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

Talonhawke's page

RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 4,771 posts (4,891 including aliases). No reviews. 3 lists. 2 wishlists. 6 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,771 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
GM_Beernorg wrote:

Mostly sure that Drow don't have a word for solidarity ;)

I think i found one....

Running now

Can't see it or is that intended?


You have to be using either unarmed strikes or a manufactured weapon to TWF. So yes if your using TWF then inherently you are using either manufactured weapons or unarmed strikes.


Actually with TWF its only .5 Str as quoted above.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:
This entire thread is a catastrophic case of people talking past one another. Note to self: Alignment threads BAD.

Things that never seem to make good threads

1. Alignment
2. Paladin codes
3. Druid codes
4. Adamantine
5. "Hands"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sundakan wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Sundakan wrote:
Slight tangent, I've never been clear where this attitude of "Writers have no responsibility or obligations to anyone or anything" comes from. As if it's somehow different from every other profession, where doing a competent job is expected, and rightly so.

Uh...no.

Self-employed people who personally make things for other people to buy have no obligations of any sort in regards to the nature of their product. They just aren't gonna make any money if people don't like what they make. So...they have a huge incentive to provide a quality product, but no obligation.

And writers generally fall somewhat into that category, though they're far from the only ones to do so.

Those employed to write a specific thing (like most freelancers in the RPG industry), not so much, but most novelists without an ongoing contract? No obligations at all, just a strong incentive.

I'm not sure I really see the distinction, at least from a practical perspective.

Being "incentivized" to provide a good work and being "obligated" to end up at the same result, really. You provide something good, that peopke want, or you're out of a job.

Here is a good distinction at work I share my position with the owner's son. If I want to keep my job I am obligated to show up be at my desk and answer the phone among other things. His son has incentive to do so, by that I mean his dad has flat out told my supervisor that he won't relocate or fire his son he can come and go as he pleases deal with it. But if he does manage to show up for at least 3 days a week he gets he truck payment made.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:

Ha! You're old people.

Isn't it Bingo night. Or is Matlock on.

You know, they have these things called DVDs, so you can watch Murder, She Wrote whenever you want. :-D

Hey there a problem with Matlock and Murder She Wrote? ;)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
...shrinking even faster than reasons to believe in a God.

Whatever your own beliefs may be, taking pot-shots at people for their religion as part of your speech about discrimination and equality is pretty hypocritical.

Sex, gender, orientation, race, religion, ethnicity, political affiliation, abortion stance, marital status, economic class, pizza topping preferences... How about we don't weaponize any of it, okay?

But anchovies!!!


lol thought you were on the 3rd ordered organizer and it was broken as well.


Unarmed Attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:


Sealed with Adamantine and the Golem can't get back out now.......... or can he? The world may never know.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CBDunkerson wrote:
Aww, shucks. That thread had gone so far past ludicrous that I was starting to have fun with it. :]

It almost went to Plaid!


Been gone a few weeks any news on this front from anywhere?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Golem wrote:
With the soft hands of an angel.

OH CRAP IT FOLLOWED ME!!!!! Quick everyone just ignore it and it will go away and maybe this thread will survive the curse. Just don't make eye contact.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Seems like we have once again proven that Adamantine is the Special Material version of an Alignment thread.


What if I plate the arm in Adamantine weapon blanch?


Depending on context yes and no. And A gauntlet is doubtful 100% adamantine either.


Aelryinth wrote:

That is absolutely correct. The arm is not made of adamantine. You would have to equip the gauntlet as a proper weapon to wield it properly. A limp arm wearing armor and a gauntlet is very different then a worn gauntlet.

If you can't differentiate between the two conditions 'logically', hey, house rule it. I don't care.

You might as well argue that hitting someone with a severed arm is an unarmed attack. Eesh.

==Aelryinth

So we need to "logically" differentiate between using an adamantine skillet as an improvised weapon vs using a body part clad in armor as one. But not between golem naming conventions and other creatures naming conventions?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
thejeff wrote:

OTOH, people are more likely to be a++&@!*s online, especially anonymously. OTGH, it's also easier to pass as male on the internets and I know many women do that, in at least some circumstances.

Most, I suspect, feel even more at-ease trying out a new activity with someone (or better yet some group) they already know and trust, rather than the random grab bag of a convention or game store.
Personal experience and anecdotal evidence suggests that women make up a larger percentage of home games than of other face-to-face environments.

I also strongly doubt most people, male or female, get their start gaming online with strangers.

True story:

I'm a Guy In Real Life.

Playing a particular MMO, I've had some exceptionally bad experiences due to individuals assuming because I was playing a female character that I as a player was interested in their 'advances', in part because *I didn't make a big deal about it*, so *must be legit*.

We won't go into the details of some of the truly creepy things, thankfully there was an 'ignore' and a 'report' function available...

This doesn't diminish the 'gamer wall' that women have to fight through, but I have a bit more empathy for the situation than some do as a result.

The tables I've been at with women in my games has been positive, though I always worry that I come off too 'over the top' and scare them away playing in-character (no advances or unwanted behaviour because at the table, all are brothers and sisters and that is be a very HUGE turn-off for me.)

And that is why one never goes to Goldshire on Moonguard. Also why my wife tends to avoid large player gatherings on most online games unless she has other guildies present.


Snowblind wrote:
Talonhawke wrote:

But if we don't know how many hands a human has the how many "Metaphysical Hands of Effort" do humans have?

Crap maybe they can't dual wield at all.

No, no, no, creatures have two metaphysical hands no matter how many hands they have.

I would show you where it says this in the rules, but luckily for me this particular rule is unwritten.

Careful that way will lead to a very silly place. Like Camelot only worse.


That's odd I had to go to post to see the newest post on this one.


But if we don't know how many hands a human has the how many "Metaphysical Hands of Effort" do humans have?

Crap maybe they can't dual wield at all.


Dotting will have to give this a hard look after work.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
Kitty Catoblepas wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
Kitty Catoblepas wrote:



  • There's a good chance that an Aboleth can't tell a human from a Pit Fiend... or an Aboleth.

    Ehh the DC to recognize common things like humans and orcs are 5. The int modifier is enough to get that. DC 10 or less can be untrained.

Ehh the DC to recognize common things like humans and orcs are 5. The int modifier is enough to get that. DC 10 or less can be untrained.

Depends on whether the human/orc is under level 7 and/or a common creature from where the skill checker comes.

Also, your average Orc gets a -2 to his knowledge roll, identifying your average Orc on a roll of 7 or higher. Of course, this is consistent with how Orcs are usually portrayed.

Well, high CRs due to levels aren't really handled properly.

<Rolls 9 on Knowledge(local): "Well, the militiamen are human and their sergeants are too, but I've got no idea what race the lieutenants and captains are, even though they look just the same."

Let us not forget that the CR thing means that long lived big bads who have risen in power are less likely to be remembered.

Commoner's can remember the orc captain who raided their village last fall. However the evil lich who shows up each winter to take a sacrifice.......... who are you again.


I agree I can't think of of any, but I also can't think of too many in general who would work out as other ethnicity it tends to be a part of the character to me. I wouldn't want a white Falcon or Luke Cage anymore than an Asian Superman or Hispanic Punisher.


thejeff wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
Talonhawke wrote:
So just gonna ask then since its not an issue for certain characters to be race swapped, can anyone name a non-white character they think could be swapped without it affecting the characters identity?
John Boyega in The Force Awakens; Finn's race had no effect on the narrative whatsoever.

Hell you could have swapped Lando in the original or Mace in the prequels with little effect.

Other than removing some of the very few non-white humans in Star Wars. That's part of the problem with reversing it - too often white is the default and any non-white roles are only assigned when there's a specific reason. Makes white roles far more dominant than they need to be.

Another option - Jules in Pulp Fiction. I don't think anything would really change swapping him out for a white character. Mind you, swapping Samuel Jackson for anyone else in the role would be hard to face, but race isn't the issue there.

Sorry let me rephrase i mean an existing character which is what we are talking about. Not a character that didn't exist prior to being cast and played.


So just gonna ask then since its not an issue for certain characters to be race swapped, can anyone name a non-white character they think could be swapped without it affecting the characters identity?


GM Lamplighter wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Ragoz wrote:
Terminalmancer wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:
Are you sure they're trolls? Because they all look alike. In a situation like this, I'd call them "common" for the party based on recency, and allow untrained skill checks (even beyond DC10) to identify them. But that's within a scenario. Tracking what you recall between scenarios is much more problematic.
So... how do you handle worship of obscure deities? Without the ability to form memories or bring in outside information, that seems to require a DC 20 Knowledge: Religion check. That's awfully hard to hit at low level.
I'm sure the answer to this should be "As written. Indeed it does. Yeah probably for most characters."
Seriously? "I worship this god, but I can't even recognize my own holy symbol."

Yep. Welcome to RAW. Now, in a home campaign, I would say that it would be a common identification, so you could make an untrained roll to do it. But PFS is RAW, and while RAW is used to hamstring GMs hundreds of times a day, here's an instance where it hamstrings PCs.

By the way, most peasant worshipers in the middle ages probably couldn't identify trappings of one denomination over another, either. They'd likely recognize the local variant they use in their church, but not all the trappings of the religion.

So are you going to start insisting that Perception be run Raw as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aranna wrote:
Just look at what amazing work Samuel Jackson did as Nick Fury (a white part played by a black actor).

Just have to note here Ultimate Universe Fury is a black guy.


thejeff wrote:
Talonhawke wrote:
Hama wrote:

You look for absolute consistency without looking at all the variables. Sometimes race lifts are unimportant. Sometimes they are not. Differing factors.

I do try to look at factors but too often I see the arguement that Asian character in an Asian Setting written by Asian's better damn well be Asian. But then see the same people call someone racist for saying that a European Character, and I clearly mean a white guy just so we don't get into the fact that yes not everyone from Europe is a white guy, in a European Setting Written by a European, should be European.

Just to be clear, you're counting the Dark Tower world as a "European setting"?

No Bond not Dark Tower sorry should have specified.


Hama wrote:

You look for absolute consistency without looking at all the variables. Sometimes race lifts are unimportant. Sometimes they are not. Differing factors.

I do try to look at factors but too often I see the arguement that Asian character in an Asian Setting written by Asian's better damn well be Asian. But then see the same people call someone racist for saying that a European Character, and I clearly mean a white guy just so we don't get into the fact that yes not everyone from Europe is a white guy, in a European Setting Written by a European, should be European.

Now if your arguement is that an actor/ress isn't gonna work for the role because of reasons besides they aren't the right Ethnicity, then those reasons are just as valid for why one is the right choice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

And that's my disconnect here. I don't typically get up in arms over casting choices in movies or TV. But when I see an uproar over a casting choice because the source character is x and the casting choice is y. But then when the character is Y and the casting isn't its fine and all kinds of reasons are listed as acceptable. I just look for consistency in people and it bugs me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How the Idris as James Bond run of things that came up during the Sony hack then? That was viewed as completely acceptable and tended to get calls of racism against those who felt that changing his race wasn't in keeping with the character.


Is that an issue both ways for you Fabius? Are you upset that Idris Elba will be playing Roland in the Dark Tower?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SCPRedMage wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
I remember getting disintegrated. A lot.
Stop sticking your hands in the mouths of random statues, then.

Hey that statue should be glad its just a hand.


KingOfAnything wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
And this feat only lets me call for a Cease Fire in circumstances when I want to surrender or call it a draw.
Well, it does buy you enough time to make a Diplomacy check to improve their attitude, which could result in them no longer wanting to fight.
No it doesn't, actually. Not when they're losing it doesn't
If the PCs are winning, they have more and better options than a Cease Fire. NPCs are allowed to call for a truce or surrender, too.

Maybe its not just about winning the fight and killing everyone. Party is tracking an assassin through an elven forest. Elves jump the party but Bob the barbarian and Dave the Diviner have the teamwork feat where both can act in the surprise round and wreck the ambush party. Then rest of the party then realizes these are good guys after someone points out they are forest guardians. A cease fire is still a good option.


Michael Hallet wrote:
Snorter wrote:
The naysayers on this thread (maybe not you, but definitely Michael Hallet) are ruling that it takes a full minute of being battered, and providing no resistance, for you to inform the guard of their mistake, and 'make a request' that they stop battering you.

Because by the core rules, you can't make a request of someone who is hostile or unfriendly, and if someone is trying to hurt you that is pretty much the definition of hostile or unfriendly. So in order to make them listen to your request, you have to change their attitude, which takes a minimum of 1 minute.

Now it's nice that Ultimate Intrigue mentions being able to make requests of hostile or unfriendly NPCs in limited circumstances, but that's not what it says in the core rules. Since it is not in the core rules, it is not part of the core assumption, so now, Diplomacy might work differently depending upon who brought what books to the table?

Now you may have missed the part where I said that while I agree that the rules as written say one thing I'm perfectly willing to ignore those rules as a GM in favor of letting the PCs resolve the encounter in a way that is fun for them. Even in PFS where I'm not supposed to do that.

So your opinion is that prior to the release of UI no one ever could have asked for a break in combat without surviving a 10 round onslaught without death or retaliation back?


Ragoz wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
The rules in Ultimate Intrigue explicitly allow for using Diplomacy to call a cease fire as a full round action without the need for a Feat.
...against people who are at least indifferent to you. Most people in combat with you are probably hostile or unfriendly.

No the rules allow it against anyone if and this is the biggie it's worded favorably to them. Makes it a bit of a issue if they are kicking your ass then doesn't it.

I guess if the Giant Hunter's handbook is legal then one could use the current rules from UI to "suggest a course of action" and make them think a temporary cease fire is their idea.


Ragoz wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
ragoz wrote:
And this is where people are noticing this difference. Characters never had to fight on. It might not have been the easy or convenient choice but they did not have to fight. As I said before nobody ever forced your characters to make any decision if you had control of your character at the time.
Horsefeathers. A "choice" between getting attacked for 10 rounds or fighting back is not a choice at all. You run out of other cheeks to turn after 4 hits.
Do non-violent actions that involve you not dying for a while. Maybe Sanctuary, Vanish, defending, moving away. Is diplomacy supposed to be easy? Am I supposed to solve every combat as a free action with +30s diplomacy?

Sanctuary: One of 'ems castin a spell don't trust it.

Vanish: One of 'ems turned invisible he gonna stab us in the back keep at em boys.

Defending: Might work but remember to put our weapon away.

Moving away: still have to stay in sight of most of them but might work.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
I'd love to see myself represented in such media, the happy go lucky GM that encourages player ideas and is apologetic but firm when he has to veto them.

Only if it includes good segments of messageboard snark when needed TOZ


Alot of people have that thought about table variation. If a class has an oft argued over feature most people will tell you to plan to use it in the least favorable light because its the worse case scenario for using it under multiple GM's. I don't want to wonder each time I go to play if I can do x this game or if I will get it at x-1 or even x/2.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
DungeonmasterCal wrote:

I have a "core" group of three who make nearly every game. The others have a 2+ hour drive to get here, and another two have young kids they are very involved with on the weekends with their own activities. So if anyone but the core three makes it all it's a good thing. If they can't, I always try to have either a side adventure for those three or I tone down the one I had prepared for a larger group. Turns out I'm also the only one in the group who ever GMs that can do this, it seems. We've had our Call of Cthulhu game cancelled numerous times by another GM in our group because one person couldn't make it. We play that particular campaign maybe 4 times a year at the most, and if it gets cancelled because one player can't make it it's very frustrating. And again, THIS guy can miss a a game or two and I can run w/out him.

Maybe this is my superpower - running successful games with an inconsistent number of players.

My life in early college, wrangling 7 guys who worked odd rotating shifts and homework to boot. My rule was if we get 3 we are pushing through


Tacticslion wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Blizzard, why couldn't you be better than this? *sigh*
What happened?

Tracer Pose?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah i have some friends in Conway that cool but yeah not close.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cal Define Central Arkansas I'm in Monticello.


thejeff wrote:
Grond wrote:
Geoffrey Peart wrote:
Harleequin wrote:

One of the things I've enjoyed but been surprised about, is how its not an issue being a girl in a RPG gaming group. Most times I'm the only girl in the group but no-one has batted an eyelid.

I know RPG playing is very much seen as a geeky guy thing but I think more women are giving it a go.

Quick survey... who here has a girl in their group... and is she treated with the respect she unquestionably deserves!! ;))

The answer I wish I could give:

"I game with humans, some of the humans are different than some of the other humans, but they are all humans and treated with dignity and respect."

aka, it shouldn't matter...

But in reality, today it does, and we need to encourage people towards behaviour like tolerance, respect, and dignity.

In my core gaming group we have one girl who plays, although currently she isn't in either of the primary campaign. In our monthly open PFS night we have probably 1/4 of our registered players as girls, but at our next session almost 1/2 of the attendees are girls.

I'm a bit melancholy on this subject, having read a long article on the subject that is making its rounds on social networks. It detailed the authors personal experience through 20-30 years of harassment, and assault at gaming stores, conventions, and online. I was horrified when I read the article, but not surprised, and I've made a new conviction to speak out against the small intolerances that enable the big ones.

p.s. I'm making a point of posting this using my own name, and not my avatars, this isn't an issue hiding from will make better.

What article is this you are referring to?
The one that was linked earlier in a now deleted post and also linked several times in newly created and quickly locked threads.

Yes that way lies the Hammer of Locking let us not go there.


I know but I have faith and belief and the power of friendship.


Well being that't its been a few weeks lets hope for some kind of FaQ on this debacle soon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KenderKin wrote:
I wish they would leave relevant factual posts even if they are alleged to be "off topic".....

Keep in mind while one off-topic may not be an issue and might even be relevant it may lead to a spiral that ends up causing a lock.


Yeah just realized that CoT and CoCT damn my lack of reading skills.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Rysky wrote:
NenkotaMoon wrote:
What's the problem with Council of Thieves?

The Six Trials of Larazod are misogynistic and degrading as all f%&+. And unfortunately most people assume the opinions of the play are also the opinions of Paizo, which they are not.

Yes, the play is horrible. It's supposed to be. You're not supposed to like it, you're supposed to hate it. It's a challenge you're supposed to overcome.

That being said I see perfectly fine why people don't like it and are uncomfortable with it to the point of altering or removing it completely from the AP.

This is where people forget that the setting is freaking Cheliax, the poster child for the "Nation Of Evil" trope.

Wonder if any changes will come in the hardcover rework of it?

1 to 50 of 4,771 << 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.