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

Tacticslion's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. 9,393 posts (11,630 including aliases). 3 reviews. 4 lists. 1 wishlist. 30 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 9,393 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Support ZOE!

(That's the short version of the two-hour video. But more seriously, they need, like, 1,000 more supporters of $100 each - or some at 1 dollar or some at lots of dollars - before Journey Quest Season 3 can be made!)


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

"I blame my phone."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

... meh.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Drejk wrote:
Comcast?

Century Link.

Though I don't actually think it's them. This time.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tacticslion wrote:
Grr. iPad not getting online, computer improperly processing Paizo ("you've made too many requests" stuff no matter what I do), leaving me only with my phone...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tacticslion wrote:
Grr. iPad not getting online, computer improperly processing Paizo ("you've made too many requests" stuff no matter what I do), leaving me only with my phone...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Grr. iPad not getting online, computer improperly processing Paizo ("you've made too many requests" stuff no matter what I do), leaving me only with my phone...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

>.>
<.<

... me too.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I also have acquired a stalker... a small, scaly, cleaving stalker with a terrible family...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hey, Mark, do you mind finding that one post you did that was about a Commoner campaign, and either re-post it or link to it here or here? Or even, dare I hope, expand on it?! I wasn't able to find it recently, though that's likely just because I crit-failed my Search roll and am too super-lazy to look it up again.

On topic: Ashiel, how do you feel about me using your thread as a less-efficient means of communication than a PM which would probably be easier and less cluttery?


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

So awesome! Thanks!


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

Dang it, thunderstorms. Goodbye, for now, forums! I'll retuuurrrrnnn~!


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

The Set-up:

- Single player game (so it's just the two of us).

- Player plays a normally-loner-type paladin, massive exceedingly heavy armor, very high strength. Wisdom penalty. Items that really help out with intelligence-based skills.

- Has successfully 'hot-wired' a "mechanical man" (described in our game as a giant tea-cum-boiler-pot with three legs and four arms) to always follow orders, places a big leather tarp over top of it (leaving it's "head" poking out), and has taken three kobolds alive (though one is unconscious) and tied them to said mechanical man.

- Has several additional exceptionally heavy things.

Dressed in her plate armor with all the stuff tied to her, she clomps heavily, having had the entire small town stop and stare at her along the entire way. She was interested in talking to "cane guy" - an NPC who, though young and reasonably healthy-looking with no obvious injury, seems to rely on his cane and walk slowly; earlier in the day, at lunch, he'd been about to head over to talk to her while she was eating, but a minor earthquake had sent him tumbling, dropping all his food and drink over himself, while she'd run out to investigate (culminating in the part of the adventure where she took kobolds prisoner and hotwired the clockwork servant).

Since that adventure, she'd met with the mayor and undertaker, gotten lots of things prepared and under way, had the bones of ghosts buried to prevent their haunting (even performing rites for kobolds to prevent said haunting), and collected rewards, as well as turning in a wayward (dead, but not by her hand) wizard.

Pretty tired and hungry,

PC: "Do I see cane-guy?"
GM: "... you mean Dajsheem? Yeah. He's over there in the corner trying not to be noticed."
PC: "Yeah, cane-guy! Poor guy! Wait... do I know he's trying not to be noticed?"
GM: "... uh..." *rolls dice* "... no. No, you don't. He's really hoping for company, in fact!"
PC: "Awesome! I go over there and say 'hi'!"
GM: "So... you clomp over to the corner table, as his eyes widen with..." *rolls dice* "... some emotion or another, probably joy... and your device goes *putter-putter/click-clack-cluck-clack-click* behind you, as two of your kobolds stare about wildly.
PC: "Oh, dangit! I forgot about them!" >.> "Oh, well, he's really happy to see us!"
GM: *rolls dice... again; blinks at results... again* "Yes... yes, his bright red, wide-eyed face definitely confirms that. It just screams, 'I'm so happy.'"


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Malag wrote:
Did I really, but really abuse tactics

Ow, ow, ow, ow, oowwww~!

Heeeeyyyyy~! Stop it! That hurts, man!

Aaaaaaaaaaand /my contribution to the thread with a joke-pun post about my name that in no way reflects the discussion at all.


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

Awesome! Thank you!


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ashiel wrote:
Serenrae is probably my favorite good deity in Golarion because she's super good in an unusual way, having love even for the evil gods in the pantheon. She feels like a super mary sue goddess of goodliness except without the Mary Sue part, which is hard to pull off and awesome. I also like that her followers are often screwed up which is very humanizing. She's got crazy religious military extremists trying to spread her love with swords and bloodshed. Seems pretty...human.

I also really heart Erastil. Lawful good without the idea that you need to kill 'em all, and with the idea that a simple life helps avoid corruption. It's like "let's put all the anti-lawful into a lawful good and make it work." Looooooooooooooovvvvveee it.

Ashiel wrote:
In Eberron, the Silver Flame and Vol are the only deities I really remember because I was interested in them. The noble order with the child prophet seemed cool and there was a lot of gray area in the church of the silver flame and a lot of cool "what ifs" here and there. A friend of mine who was an avid fan of Keith Baker got me interested in Vol because he explained prior to Wizardification, the cult was a grayer shade than the "Generic evil undead god", explaining that the cultists believed that mortals could unlock the secret of godhood but in a cruel trick by the gods were given lifespans too short to discover it. Believing that the secret to godliness was in the blood, their undead members were like martyred saints who forsook their own chance to become gods in exchange for the lifespans needed to discover the secret.

I mostly loved the religions of Eberron, though the Sovereign Host (the main one) felt kind of "generic meh" to me (which, I guess, was actually its purpose): the Silver Flame was awesome, Vol was endlessly fascinating (and retained enough traits of what you said after the Wizardification) for that reason (and also was explicitly not a goddess but an 16th level wizard...), and the Undying Court was a freakin' amazing concept ("hey, my 'god' is really my distanct ancestor... so I'mma go walk up to him and ask what I should have for lunch today. Yeah. He's right over there.") and I heart it.

And then, of course, was...

Ashiel wrote:
Though not technically a deity, there was also a philosophy that was popular amongst Kalashtar and monks (the name of which escapes me at the moment) but it was listed amongst the deities while explicitly noting that it wasn't actually a deity so much as kind of a self-improving philosophy.

... il-Yannah, or "the great light" which wasn't, exactly, a "self-improving" philosophy, though it certainly had elements of that as well. It was a "lawful neutral" "force of positive energy" (well, philosophy) with lawful good followers with the concept not just of self-improvement (though there was, by necessity, that concept) but also the concept of bringing about universal "enlightenment"... which doesn't mean "make everyone smart" but rather means "let's wage war against the ultimate evil - the darkness within men's souls - by doing really nice things and being the best daggum people we can be."

... and said warfare was literal, as they were literally trying to alter the current age and change things from the "eternal nightmare" made of men's dreams that the region of dreams was into a similarly "eternal dream" (il-Yannah).

Freakin' sweet.

Ashiel wrote:
In Forgotten Realms, I don't know a whole lot about the various deities but the ones I am somewhat familiar with and liked were Mystra and Shar 'cause I thought their weaves / shadowweaves were pretty cool, and I liked Eliastree (or however you spell her crazy name) and had a ranger that worshipped her in a FR game I was in once (unfortunately the GM thought it was stupid for our non-cleric PCs to be religious and would sic random encounters on us if we did or said anything relating to their beliefs).

There are far too many to go into here.

- Mystra/Shar/Selune (also the whole Azuth/Chosen/etc. thing)
- Eldath: ELDATH!
- Eilistraee
- TOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
- Red Knight
- daggum, there's a lot and I'm out of time.

Yeah.


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

Well! Back home, boys abed for nap, and I'm pretty sleepy.

I have pbp stuff to do, and a few thing to read and review, and a whole host of chores.

So naturally, now's the time to install Bioshock 2!

(Of course, it tells me that it's going to take 13 hours to download... >.>)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Internet politics suck.


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

YES!

Also, "dot".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Steve Geddes wrote:
I don't know if you want answers, but here are mine:

Thanks! Those are good answers (and some of them reflect the mods' specific ones in different other threads I've seen), however, I'm specifically looking for mods to answer these questions so I can point to this thread any time similar questions arise in the future and go "here thar be mods' answers" for all similar related questions.

As I said, most of those I know the answers for, but I figured it would be helpful for the mods to not have to answer the same questions over and over again, as well as to have a method of bypassing any sort of "well, that's just your opinion, man" kind of debate that can reasonably rise from a healthy distrust of second-hand reporting - effectively creating a FAQ for such things.

That said, I appreciate your feedback, Steve! :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Nappingbushbaby wrote:

SHHHH!!!

I am trying to take a nap here.

Highly recommend you learn how to do so in a noisy environment. It's the only way I survived college.

The NPC wrote:
I know you're probably busy, but did you get a chance to start reading that script?

I am and yes - but not much. Still, very interesting!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Barnes & Noble with he boys!


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

New thread. Give it your flagging-questions!


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

So, I need to flag a post... but what to choose?

Some of these I know, some I don't, and some I've asked but have been ignored or missed. Nonetheless, I've seen numerous questions on this topic, previously - although the categories are mostly self-explanatory, there are a few things that defy obvious classification. So I figured I'd make a pseudo-FAQ thread for the curious!

When flagging a:

- Spammer, which do I choose?

- Post that has a link to an NSFW site, but lacks that warning, what do I choose?

Is flagging my own post the correct response when I've:

- Made a spelling error?

- Unintentionally insulted someone or something?

- Improperly used BBCode Markups?

What happens (or what should I do) when I:

- Select "just wanted to try the flagging system"?

- Disagree with a deleted or edited post, or a moved thread?

- Accidentally flag a post (or flag it, then regret it)?

- See a post that contains words purposefully replicated from a Paizo-created work? (Such as an extended quote, with page citations.)

Are multiple flags important, or if a post is already flagged by one person, is that enough?

Thanks! I'm encouraging us to put all our questions related to the flagging system in this thread, to make the whole experience better for all of us, and to have a simple, single place to point to for future questions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Brodert Quink, Lady's Man, esq. wrote:
I personally go for the obvious analogies between ancient ruins and my genitals, but whatever works for you :-)

WELP. FINALLY GOT IT. o.o

#excusemymeI'malittleslow


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Gambitbear wrote:
Technically this guy is an Aurumvorax but I liked him better than the one bear avatar I found, and the resemblance is close enough.

Works for me!

Nappingbushbaby wrote:

I am going to take a nap now...

zzzz....zzzzz...zzzzz

Good call.

Elephant in a Room wrote:
I have a woodchuck question, but.... you probably don't want to hear it... never mind, it's not that funny anyway... Um, where's your bathroom?... never mind I'll just hold it in.... can I get some water...

1) Feel free.

2) Why not?
3) Your call.
4) In the area labeled "bathroom". Yes, in my house. Written in pencil on a taped piece of paper for company.
5) Bad call.
6) Not until you go use the restroom. Alternatively, there are bushes outside, away from the house.

The CR30 Green Tea Demigod wrote:
Mythic Tacticslion wrote:
...

Mythic is for wimps. Demigods are where the real power is.

Tacticslion wrote:

Arg! Look, it's not an "initiation" if you're all doing random things without any requisites!

This is totally you guys just choosing to do this for no reason!

And, for the record, suicide charges at boss monsters are also not part of any "initiation" ceremony!

... IF I had one, it'd be, like, drinking a small cup of sweet tea or something.

I approve.

:)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Anarchy_Kanya wrote:
Regarding the current conversation, BigDTBone should read the Darths & Droids webcomic. In that comic, which is about a group playing d20 Star Wars or something like that, there's this player who pretty much creates the world for the GM on ocassions. Yeah, the GM fills in all the details later, but he allows for the players to expand on the world, and that one player sometimes surprises him with her great imagination. Here are the pages I'm talking about.

Also an excellent example!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jaelithe wrote:
You know, I think that went right over his head.

It... it's very likely...

<.<

EDIT: Man, it took way too long to find a version of that which wasn't either labelled "you" or wasn't really dirty... :/

EDIT 2: Yay! I found two more! *goes into profile, as they will be useful later...*


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

Cool list!

Gendif wrote:

4)They guide but do not steer.

With a gmpc I have a voice in the party whom the party trust. Through this I can make suggestions providing it is in character. The dmnpc will never object to whatever the party majority decides to do. EVER.

This is the only real guideline of these that I generally consider "super important", however I find this is generally important for a collective group working together to do anyway, unless the GM is comfortable splitting the party.

(And, while that is a trope, it's also not a bad way to play. In my experience, however, it usually takes lots of time, energy, effort, and vigor on the part of the GM to split their attention and playtime between the different groups... which is much more difficult to do with a regular game-night set up than a "come as you can" game set-up.)


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

Did... did someone named "Gendif" just post and then delete said post?

EDIT: NOPE! It's right there! So weird! I saw that he posted, clicked "(1 new post)" and it... didn't show up until I posted! Sorry, man. XD


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
I have too many minis to prefer the latter too much. But I occasionally toy with the idea. ^_^

Related: Heroscape (the boardgame) is an awesome game... >.>


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
But your posts are so much longer, TL. ^_^

Very true!

(Most of the time.)

((Hence "TL" being wwwwaaaaaayyyyyy too apt a nick-name...)) >.>


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
KenderKin wrote:
Tactical map versus describe/assume which is better...discuss amongst yourselves.

As a player and GM, I tend to like the latter better, though the latter plus lots of clarifying questions tends to be best. But I know many who prefer the former, so that's good, too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jaelithe wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
Sure. That's what happened.
Saying a GM can learn about a scenario while playing it is like saying an architect can learn about a building he designed by driving by the outside.
He can. He only imagined what it looked like until it was built.

Dang it, Jaelithe! Beat me to it! :D


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
BigDTBone wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:

I think I may be able to be more clear about this point, so let me try,

A *PLAYER* has the task of *LEARNING* about the world in order to complete a challenge in the game.

The way that a *PLAYER* learns about the world is via their *PLAYER CHARACTER*

A GM *CANNOT LEARN* about the world by playing the game. The GM already has all the knowledge of the world.

So the GM necessarily cannot employ a *PLAYER CHARACTER* to complete the task of learning on his/her behalf.

All the GM's *PLAYER CHARACTER* can do is go through the motions.

Going through the motions isn't sufficient to warrant full-billing as a party member.

It takes away from the actual *PLAYERS* of the game.

Yeah, but... I disagree. As a player.

Replying here, because I'm about to get up and run errands. I will respond to your well-thought post in the next few hours, but for now I think I can respond to this one quickly.

Do you disagree that going through the motions isn't sufficient, or that all a GMPC can do is to go through the motions?

More to come depending on your responce.

Good luck and God's blessing on your errands!

To clarify: I disagree with your entire premise - each step of it.

So, point-by-point:

BigDTBone wrote:
A *PLAYER* has the task of *LEARNING* about the world in order to complete a challenge in the game.

First fallacy: the character has the task of learning about the world in order to enable the player to act on that learned knowledge to complete a challenge in the game.

Presupposing that a player and a character must know exclusively the same things is presupposing the automatic use of metagame knowledge, which returns to the concept of information compartmentalization. If a character has never heard of a "troll", regardless of how informed the player is, the character should not (by the character's rights or merits) "know" that the correct answer is literally "kill it with fire".

Many groups allow metagame knowledge to color the player's actions, but this is not inherent to the player itself.

BigDTBone wrote:
The way that a *PLAYER* learns about the world is via their *PLAYER CHARACTER*

Often, but not inherently true. Effectively, this means it is exclusive to certain play styles.

As just one example of where this is false, any time you've multiple rotating GMs (something mentioned a few times in this thread) within a singular setting or story, however, this is effectively non-true or even possible, outside of exceedingly difficult (to my way of thinking) limitations on the current GM (and probably requires some sort of meta-GM, or AP guidebook written by a neutral third party).

BigDTBone wrote:
A GM *CANNOT LEARN* about the world by playing the game. The GM already has all the knowledge of the world.

This is false. As a GM, I learn stuff all the daggum time. Perhaps I didn't think of all the details of the world from all angles and every piece of minutiae.

What does that coffee pot look like?

What kind of embroidery is on the pillow?

What hair color is the barmaid? Really? What's her favorite color? What's her favorite food? Orientation? Is her father a "kill on sight" or is he open to the idea of wooing her? Really?! SCORE!
(And so ends a vigorous sessions of "Spinning things out of thin air.")

Beyond that, there are GMs that roll for things randomly. What's in the treasure horde? Let's find out!

The point is, a GM can't know "everything" about their world before-hand. They can know "everything there is to know" (i.e. everything they've created to date)... but that's not necessarily "everything" that's in the world.

That is what's super-human: the ability to know all details before hand.

What's more, my world changes in response to the characters. Did I plan for the characters to go that way or do that thing? No. But that's okay - they did, and now I've got to scramble and learn new things about the world, taking my current knowledge and making a whole new set of knowledge. This is, in fact, learning about the world.

BigDTBone wrote:
So the GM necessarily cannot employ a *PLAYER CHARACTER* to complete the task of learning on his/her behalf.

Aaaaaaaaaactually untrue. You know those questions above? As both a player watching a GMPC run by another and as a GM with a GMPC, I've seen the GMPC in character ask those kind of questions which creates a learning experience and organically grows the world. The GM, then, must learn new things about the world, and grows, and does so through the GMPC.

But, of course, you mean in the course of an adventure (or at least, that's where most of this would become a problem).

That still doesn't mean that a GM can't learn through their GMPC.

Again, from both sides of the screen, I've watched as a GM learns and realizes a brand new angle to a certain problem. Why? Because they're now at that situation and looks at it through the eyes of their character - a character who does not know what they do, and thus must engage in ingenuity and come up with something new and different to overcome the obstacle in front of them.

This goes back to a GM being a finite creature. Sure, they have "all power" and "all knowledge (that exists)", but the person, the human behind the role, does not. They are not infinite, and thus will, inevitably, overlook things, because, the game, in the end, is an illusion, a story woven by everyone and facilitated (for various definitions of the term "facilitated"*) by the GM to create an effect within the minds of all the players (including the GM): that of creating a piece of interactive entertainment (which may or may not come with other benefits or emotional responses).

* Including, but not limited to: "arbitrated" or "facilitated" or "guided" or "controlled" or "loosely suggested" or any number of other things or combinations of the above. "Facilitated" is really more of a "filler" word than anything else.

All that stuff above means...,

BigDTBone wrote:
All the GM's *PLAYER CHARACTER* can do is go through the motions.

... is true, for the reasons described above.

BigDTBone wrote:
Going through the motions isn't sufficient to warrant full-billing as a party member.

Hah! You've never met some of my fellow gamers or their PCs!

Wooo~! That's what we call a "zing!"

(No, but seriously, some of them are great people, and fun to have around the table, even, but... yeah, they just roll dice and keep quiet.)

BigDTBone wrote:
It takes away from the actual *PLAYERS* of the game.

[Citation Needed]

pres man wrote:
I guess I am confused here. A PC that doesn't know what is going to happen, just because the player doesn't know, is function identical to a GMPC that doesn't know what is going to happen because the GM chooses not to have the character know. In both cases the characters don't know. You don't punish players for being incidentally ignorant, I fail to see the issue for a GM being willfully ignorant. The party is no worse off in either case.

Or, you know, I could just copy/paste knightday's and pres man's posts, as they tend to be far more eloquent and cover things far more succinctly than I.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
BigDTBone wrote:

I think I may be able to be more clear about this point, so let me try,

A *PLAYER* has the task of *LEARNING* about the world in order to complete a challenge in the game.

The way that a *PLAYER* learns about the world is via their *PLAYER CHARACTER*

A GM *CANNOT LEARN* about the world by playing the game. The GM already has all the knowledge of the world.

So the GM necessarily cannot employ a *PLAYER CHARACTER* to complete the task of learning on his/her behalf.

All the GM's *PLAYER CHARACTER* can do is go through the motions.

Going through the motions isn't sufficient to warrant full-billing as a party member.

It takes away from the actual *PLAYERS* of the game.

Yeah, but... I disagree. As a player.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
BigDTBone wrote:
Apparently When I say, "The full scope of unknowns in the game from plot twists to hidden levers," it isn't clear what I am talking about.

It's not, 'cause it's pretty big. Hard concept to grasp.

BigDTBone wrote:
So let me be more specific.

Sweet! Let me go down your list.

BigDTBone wrote:
Things a DM knows (or at least should be able to know) that can involve an unknown to the players in the game:

The very first caveat is a really, really big one: "(or at least should be able to know)" is a case where the GM might not know off the top of his head, but has access to. In this case, it's fundamentally important for responding to some of your points.

BigDTBone wrote:
What happens in the next week of game time at a "world" level if the players do nothing.

How does this affect the GMPC? If the PCs don't know, the GMPC doesn't know, unless otherwise indicated for some reason in-character.

Also, this either applies only to a game that has a hard timetable, or if the game just goes off the rails and the GM arbitrates a given amount of time... in which case the GM is arbitrating, rather than having a hardline predetermined element... in which case it's the GM making the decision as a GM, totally independent of any GMPC, meaning that it's a "compartmentalized" decision-making process (unless the GM isn't any good at compartmentalizing, in which case the NPCs are very prone to the same omniscience).

BigDTBone wrote:
What happens in the next week of game time at a "local" level if the players do nothing.

Again: how does this affect the GMPC? The other considerations above apply to this.

Summation: "What happens 'next week' should have no bearing on any GMPC or NPC unless the GM is bad at compartmentalizing his knowledge from in-character knowledge. A given GM may or may not have the ability to do better with certain categories (such as a GMPC or NPC) than others, but at it's core, it's the same issue."

BigDTBone wrote:
What happens in both of those levels in the next week if players follow paths A, B, or C.

(Question: what if they choose D? Or "all of the above"? Or "none of the above"? Are you just generalizing basics, ala an adventure path? I'm asking for context.)

Otherwise, similar issues to the above.

BigDTBone wrote:
What happens at those levels, if the players take no action or follow a particular path in a Month, 6 Months, and a Year of game time.

My plans mostly involve a general sort of "here's what happens eventually" - how things get there (or don't) is strictly up to how things play out in the game.

None of this automatically impacts the creation or build of a GMPC. Of course it can, but it still boils down to easily compartmentalized knowledge.

Either the PCs (including a GMPC) know this stuff, or they don't. If they don't, an NPC somewhere likely knows some of this stuff. In a complete void of information on the players' part, there is no reason to have that information "solid" (because it's not directly impacting the world), though it's a good idea to have a vague sort of idea of what's going on.

BigDTBone wrote:

What the major players in the world are doing at any given time, and how that relates to the PC's and plot.

What the major players locally are doing at any given time, and how that relates to the PC's and plot.

If you know in advance what every major NPC is doing at each hour of the day, you're in too deep. Pull out, man! Do less work!

If you simply mean that the GM needs to be able to spontaneously answer questions that the PCs would legitimately have reason to know the answers to about various NPCs, than you've got your answer for how the GMPC does or does not know something: does he have a legitimate method of acquiring the knowledge?

If you're worried about him acquiring the knowledge in a manner that is inconsistent with his character, than don't give him the knowledge. Be consistent with the character.

Unless there is an unusual dynamic (in which the party keeps information from each other for whatever reason), once one of the PCs know something legitimately, they all will soon.

BigDTBone wrote:

The lifestyle, wealth, family, alliances, and internal motivations of major players in the world and locally.

The nature and strength of every significant faction in the world.

The nature and strength of the alliances of those factions both locally and in the world.

The nature of politicking, espionage, power-grabs, power vacuums, revenge-plots, and media in every faction of the world, in every location in the world.

Do the PCs know none of this at the start? Are the created in a void? Whether or not they are created in a void, than create the GMPC with the same "amount" or "style" of knowledge as the other PCs.

Done deal.

That said, unless created in a void, completely devoid of knowledge of the world in question, a GMPC should be able to contribute in-character knowledge through in-character means. Simply limit it to that.

BigDTBone wrote:

The locations of all people in the world at any given time.

The locations of all major and minor artifacts in the world at any given time.

The nature and location of every point of interest (castles, dungeons, ruins, etc) in the world.

The nature and strength of every defensive measure, of every person, in the world at any given time.

The the nature and strength of those measures including guards, patrols, traps, locks, and hidden items.

None of this, that I can see, actually automatically impacts a GMPC or their knowledge, in any regard.

This seems exactly like what any given PC would have to learn through in-character means, exactly like the GMPC.

BigDTBone wrote:

What an NPC will say if a player asks A, B, C, or D.

How an NPC will react to a player asking A, B, C, or D.

This is the first major thing that might influence a GMPC (especially if a GM is not skilled at switching out between characters and their knowledges quickly)... but it's still not an automatic thing by any stretch.

Instead, in this case, it's important to play the GMPC according to character. Are they the kind of person that would ask A, B, C, or D? If so, why? If not, why not? Either way, simply have them act in-character.

If you're worried that they'll steal the spotlight, if you think it's in-character enough (or you think it'll be a better game for everyone), simply have them wait and act last, having allowed all the others the chance to add or do something first. This is not a difficult thing.

Of course, I do the same thing as a player - if I think I've got a great idea about what to do, but it's not perfectly in-character, or someone else would be naturally "better" or at least "more likely" at it, I try to let them go first. Otherwise, I'll either discuss things with them, or undertake the action myself.

While I might not "know" the correct action, I do tend to have confidence that I'm making the right decision most of the time.

Presupposing it's not always the "right" decision (and, if you're in-character, why would it be?), there is no functional difference between a GMPC and a PC in this case. The GM might have knowledge, but the character does not. Play that character, or what you think would be more enjoyable (over-all) for the players at the table.

BigDTBone wrote:

The full gear carried by every NPC in the game.

The class and level of every NPC in the game.

The spells prepared by every prepared caster in the world.

The spells known by every spontaneous caster in the world.

The spell-like abilities of every monster in the world.

This comes back to good ol' compartmentalized knowledge, as discussed above. (Also, holy carp, am I never going to remember all of those, much less have them down when I start!)

BigDTBone wrote:

----------------

That is just the stuff off the top of my head.

SO, anyway, a GM will weave the specifics of that knowledge into "puzzles" for the *PLAYERS* to solve.

The "puzzles" are not limited to riddles that the sphinx asks you, but are ANYTHING related to an unknown in the game. And *PLAYERS* not *CHARACTERS* must solve these unknowns.

When you introduce a GM *PLAYER* Character, then that implies that the GM is now attempting to solve (as a member of the party) puzzles related to unknown things in the world.

A GM cannot do that. Because the GM already knows the answers to every unknown thing in the game.

Anything less than fully and equally helping to solve the unknowns (Which includes "should I hit this dude, or should I run away") is not being a *PLAYER* character, but rather a *NON-PLAYER* character. And non-player characters should never get equal billing to the party.

The closest thing I saw that you came up with is specific dialogue options.

But here's the thing - no matter how much I've prepared for a game, I'm not 100% Skippy on everything from beginning to end. Never can be. I don't have that kind of memory.

Thus, at the beginning, I'll create a character who has the same types of advantages and knowledge - and disadvantages and ignorance - as the other PCs. I then act according to character (unless that character is unpleasant for the rest of the gaming table, at which point, like any good player, I'll adapt to fit the group).

None of this is super-human. Having all of that knowledge down solidly when creating the character seems superhuman to me.


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

kestral287: it's the trial for the assassination-gone-bad that I don't recall...

Looking back,

Quote:
Her dreams shattered, she made her return to her village. Dismissal not enough for some of the conspirators, they attempt to then assassinate her but are killed by her in the attempt. She's charged in absentia for their murders, but not really pursued as those in charge prefer to simply let the matter be at rest.

I didn't see that as a legally-binding death-warrant, but rather some charges were presented, but those "in charge" recognized the wrongness of the whole thing but, for political reasons, couldn't return those charges against those who sent the assassins, and thus dismissed said charges.

Kazaan: that is a really interesting breakdown. I don't know that I agree with either it or all of the terminology used, but it's very interesting nonetheless.

EDIT: adding clarity, necessary due to ninja gobbos!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
tonyz wrote:

All evil works on appearing pretty -- or at least impressive.

It's only after you're in the snare that the masks come off, and you see that Asmodeus isn't laughing with you, but at you. Norgorber isn't selling you secrets, he's buying yours and selling them to your enemies. Lamashtu might have the hot-and-heavy vibe, but you're not her children, you're their food.

The remaining evil deities are left as an exercise for the nightmare-prone.

Man, before reading the title, like, five times, I was totally going to say similar. Also something about succubi, probably.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The poster says "Dot".


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

... or at least "close enough" for my purposes. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Strategytiger wrote:

Hey, I found an actual tiger avatar instead of a leopard! Sweet. ...and it's almost as white as I am!

Geeze, I look grumpy with this avatar, and my two new ones for my original handle.

I liked your happy green guy for the alt alias better... >.>

Strategytiger wrote:

...

...
She doesn't frequent the boards.

Heck, she barely even checks Facebook.

Frankly, sir, you could do with an actual lion :-P

My wife is less frequent on these boards than I, but she's our "dedicated" facebook person. I... am never on it.

Also, while there were no lions that I could find when I first established this alias, and I am notoriously loath to alter my avatar once chosen...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Nappingbushbaby wrote:
Did I get it right?

... sure, why not.

Strategytiger wrote:

...

...
...As self-elected (and never actually positionally contradicted by the President himself) Vice-president of the Cunningplanimals Club, normally I'd point out that napping isn't a tactic or synonym for it...

...but actually, when faced with a difficult problem, a nap sure as heck is a genius plan for solving almost any situation. I'm almost positive every problem in life can be solved by sleep, except perhaps narcolepsy. I like it.

Mind you, the lion is the man here, I'm just a stripy sidekick with a big mouth.

Seriously, I love me some napping. I'm gonna go bump your thread. That's how much I love napping.

... sure, why not.

Maneuvermoose wrote:
What do I have to do to Maneuver myself into the Cunningplanimals Club?

That'll do.

Sarcasm Dragon wrote:
Get your post favorited, which everyone knows is impossible!

Hey! Something fishy 'bout this! I smell a set-up... maybe even sock-puppetry... hm...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
Hey, John, could you link your thread? Can't find it right now.

I'll try but I suck at linking....

Here goes...

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppra&page=31?Ask-John-Kretzer-ALL-your-que stion-here#1519

Thank you!

Tels wrote:

[ url=http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppra&page=31?Ask-John-Kretzer-ALL-your-question-here#1519 ] Insert Text Here [ /url ]

Remove the spaces and that's the forum code to make a link. There is a space before and after every bracket ( [ and ] if you don't know what brackets are).

Thank you! (Beat me to it.)

Following his advice, [ url=http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppra&page=31?Ask-John-Kretzer-ALL-your-question-here#1519 ] Ask John Kretzer ALL your question here [ /url ], becomes Ask John Kretzer ALL your question here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Bi-Curious George wrote:
You have no idea what I had to do to get in this club.....

Look, I told you at the time, that wasn't necessary, and that I didn't even want you to!

Like, no matter how many times I protested you always went something like, "No, no! I understand! Say no more, wink-wink!"

I never wanted you to do that.

I have no idea where they even had a monkey-vest and fez your size, an accordion that large, or how you managed not to get arrested for doing that with them in the subway!

Leeroyjenkinsbat wrote:
HEY MAN DON'T TALK ABOUT INITIATION!!!!!!!!!

Arg! Look, it's not an "initiation" if you're all doing random things without any requisites!

This is totally you guys just choosing to do this for no reason!

And, for the record, suicide charges at boss monsters are also not part of any "initiation" ceremony!

... IF I had one, it'd be, like, drinking a small cup of sweet tea or something.

Cheryl Tunt wrote:
You're not my supervisor!!!!

Weeeeeeeellllllllllll... *looks at name on the thread*

Kalindlara wrote:

Cheryl, wouldn't this be a better avatar? ^_^

Also, I may actually be your supervisor; check with Pam.

Cheryl Tunt wrote:

Good one!

I like the crazy eyes of this one tho :-)

Man, that was an awesome module!

(No, seriously, you guys should go play The Hangman's Noose!)

Just... don't... be a ninja. Or rogue. You're class abilities will be pretty "meh" to nearly useless. /talkingfromexperience


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The black raven wrote:
BTW, trying to enter an organized military unit, being unhappy at how they treat you (and being disillusioned about their not-so-ideal behavior), being stubborn and quitting while considering them to be the true culprits is NOT a hallmark of a Lawful mind ;-)

She didn't quit.

She lawfully joined, lawfully stayed and attempted to lawfully alter the system from within via 'proper means' until she was forced out under false accusations by others, and then returned to protect her village. And then she had assassins sent after her.

Hence, she never quit due to disillusionment, but was drummed out by unlawful means against her will (and then had some people attempt murder).

kestral287 wrote:
Let's be honest, she's already got a death warrant on her head. So she gets another one. What's she care?

This is one thing I'm curious about. I may have missed it in the OP's posts somewhere, but does she have an "official" death-warrant on her head, yet, or merely the (presumably illegal?) assassination attempts? It was my understanding that she was thrown out but not condemned to death... except by a few acting illegally.

That's the side that I see as less-than-super-lawful, and where I find her actions most questionable: if she is currently not already a wanted criminal with a death-penalty, than her actions are likely going to get her there, and cause many others to be hurt.

If, on the other hand, she was condemned to death "legally" (though unlawfully) by trumped up charges prior to her monstrous and murderous actions, than, yeah, I'd likely bump her a half-step or so up the alignment chart. She's not good, but she miiiiiiiiiiiiight squeak by with lawful neutral (maybe) if she truly feels she has no choice but to kill to live (and thus targets those she believes responsible for that state)... though I'd still tend to classify her as lawful evil.

Though if she's condemned after her actions, she's up the creek. She's certainly earned every bit of her death sentence since she was drummed out, though (even if she wants to be doing the "right" thing).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

That's... better!

In other news: I beat Bioshock! Got the good ending!

EDIT: As I'm never going to be able to make myself go back and kill those little girls, I just watched the endings instead. (Spoilers, there. Obviously.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm really sorry, Icyshadow.


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

Agh! Avatar Change! Wh-wh-wwwwhhhhhaaaaa~!?!?!

How will your wife know who you aaaarrrrreeee...???


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:
I Blame Cosmo <snip>

... you know this is the wrong thread for that, right? ;D

1 to 50 of 9,393 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

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