mesh so well with current entitlement and instant gratification culture...

When did expecting people to fulfill their promises become something to be looked down upon?

Your terminology is wrong here. They didn't promise you anything according to the ToS that I saw written above. They gave you an estimate. A hopeful estimate at that. The only promise they made via the KS is that you would get a product eventually. That's the only promise they should be held to. If it takes another three years for them to complete it, oh well. So long as that product makes it to your hand, you've gotten what you paid for, and their promise is fulfilled.

You're putting your own stipulations upon the contract that don't exist in the actual contract, then telling that person he's unethical. This sounds very much like hypocritical thinking to me. My suggestion: read what the contract says and expect nothing more than that. You won't be disappointed.

Aarontendo wrote:

Yep, wow. I work hard at my job as a teacher, and I have a lot of student loans to pay back. Additionally, I'm paying for some further education.

I don't know anyone's personal situation here, but I'll say that my gaming budget isn't so great that I can just shrug when someone makes off with $100 and "goes dark" on a project.

My advise to this would be stop throwing around your $100! I'm a teacher too, and I've never once given to a KS because, frankly, I don't have that kind of money to burn, period. From everything I'm reading here, most Kickstarters sound like they're nothing more than a shot in the dark. Why continually throw money at a shot in the dark? When the product hits the market, pay for it. If a KS gets you aggravated because the silly thing keeps failing, my suggestion would be to learn the first or second time to stop giving to them.

Or, learn to be a bit more patient. It may just take longer to get to you.

Aarontendo wrote:
I do fail to see how wanting to get something that was paid for is entitlement. It's not as if people want something for free. They've paid over a year in advance for a product, which takes much of the finance burden off of the shoulders of the creator.

That's not entitlement at all. Demanding to get something on an estimated delivery date, however, is beyond silly. As stated above: the only guarantee the KS makes is that you will get the product. Eventually. If that doesn't bode well you, my suggestion would once again be don't give to the KS.

Or, learn to be a bit more patient. ;)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

Yeah, I'd be all over this one too. Love the idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

DMantium. The strongest of metals that can only be destroyed by GM fiat. It's rare . . . or so very rare . . .


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
James Thomas wrote:
Or how about one for certain non-human races?

Such as a First World AP with a party of gnomes?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

Very excited to hear how you all enjoyed this AP! It's my intention to run this one after my current crew finishes Runelords (in probably a year or so), either as a "few years down the road" thing or as an immediate necessity thing requiring it be done in a matter of a couple months (give-or-take)--for obvious reasons.

My group is already planning their characters for it though, getting back stories and connections established (for instance, the two ladies I've got in the game are playing daughters of Brodert Quink). I would be very interested to learn of any tweaks for encounters that you think might be necessary to help make the AP more memorable. Not all, of course, that would be crazy, but are their some specific ones you thought could have been more interesting and how?

My intention is to play this AP on the slow progression track, so I can include various other Pathfinder missions that the players will be required to go on for the Society (primarily from the Pathfinder Society missions that I've bought and downloaded). In this way, I hope to have them returning to Magnimar regularly and making the city more important to them, as well. I'm also planning to do a little something to start with that requires their doing a bit more research rather than Sheila just giving them everything. The plans are yet fuzzy in my head, but the hopes and dreams are there!

Anyway, great write-up and responses from your players. Thanks for all the info thus far!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

Serpent Skull was the first AP I GM'ed for Pathfinder. All the information you need to run that game is there in the books; however, book three does necessitate some intervention if you want it to be more story-driven. Otherwise, you almost have to treat it like a mini-game.

Never played Second Darkness, so can't comment on that one.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Krome wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Personally, I believe XP should ONLY be awarded for completing quests. This provides incentive for players to be more creative in how they deal with obstacles. Killing is not the only way to deal with monsters then.

And killing the monsters should not be the only way to get XP when dealing with monsters. The objective is to defeat/overcome the encounter. You don't have to kill the monster/NPC in order to gain the XP award. Getting them to flee or subduing them are two other viable options amongst many others.

My KM crew goes out of their way to keep the vast majority of those they face alive. That doesn't mean they don't get XP for defeating the encounter. Of course they do! I couldn't even fathom the death of the enemy being the only way to achieve an XP award. That idea is absolutely foreign to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

dotting

(and to push it forward onto the first page)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Dungeon Master Zack wrote:
We're not talking about a pointy stick, we're talking about weapons and magic that can fell demigods.

And far, far, far too easily, might I add. Tough to point to a demigod as being anything special when they can be completely eradicated in a matter of 12 seconds or less. But, that's partly why I have an issue with stats for anything "godly" at all.

Just my opinion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

I've gotten into the habit of running most everything on the slow track, except the Rise of the Runelords AP that I'm running now, which is on the Medium track. Slow progression enables me more leeway to do more things inside the story or to create additional stories for my players. Kingmaker is our primary game right now, and I don't see how anyone can play that AP with the standardized Medium progression rate. That AP would be no fun at all if you couldn't add in your own story lines. Not that the AP is written poorly, mind you; it's awesome! However, there's simply too many possibilities to just run it with what's been written.

So far, our group has selected Shattered Star and Skull & Shackles as almost certain future games after we're done with the couple we're playing now, and I've already told them that both of these will be played on the slow progression, as would Carrion Crown (another they've shown interested towards), because there are simply too many ideas I've got for all those APs. Granted, it does help that my players enjoy longer campaigns, typically running 2-3 years in length.

I'm blessed with an awesome group that way!

All that said, I'd be incredibly receptive to a slow progression AP!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

I think you'd be just fine, AD. That all three of your players are playing caster classes (no higher than 3/4 BAB) should make things a bit more interesting for you, but they should still be able to do it. And while a GMPC is something you could go with, I'm not so sure it's necessary either, since there are a plethora of NPCs in this AP that could take up the mantle and help if necessary . . . especially a very unique one in Book 3.

@Rojosama: You will break this AP. Everything in it would become so pathetically easy for your players that--if they desire challenge at all--you will either be working your bum off to increase the power level of every book, or you'll fly through this thing in a matter of a few months while your players wade through everything in less than a full round. I've said it before: I don't believe the difficulty factor of this AP is there. You can make it difficult, of course, but it's not ingrained within the AP. Gestalt would make it a complete waste of time.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Lauraliane wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
That's pretty much my impression, too. I am very tempted to ask my players this Tuesday (when we begin to play again after the holidays) if they even want to use the mythic rules at all, partially or fully. The last session they just finished adventure one, so all is open in that regard.

Isn't your party made of 6 players though? Anything would be easy with so many players.

Also the module 1 is obviously not the right one to decide if you want to use the Mythic rules or not, because well the player are anyway not mythic in that module.

I think his point here was that because the players haven't actually become mythic yet, they wouldn't have to retcon anything by deciding not to go with mythic now.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

I would say be careful. I haven't run Wrath yet, and it's going to be a toss up as to whether I'm going to. I've read the first four books now, and I have been quite unimpressed with the difficulty level of this AP. Despite using Mythic system, it doesn't appear to be incredibly mythic in its difficulty. You might almost be able to play this AP with two regular characters and pull it off if their choices were decent.

Besides that, you get so much help throughout the AP that many encounters would be trivialized. The development team for Paizo said it would take the Mythic system to make this AP work. So far, the Mythic system has only appeared to make it a cakewalk. I'm really hoping the difficulty level escalates tenfold for the last two books, or I'm afraid this one might be a wash.

In short, I'd be wary of gestalt. Luckily, any campaign can be fun with the right people around the table. =)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Tangent101 wrote:
half-brother Titus

I've a Titus in my campaign as well! He's a cohort of one of my players who thought it would be wise to get a cleric into a game of two sorcerers, a druid, and a monk. He is a cleric of Lissala (everyone else thinks he's a follower of Nethys; he Titus knows very little about Lissala, but he found this strange rune . . . ) and started as human, though after dying has subsequently been reincarnated as a goblin, which has been interesting!

Just thought the connection with the name was cool. Carry on everyone! =D


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Tangent101 wrote:

What I may do when I run WotR is craft an encounter of suitable difficulty for the party, composed of the creatures they fight (and maybe the opposing army's general). Then I describe the fight between the armies as akin to the actual fight between the PCs and their foes.

Though that might be difficult to pull off seeing that I'm not sure how to determine the CR of an Army, especially when it may have several advantages due to NPCs joining them. But I can always just wing it. ^^;;

Tangent, I would use the troop subtype found in

Spoiler:
Rasputin Must Die

With this, you can take any lesser CR creature and turn them into a CR worthy of fighting for the group. The rules for it are pretty easy, so creating them is worth it. I did this for my group using hobgoblins when I introduced Red Hand of Doom into my Kingmaker AP. It works very well.

Just a thought.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Krome wrote:
Kayland wrote:

Did anyone seriously rework Aldern's mansion in the Skinsaw Murders? It seems....beyond severely harsh with the constant saves or lose stats. I could see my players going into two rooms...looking at me...giving me the finger and razing the place to the ground while just walking away from the A.P.

I was thinking about changing the Universal haunts to not be save/drains and instead just impart information combined with some short term effect...a set number of rounds of being nauseous etc. After all they're still too low at that point to be walking around with numerous ways to get rid of stat loss.

Fortunately the mansion is fireproof and cannot be burned down. The mansion is harsh... harsh enough we had a total party kill in it! On several of the haunts I even added in extra saves to give them chances. Still killed everyone.

The mansion really is hit and miss, I think. My group went through it without a single issue. No deaths, barely a scratched fingernail until they got down into the caverns, and even then they barely suffered an incident.

Spoiler:
The sorceress with undead bloodline essentially charmed Aldern before any attacks were made. They took him above ground where the revenant of his wife fought and tore him apart.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Nearyn wrote:
@Zhayne: Quite correct, I apologize for not providing enough information. At my GM's table, the players may decide for themselves whether they want to roll several times, or just multiply the result outright. They must, however, decide which they wanna use before the dice are rolled. I usually just multiply because it saves time, and lets my fellow players get their turn faster if I crit. This time, the dice came up in my favour.

That's a rule you all might want to do a retake on if you'd rather not have to deal with this sort of situation all the time.

Doing 4d8+24 damage, maxed out, would be 56 damage. Doing it the way you did it adds a significant amount of phantom damage to that tally, and you didn't even get max on the original damage roll, which would add even more. Chances are, at your level, 56 damage would have been enough, though average damage for 4d8+24 would amount to 42, which may not have completely killed the brigand.

Not trying to tell people how to play, but this house rule just strikes me as being somewhat broken. Eliminating it could help to alleviate problems like this in the future.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

Native Michigander here! Love winter and love snow! I say bring on the cold! =D


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Wiggz wrote:

Think of it like this: a veil of invisibility cloaks you, but if you move to fast, cover too much ground or engage in too elaborate an action, the veil is disrupted. For the duration of the spell you are Staggered by choice to keep the veil in tact. If you choose to act normally (double move, full attack action, etc.), the veil is disrupted until the beginning of your next turn at which point you become Invisible again - unless you again act too quickly or elaborately. Obviously the duration of the spell ending cancels the effect as well.

Its worked out very well and feels much more natural than the games we were playing with the rules before.

If I were a wizard or other primary spellcasting class, I'd buy into this interpretation/house rule of invisibility all day!

Wizard: What? You mean I can go invisible, stand over here in the corner, and spam every spell I've got as a standard action and never become visible? Um, WIN! Yeah, sign me up!

I'd then make sure that all my primary spells had no point of origin, so no enemy would be able to pinpoint me and stop worrying about a thing! Or, do you make sure that every NPC one comes across has see invisibility to counter this?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
PRD wrote:

Cast a Quickened Spell

You can cast a quickened spell (see the Quicken Spell feat), or any spell whose casting time is designated as a free or swift action, as a swift action. Only one such spell can be cast in any round, and such spells don't count toward your normal limit of one spell per round. Casting a spell as a swift action doesn't incur an attack of opportunity.

Emphasis is mine.

I remember there was a huge debate about this during the Mythic playtest. In does say in the CRB that only one spell can be cast per round, unless there is a swift/immediate/free action associated with the casting, at which time two spells can be cast in a round.

Never can three be cast in a round, regardless of whether one has more standard or movement actions left in the round. Mythic rules provide opportunities for additional actions in a round I believe (such as taking a full round action and still getting an additional standard action). A character able to do this, that has a quickened spell available, can still only cast two spells that round, not three. They'll have to use the standard action for other abilities or powers they might have to use.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Grayn wrote:

Remember, Paladins are a bit of a trouble magnet. Most of the enemies are written to head straight for the paladin (or obviously good aligned characters).

You could always scrub that part of the description or just make something that wouldn't attract all the attention...unless of course, you want to gm and be the center of the fight.

Not to mention that Paladins can get incredibly powerful. It probably wouldn't do for you to outshine your players either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
MMCJawa wrote:
Note that pretty much the entire city had been driven mad. It wasn't "well, there are some jerks here, better smite everyone". Also this event is called out as causing a shift in Sarenae's personality, to one of less reckless smiting and more embracing redemption. So yeah it was a mistake on her part that she regrets, and caused a re-examination of her existence. When the Greek Gods, or Yahweh, do something on par with this (and often for less reason), at best we get a shrug.

I spoilered the reply to this so as not to derail thread . . .

Spoiler:
As has been pointed out earlier, pantheistic gods are fallible. Thus, when a fallible being does something like destroying a city, naturally said being might shift their personality, regardless of whether their actions were justified.

When Yahweh did something "on par with this," it was because those people fully deserved what they got. There was no need for apology, and the possibility for redemption had always been there for them . . . they chose to ignore it and live the way they wanted to. We reap what we sow. People most often don't like it because we look at the punishment bestowed upon those people of old and say, "Am I any different? Do I deserve the same?" and always the answer seems to be, "Yes." Of course, we'd rather say, "No." So, instead of changing our lifestyle, it's easier to blame Yahweh for His rightful punishment of evil people.

Now, I know that Paizo doesn't like people getting into these arguments, which is why I put this in spoiler tags. However, I do get tired of reading how people trash on God constantly. I'm not even trying to start an argument here. I'm just trying to point out the other side of the story.

For what it's worth, I agree with your statements on alignment categories.

Have a great evening!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
MYTHIC LOVECRAFT!!!!!! WITH CTHULU AT THE END!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SHOOT! I'm already doing this! It's called Kingmaker! =D


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Gancanagh wrote:

So... people get it this week? What happend with the only-1-week-before-PDF-release thing?

So now its 15 days from the PDF release, I have to wait 15 days while list being made by people that test my patience and curiosity.

That is 15 days of pure hell.

Thanks...

Yeah buddy! =D

There is, of course, an easy fix for this little predicament.

Just sayin'.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Dragonchess Player wrote:

How about becoming a Linnorm King?

The PCs start out as "hired help" protecting a small town from minor threats and progress to leaders expanding that town against increasingly tougher threats (many of which can dragon-themed), leading raids to increase their reputations, etc. Eventually, they have to square off against one of the existing Linnorm Kings (probably Opir Eightfingers, as his claim is the most tenuous); they can defeat him, but to be recognized as "legitimate" rulers, they have to defeat a linnorm.

If you want to take it even farther, they can attempt to unite the Lands of the Linnorm Kings under their rule... requiring that they defeat the Fafnheir, the Father of All Linnorms.

I [b]LOVE[/i] this for four reasons:

1) It's definitely feasible to be dragon-oriented throughout.
2) The draconic aspect is stooped in Golarion lore.
3) It's all about Land of the Linnorm Kings (aka Vikings!).
4) It can be another Kingmaker-esque AP!

There's a ton of upside to this idea.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
J-Bone wrote:
Space - definitely Spelljammer in the Golarionverse!

I am not a Distant Worlds fan, and I am definitely not a Spelljammer fan (in my Realms, Spelljammer never existed).

However, seeing that we have a bunch of people wanting both, why not combine them by creating a Pathfinder Trek: Distant Worlds AP? There's already precedent set for space ships sent from Golarion in

Spoiler:
Doom Comes to Dustpawn

Let's give people the ability to enjoy Golarion's final frontier using the sci-fi tropes that so many already know and love (unless you're more of a fan of that other silly sci-fi mess involving Wars). Give the players an opportunity to build a diverse crew from all around Golarion, become chief officers aboard a star ship where they'll have plenty of NPCs to take command over, and zoom around galaxy to the various distant worlds to tell amazing stories of space drama and true tactical combat in a 3D format!

I think the PF devs could create an unbelievable story in the far reaches of space that wouldn't even need Golarion flavor save for what the PCs bring with them on the journey. Plus, all that planet-hopping would be much more intensive if done via a star ship! Portal-hopping has been done to death, and this would give us an opportunity to experience something far more interesting! And it gives people the ability to pilot a star ship! Throw a mech suit in there someplace, and Paizo has an AP that could not be matched. Sci-fi fanatics would get those six issues they've finally been craving for, and perhaps it would even blow the new Numeria AP out of the water . . . or maybe not.

As for me, I'll still put my vote in for a Land of the Linnorm Kings AP (vikings vs witches), an urban-centric AP in Absalom, or a First World/fey AP. Geb/Nex would be pretty cool too.

Spoiler:
I would vote for a Nirmathus/Molthune AP, but if the novel done on it gives any insight into the nature of that fight, it would probably be best for both sides to simply wipe each other out and start from scratch. Neither appeared to have a lick of sense.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Tangent101 wrote:
So Acrobatics can help enemies move away from a tripping foe.

What would the DC be for this? Would it be a static number, based on the opponent's CMD, or other?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

I actually welcome the vermin fights. My group has been playing PF for roughly three years now, and I can count on one hand the number of vermin they've squared off against. I see this as an opportunity to let them fight something different from the norm! I welcome it!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Mechalibur wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I think Gods should be CR 26-30, and killable by CR 25 PCs.
That's a strong monster, not a god.
That's entirely a matter of personal preference. Hell, the loads of people asking for god/demigod stats shows that a lot of people think being able to kill demon lords isn't going far enough.

Pretty sure Paizo staff have said numerous times that they aren't interested in statting up their true deities. It just doesn't fall in line with their philosophy of what a god is in their multiverse (ie. gods are simply too powerful for PCs to tackle). Naturally, this doesn't mean that those who want to kill gods are playing the game wrong . . . it does appear to mean that such desires lay outside the scope of what Paizo envisions for their world and the people in it, however.

Thus, for those who wish to go on god-killing rampages, I say knock yourselves out . . . but your GM will have to do a little constructive stat-blocking of their own. In my former 2E campaigns, I gave my players numerous chances to put a god down for good. We played in Forgotten Realms, but even with all those gloriously beautiful deity books (Faiths & Avatars, Demihuman Deities, and Powers & Pantheons) full of avatar stats, I wouldn't let them off that easy! Gods shouldn't be a cakewalk. Deciding to take the fight to one of them should mean gruesome death to all heretics and blasphemers that try . . . except, on the rarest occasions, one might find that lucky few. ;)

Needless to say, I have no problems with Paizo's take that gods won't be statted up. I welcome it. If my players want to square off against a god, it's probably best if I do the deed myself anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

This actually reminds me of that guy over in the RotR forum that said he and his compatriots will be running an all wizard party for that game.

Personally, I think it's a great idea to try if your players truly want to go for it! Best part about Pathfinder is any combination of party is viable . . . even if that only involves one class!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Voltron64 wrote:
3. Another module set in Lastwall.

Bold is mine . . . What was the first module set in Lastwall?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
thejeff wrote:

I wouldn't say "very unusual". It's pretty common in fantasy to have a series be one long story spread over several books. Partly due to Tolkien's influence the trilogy is very common. Common enough to be a standard fantasy trope.

Less common in SF, I think and much rarer in other genres.

There are certainly many examples of loosely connected series or even fairly tightly connected ones that are still more complete in themselves, but plenty of examples of books in a series that don't stand on their own.
Zelazny's Amber would be an earlier example. ASoIaF and The Wheel of Time are more recent ones.

And let's not forget the trilogy that's growing in popularity in fantasy circles: The Kingkiller Trilogy by Patrick Rothfuss. Fantasy has plenty of examples of many books being used to complete a large story arch without any of them being self contained.

Maybe this tendency that appears to be used more in the fantasy genre than others is what makes it somewhat unique in its story-telling mode.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Chris Kenney wrote:
Sub-Creator wrote:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
That's as good an explanation for it as I've heard. I often give my players XP awards for the completion of tasks and the like (or used to, until the rather rigid XP tables of this edition started to make such things difficult). I'm definitely willing to accept such a concept in APs. My thanks.

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
The Block Knight wrote:
But there's about 2% of all things that are pretty much black-and-white. The earth is round. Water is wet. And people are either accepting or not. Period. There aren't varying degrees of acceptance. Those who claim to be accepting, except for people who don't fit into their band of acceptance, aren't actually accepting, now are they? To be accepting on an issue, you sort of have to go all in. I'll say it again, people are people. There shouldn't be degrees.

Sorry to intrude on this conversation, and with the hellfire being thrown around here, I step into this without intent to make anyone feel bad.

However, I completely disagree with this point. To state it simply and hopefully without anyone reading malice into the point (though you may if you wish, as I'll stand by it anyway): It is entirely possible to be accepting of an individual, but not accepting of certain choices they make. You can love a person without loving certain lifestyle choices they make. Stated another way yet in the same fashion, you can be accepting of the individual yet find certain behaviors unacceptable.

I would also like to say that I'm only part of the way into Part 3 of this book, but have found it very enjoyable for an adventure and am excited to see where it goes. However, as much as I appreciate this adventure, there are choices that were made that I didn't like, such as

Spoiler:
on page 18: The party is awarded 600 XP for "managing" to secure Chief Sull's friendship and accept the offer of alliance despite the fact there isn't even a roll that needs to be made to secure those things. They are freely given by the mongrel! Most of the other story awards in the AP I agree with, but not this one. Experience should not be awarded for something freely given and that doesn't even possess any hurdle to acquire.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

Okay . . . I've officially learned my lesson! I'll not attach other desired purchases in with my subscriptions to lessen the S&H charges anymore! All right? All right?!?

Can I please get my shipping notice now? I'm dying to bloody read this first installment already!

PS - The first paragraph was written in jest . . . I realize the delay drags because of GenCon. Doesn't mean I'm not getting antsy here! ;)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Gancanagh wrote:

I hope the new dragons look kinda like this:

Peppermint Dragon from Deviantart

The guy who drew this has done a lot of artwork for pathfinder.

That's an incredible picture! However, its anatomical construction appears more drake than dragon--based primarily on the forelimb attachment to the wings.

Still, awesome artwork.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
You can start saving for my airplane ticket to the next PaizoCon right now. Heck, we could even kickstart it. I'm sure people would throw stupid money for the opportunity to punch me in the face in person. ;-)

. . .

. . . Would that be a guaranteed perk?

;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Quandary wrote:
Tom S 820 wrote:

Dynamic world changing story. That word is not same in next several AP.

+10,014

Exploring the repurcussions of changed world from several angles sounds cool.

Here's one: Rahadoum meets Aboleths and Gill-men meets Mengkare/Hermea meets Ancient Jistkan Hoo-Ha

I really hope to see Gill-men more prominently though. Given they are basically the Aboleth's hyponotized spies amongst humanity.

-10,015

This idea of a major over-arching story line for Golarion has been brought up a lot (I expect to see magnus here any time now), but continually gets shot down because Paizo isn't interested in making its own books obsolete through changing canon. They write the canon-altering stories as APs, then gaming groups get to decide which of those happen in their own campaigns. Thus, each of these wonderful ideas listed above can indeed happen; it just won't be Paizo who does it. It would be you, in your own game.

Many of us would hate to see the Forgotten Realms all over again. ;)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

I'd actually be more apt to appreciate mecha in a straight fantasy setting like PF than I ever have in "real world" set pieces such as Pacific Rim. I mean come on! One frickin' pin or node breaks or melts from heat on the processor or motherboard and the whole bloody system malfunctions and shuts down, yet you expect me to believe they can build a mech unit that can take a punch and not just collapse into a useless, hulking pile of metal? I think not! ;)

@Feros: I do concur with that. Although from what I've read, the Technic League only thinks they're in control. The gearsmen don't always follow orders. Perhaps the League has thought about world conquest, but they can't get their technology to do what they want it to!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Sub-Creator wrote:
Can any of these word spells be used by the magus? That's what I'm playing and using Words of Power, so I'm looking for additional words I might be able to use with him!

Undead disruption i and ii (disrupt undead equivalent with a higher level version as well) can be used by a magus. IIRC the magus' base spell list does not include many undead targeting spells so we did not include many in here as well.

Having said that, Book of Magic: Energy Words Revisited is very magus friendly.

Most excellent, sir. I thank you! Is your company intending to release any other supplemental material for Words of Power soon? We're starting Jade Regent in January and am desperately trying to improve his repertoire by then!

And thank you for the suggestion! I'll be checking that other one out, as well!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

Can any of these word spells be used by the magus? That's what I'm playing and using Words of Power, so I'm looking for additional words I might be able to use with him!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
ShadowcatX wrote:

Both from JBE:

Book of Magic Energy Words Revisited

10 Undead Spell Words

The book of deep magic (which was a kickstarter) will have some as well when it is released.

Thank you. Thank you very much!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
ShadowcatX wrote:
A couple 3pp exist for words of power

Could you point to a couple of these, perhaps? Thanks! =)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Cat-thulhu wrote:
I have at least 1 player who looses interest if the focus shifts away from the players for too long. Hopefully I can integrate the PC's into the mass battles so it's not an issue.

Do you have Reign of Winter Book Five? There's a new creature subtype that Hodges introduces in that book that can actually really help to offer a fantastic way to more integrate into mass combat!

Spoiler:
It's called the troop subtype. It's kind of like a swarm with regular soldiers, but with a few different aspects. Honestly, it works perfectly if you want to have a cut-scene combat in the midst of a mass battle sequence, and because the mass combat rules are abstract, you can literally do them both at the same time! This is just a suggestion that I haven't implemented myself yet, but am planning to do so in my KM campaign!


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Orthos wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
It's possible that that isn't the average Pathfinder player's sentiment, and that the tastes of the average RPG player have changed considerably in the past dozen years or so, much like many other industries.

This.

Speaking only for myself, this whole discussion on "Star Wars"-ifying Pathfinder/Golarion isn't the thing. Star Wars isn't where I get my "I want some tech in my fantasy".

For me it was what got me into gaming in the first place: console RPGs. Specifically, Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy IV through VI. Chrono Trigger, the first non-Mario video game I ever beat, started out stereotypical medieval fantasy - kings and princesses, swordsmen and knights, evil wizards - with a small dash of tech involved thanks to Lucca, which continued to build as you went through the game (first getting dumped in the high-tech future, then getting tossed back to magi-steampunk Zeal). Final Fantasy IV was very fantasy until about halfway through the game where you start running into higher technology including a spaceship. Same with V - low-tech, idyllic fantasy fare at the beginning, but as the situation gets more and more dire and you travel to more extreme parts of the game world more and more advanced technology rears its head.

The capper for me though was Final Fantasy VI, still my absolute favorite in the entire series, which introduced the concept of Magitek from the get-go, as one of the main driving forces of the plot. You start the game walking around in a mech, charging in literally guns-blazing!

These are the things that got me into gaming in the first place, and without them I wouldn't be here. I can't help but love the opportunity for the game I spend most of my time on now to begin to be more like the games that got me interested in the first place.

Whereas I got into gaming because of my love for Tolkien and Lewis and Howard . . . and these are the types of fantasy that I enjoy. I played and enjoyed Final Fantasy too, although all those darn airships got old with me incredibly quickly. At the same time, I have a really good friend who played those games for the airships! It's different tastes, which is awesome. Everybody brings something different to the table! What I like about the Numeria AP coming out is that it finally gives those Final Fantasy lovers something in canon to play with, which they've really been missing out on for a long time. Honestly, you all deserve it!

Of course, it also reassures me when the CEO of the companies comes in to say that Golarion is a primarily fantasy world and will stay that way. (I didn't appreciate the ridiculous bickering that brought her in to say it, but I digress.) Because while I am happy for those fantasy/sci-fi/tech lovers, I am still a Tolkien/Lewis fantasy guy at heart, and that's what I truly enjoy. I don't necessarily agree with Cheapy that the majority have turned to the sci-fi/tech perspective on things, but I also don't agree with others here that get disappointed whenever Paizo does something for their sci-fi/tech crowd (though, admittedly, I'm not keen on planet-hopping . . . my apologies).

Paizo has always played things smart here. Dip the toe, and if it gets a good reception, immerse the foot. I'm cool with that. That's what they did here too. Put Numeria-inspired stuff in a couple products like KM and Dungeons of Golarion, put airships in UC, and now it's moved up to an AP with support material. I'm glad they've done this, and I hope the crowd that prefers this continues to get some support for their tastes in future products, as well.

Saying that's where the crowd is leaning though . . . I don't necessarily believe that. The vocal crowd maybe! Which makes sense, as that crowd hasn't had much to play with 'til now. I'm sure there are still a large number out there like myself though, that grew up with good ol' standard fantasy rummaging around in ye ol' imagination and still very much prefer that type of adventure! We just haven't been as vocal because we've got plenty to do! It would disappoint me if I made my switch to Pathfinder only to find that the sci-fi/tech play style was where this world was going, but I know that's not the case. Paizo wouldn't do that. They wouldn't alienate us standard fantasy folk . . . they're simply making the right move by giving the sci-fi/tech fantasy folk their options too. That's smart, and it shows they acknowledge both groups exist to provide new stuff for!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
logic_poet wrote:
Sadly, as soon as I saw that they'd placed the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords, I knew the Beer & Beards dwarf AP wasn't happening any time soon. If by 2015 people are looking for a more normal fantasy AP, I'd like to see one set in Galt. Like Kingmaker, and like Wrath of the Righteous in being able to change the canon Golarion.

I'd like to go on record as saying that ALL the APs change the canon of Golarion . . . but only in your individual campaigns if you play them! That, in my opinion, remains the brilliance of Paizo's design choice for APs.

If we're kinda starting anew with stuff, I'd still love to see a Land of the Linnorm Kings AP (vikings vs. witches!). Also, I'm a huge fan of the fey, so anything First World-related is win by me. I'll continue to make it known that I'd love to see a draconic AP one day, too!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Jim Groves wrote:
And I was the one that observed the element of the "Scourging of the Shire" theme. I think a lot of that comes from Tolkien's own feelings about returning to Britain at the end of the World War.

Tolkien would be rolling over in his grave if he heard you say this . . . You know that, right? ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
Odraude wrote:
I honestly love the concept of Machine Gods.

Skynet has corrupted at least one generation. ;)

I'm not keen on the concept, but I'm more than willing to sit back and wait to see what they do with it!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

I'm very happy that this AP is coming out for no other reason than hopefully we'll be able to get over all this bickering about alien/robots/lasers vs "boring ol' common fantasy" stuff that so many people are constantly going on about. I don't mind Numeria. Heck, I've got a plot line that involves Numeria in my current Kingmaker campaign. I don't mind aliens. I also have a very alien-intensive Black Tapestry plot line going on in that same Kingmaker campaign that deals a lot with aliens and technology. I believe there's room for all kinds of different roleplaying, despite my greater appreciation for the "boring ol' common fantasy" gaming.

Reading all this crap that seems to constantly go back-and-forth between the two camps certainly does get old, though. Real old.

This thread is about Numeria's new AP. I'll never play it, but I'll definitely own it because I try to get all the lore I can. And besides that, I don't have to turn Golarion into Deep Space Nine or Babylon 5 with spaceship armadas and high-powered laser tech if I don't wish to. I fully support all those who desire to do so, however! (This is in answer to a sourcebook containing such things as spoken above, for those who are scratching their heads right now.)

I do think it would be interesting if Paizo did give some interesting archtypes that fit Numeria tech and the like though. Standard fantasy fare might not be as interesting to play in a game that's high tech. Also, I definitely hope they deliver on the Technic League and the political happenings in Numeria, as well. Those are the things that interest me about that region the most!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

I plan on starting this campaign with a pilgrimage from the PC's Kingmaker kindom in the River Kingdoms. Kanabres is the destination, and the PCs will grab a few NPCs on the way.

I also want to start the PCs off as level 0 characters and they earn their first level in the first adventure.

Okay, curiosity is peaked . . . Are there rules for 0-level in this system? I don't remember ever reading about them! Where can I find these?

1 to 50 of 335 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 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.