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

Tequila Sunrise's page

3,430 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 309 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
For example, My GM refuses to understand that the definition of full round casting in relation to spontaneous casters and metamagic. He's effectively buffed spontaneous casters. Maybe I'll play one next character.

Back in 3.5, I asked a DM "Hey, can my sorcerer take that alternate feature from PHB2 that allows him to use metamagic without increasing casting time?"

Him: Metamagic increases sorcerer casting time?

Me: Normally, yep.

Him: ...Sure, go ahead and take it.

Me: *Kicking myself*

Honestly, I totally get why DMs miss/ignore the full-round metamagic rule. It's a niggly little exception that one wouldn't naturally expect to even exist, given any fluff or other rule. To all appearances, it was a 3.0 concession to the [very arguably unfounded] fear that spontaneous casting would be OP which then got grandfathered into 3.5 and PF. So unless you're dealing with organized play and its necessity for conformity, there's a good argument for doing just as your DM does.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
Dial A Swede, Google it, try it.

My girlfriend and I are totally doing this over the weekend. The 'Why is no Swede answering when I am calling?' FAQ made me lol. :D

Now I just have to think of a few questions to ask my random Swede.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
So guess who gets to go out and price printers (which we need anyway) and get some character sheets printed so I can fill out 70% of it after the important stuff like abilities are rolled and shopping is done. :-)

I feel as if I'm the only gamer for who still hand-writes his character sheets on scrap paper. Or maybe hand-written CSs were never a thing, just my thing...

*Bah, get off my lawn!*


3 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
We are Strike Team Delta Whatever, striking out surgically from Battlestar Galactica (the General).

My gf has never seen BSG.

Obviously I must remedy this tragedy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Happy birthday, TOZ!

Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Quite suddenly, I've found myself looking forward to two weekends of in-person gaming with new groups! Pretty sure one of them isn't going to work out long-term, for scheduling reasons. But hey, they're both 4e groups!!!

This Sunday's game was great fun. Everyone was fun, engaged, and pleasant, with brief exceptions. (See below.) My character was gloriously foolhardy, and ended up delivering the killing blow to a dragon at session's end. There were only two flies in my pudding.

Despite being freshly bathed and de-odorized, I probably ended up smelling of less than roses. I for some reason just could not get my blood sugar down, despite eating nothing for hours. Ugh! Also, I am a New Yorker in Arizona. So I was quite sweaty by session's end.

And the host did a couple of things to his wife and daughter that put me off. The kind of things that may be less-than-idealistic-but-understandable-in-a-family-context-which-I-don't-k now, or may be signs of serious abuse. None of the other players seemed surprised or phased by them, and I don't make a habit of judging people based on brief and half-aware observations, so none of us commented and the game went on. I probably won't be rejoining this group for scheduling reasons, but I can't help but wonder how this group would play out if I continued gaming with them.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Quite suddenly, I've found myself looking forward to two weekends of in-person gaming with new groups! Pretty sure one of them isn't going to work out long-term, for scheduling reasons. But hey, they're both 4e groups!!!

Spoiler:
Go ahead, I included that detail just to see your reaction. ;)

And because I'm late to the what-I've-played party...

AD&D 2e: I miss Tony DiTerlizzi's artwork, and Planescape.

D&D 3.x: "If only 3e-style multiclassing worked the way I want it to work" is pretty much the basis of my fantasy heartbreaker.

D&D 4e: Best D&D yet.

Blue Planet: A hard(?) sci-fi rpg that I played a few sessions of. Not my usual cuppa tea, but we were round-robin GMing, and one of the guys in the group loved it. It wasn't until the 2nd or 3rd session that I was like "Wait, you mean the computers in this game talk like the ones on Star Trek?!" The game probably gains purchase the more harder sci-fi you read.

Chaos Academy: An indie rpg I played once at a con. It was fun that once, but not my cuppa tea. Very rules-light, improv-heavy.

Vampire the Masquerade: I quickly decided that I detested the GM after the first session, so there was never a second.

Exalted 2e: Just a scene of pbp play, after which I gave up on the pbp format. Apparently 2e is super-broken anyway, so maybe it's better that I didn't continue the Exalted experience at that point in my life.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Set wrote:
Ring_of_Gyges wrote:

Necromancy is an awkward school, most schools are defined by the type of thing they do: illusion spells create false sensory stimuli, evocation spells create and manipulate energy, conjuration spells produce stuff, etc... Necromancy is mainly defined by tone. For example, Horrid Wilting does AoE damage by manipulating an element, but it's creepy so its necromancy rather than evocation.

Illusion is another odd duck. Create light *or* darkness, and it's evocation. Create sounds, and it's evocation. Create *colored* light, or sounds that sound like creatures or shadows, and it's illus-o-cation. Conjure energy or creatures from the positive energy plane or plane of fire or sixth layer of hell and it's conjuration. Conjure something from the plane of shadow, and it's illus-uration. (And conjure something from the negative energy plane and it's necrom-uration, because, screw you, school consistency!) Mind-affecting effects are enchantment, unless they are phantasms, in which case, illus-antment! (Again, with fear spells also being necrom-antment.)

Abjuration is in a similar position. While most schools are (or at least can be) defined by their means -- evocation manipulates energy, enchantment manipulates minds, necromancy manipulates the forces of life/death, etc. -- abjuration is defined by its ends. It protects...by a variety of means.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
I have a weakness for plant toxins and I'm allergic to spruce trees.

You sad, sad excuse for a hippy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drejk wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Celestial Healer wrote:
So... How do I order the British groom? How much for Henry Cavill?
If you add Emma Watson to your order, I'll split the two-for-one rate with you.
Noooo! We want to keep her on our side of the pond! Go find your own!

We'll trade her back to you in return for the NHS.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Katrina Sinclair wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Celestial Healer wrote:
So... How do I order the British groom? How much for Henry Cavill?
If you add Emma Watson to your order, I'll split the two-for-one rate with you.
The two for one rate only applies to deliveries in Utah, I'm afraid.

I have East India membership.

I get special rates on the f***ing moon. And Mars soon.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Celestial Healer wrote:
So... How do I order the British groom? How much for Henry Cavill?

If you add Emma Watson to your order, I'll split the two-for-one rate with you.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

So I am now a transhuman.

I've been on my new insulin pump for a full day now, and I may need to go from a feast-or-famine meal schedule to a more birdlike one, but so far so good.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neal Litherland wrote:

Masters of disguise, these characters are one-half monk, and one-half hitman.

Sound like someone familiar?

I see what you did there, and I like it. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Orthos wrote:
King Yesterday of Pillowpia wrote:

I really like the Warpriest.

installs an outer wall of transformers talking pillows, sure to repel whatever android army Orthos could possibly send at me

In fact, I like them better than Paladins and Anti-Paladins.

Now, to get the flame thrower and take out the outer wall.

Hey, I'm chill with people liking what they like.

I don't like Rogues or Clerics (at least since the introduction of the Oracle) either, but a lot of people do. Cool with what's cool for you.

Just won't catch me playing one =)

As I stated before, I have always felt these new classes would be better served as archetypes- even as powerful as some of those archetypes might be. The oracle makes me reconsider my hatred of new classes- yes the iconic oracle is smoking hot, but the things the class brings to the game are a true breath of fresh air, especially considering how stale the cleric can be at times.

I remember talking to you about this at some point, but why don't you like new classes Freehold? Or maybe a better question is: Conceptually, what's the difference between a class and an archetype?

I'm not very familiar with PF archetypes, but for a while now I've thought that which concepts get expressed as a class vs. as a prestige class/kit/variant, or even a feat is largely arbitrary. Remember when the druid was the PHB's example of a specific-mythos priest? I do wish there was more consistency when it comes to this sort of thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Celestial Healer wrote:
I finished watching the new season of The X-Files. Meh. Was it always that over the top? Maybe I remember it being better than it was.

I remember enjoying it with a healthy dose of "Just go with it..."

That doesn't mean that the new season isn't more, though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aranna wrote:

Idiot drivers... they totaled my Cavalier and my Neon.

There ARE countries which require far more rigorous driver training, more akin to the sort of training NobodysHome and I received. ALL countries should require such training.

BAH! BIG GOVERNMENT! INEFFICIENCY! FREEDOM FOR AMERICANS! CUT TAXES, NOT DRIVERS! MORE JAIL FOR OFFENDERS! WE DON'T NEED NO EUROPEAN SOCIALISM HERE! *RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:

I am drunk. Religion was mentioned. I don't know whats going on really, so I'm just going to wave this flaming bike around blindly.

flail

I am now imagining you wearing a rabbi's robe in the desert, asking a burning bike what its name is.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Redbeard the Scruffy wrote:
Tac, I understand that, but then man up (or woman up, as may be the case) and just admit it. Don't throw out some stuff about the new kid being so much work you have no possible time ro game, yet you have grandma watching her every Sunday night to go out and get wasted at the bar, or the job has zero schedulable free time, yet your standing appointment at the gym class hasn't fudged. I can't stand the deceit. Legitimate excuses - if they actually were the real excuse.

Yes, it is supremely aggravating when someone can't bring themselves to say "I like gaming, but it's somewhat down my list of hobbies, so I won't be playing when it conflicts with one of those." I get it, but I'm no less annoyed for understanding.

It's one of the factors which has led me to miss actual gameplay less than I used to.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:

I am just now watching Age of Ultron for the first time. I don't watch a lot of movies, next up, Antman, which looks great.

I didn't really like marvel comics as a kid, but even I admit they make way better movies then DC

As someone who's never read a DC or Marvel comic, I was weirded out by the Antman trailer. Not that I'd turn my nose up if I had a friend who was all psyched to see it, but the trailer just made me go '...Srsly?' A guy who can beat the p!ss out of bad guys...but only when he's tiny? I'm sure it makes some kind of sense within its own story, but the concept seems so bizarre, even for a superhero universe.

That said, I have a low tolerance for certain kinds of weirdness. I enjoy the Avengers movies despite the premise.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
mourge40k wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Yogurt sans fruit is not worth eating.
There's other types of yogurt?

No, no there are not. There are only lies and calumny.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yogurt sans fruit is not worth eating.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
So which game should I get? Conquest(germanic) or Birthright(japanese)?

Hm, evil vs. non-quite-so-evil.

...Is there a game where you play both evils against each other in order to institute a humanistic society which unifies both, and fights for the citizenry?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll keep my eyes open for Peete's and Arabica, thanks!

lynora wrote:
Redbeard the Scruffy wrote:

I can't believe putting a bed together is fun for cap.

I hate handy stuff. I needed a vacation after installing locks on our cabinets yesterday, and God help me if there's a leak in something. If duct tape and gorilla glue doesn't fix it, it ain't getting fixed.

I also disdain lawn work, cars (driving and fixing especially) and sports of all stripes, from football to golf and everything in between. That's why I don't shave. Gotta prove I'm a male in a more legal way than walking around pantless.

Really? I love putting furniture together. This week I got to assemble a couch and a desk. It was awesome. Yes, I am the kind of person that will beg to be allowed to assemble other people's furniture if I know they are going to Ikea. :P

Assembling furniture is like playing with Legos on a grand scale. :)

But I am totally with you on the lawn work . That is somebody else's problem. My husband feels the same way, which is why we live in an apartment. No yard work. :)

Same here. I hate repetitive weekly chores, but I'm totally down with the handiwork. I'm finally making enough money that having my oil changed is a non-issue, but I change my own and my gf's oil -- go ahead, laugh ;) -- because it's so...satisfying.

It's not WOOT! YAHOO! fun like gaming is fun, but yeah, I likes it. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rosita the Riveter wrote:
We currently sell carrot cake flavored coffee at work. Not sure how I feel about this. Carrot cake coffee doesn't sound right. A slice of carrot cake with a cup of coffee on the side? That sounds awesome. Carrot cake in the coffee? That's off putting.

Coffee flavors go over my head. Vanilla this, pumpkin spice that, cinnamon whatever.

Tastes like coffee to me.

Rosita the Riveter wrote:
Then again, flavored coffees really need sugar to bring the flavor out, and I typically take my coffee black. Black flavored coffee just has a weird aftertaste I don't like, and I'm not swotching back to sweetened coffee.

Wouldn't you want to go back to sweetened if black has a weird aftertaste?

Just recently I've gone from needing creamer and sugar with every cup to just creamer sometimes. I must be growing up or something. :p


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Redbeard the Scruffy wrote:

I don't understand the point of the rule forums (outside of PFS).

If you're a player, ask your GM. It doesn't matter what the strangers on the internet's opinions are - if he disagrees you can't show him the thread and overrule him!

If you're the GM, just make a ruling. It's entirely up to you anyway - just got with what seems right and fair to you, because if the official answer doesn't seem fair, you'll houserule or tweak anyway.

Sometimes the interweb has better rulings than I do.
Yes, on occasion.

Indeed. I am of course the Tony Stark of ttrpgs, but every once in a greeeeeeeeeeat while, someone else thinks of something that I have not.

;)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Redbeard the Scruffy wrote:

I don't understand the point of the rule forums (outside of PFS).

If you're a player, ask your GM. It doesn't matter what the strangers on the internet's opinions are - if he disagrees you can't show him the thread and overrule him!

If you're the GM, just make a ruling. It's entirely up to you anyway - just got with what seems right and fair to you, because if the official answer doesn't seem fair, you'll houserule or tweak anyway.

Sometimes the interweb has better rulings than I do.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
Nope, i can resist this sort of nonsense, it has absolutely no effect on me whatsoever.
Wwwwwwwwwwhhhhhhhhhhhhhyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.

Because the Flying Spaghetti Monster has blessed us all with religious freedom.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
Someone donated their entire dragonlance collection, and they had the entire Twilight series, in collectible hardcover, I got the first book for Scruffy, thus forcing someone else to have to search endlessly to complete the collection.

I used to like the DL novels. But then I reread the first couple of chapters of The Chronicles as an adult.

Baaaaaad idea.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
Who now?

Oh, just a Long Island jew I used to know.

Thanks for the reminder, it's my first V-day with the gf. :)

Is there such a thing as too much chocolate? That was her Xmas gift...

Tacticslion wrote:

2) Food courts. They're basically the best.

3) Book stores. If a mall lacks book stores, it is* dead to me. (Yes, this even supersedes the Food Courts, hard as that may be to believe.)

You have (had?) a point. Food and books are two of my favoritest things. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
Well, you see, we dated, broke up, were just friends, dated again, lived together, got married...

...Ross Geller?

captain yesterday wrote:
moved west, had a kid, then moved back to the Midwest, all during my 17 year hiatus from gaming (I dislike 1st and 2nd edition, very much).

Can't say I have much positive to say about 2e myself, aside from the settings. Never really played anything earlier, though I am tempted to buy the OD&D pdf just to see for myself what the game was at the very start. (Well, as much as any point in a thing's history can be said to be its 'very start.')


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I find malls dull at the best of times, and overstimulating at the worst.

But then, I've never been a window- nor a spree-shopper.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
enjoying a gamer girlfriend
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Sadly I'm not doing any gaming myself,

Hey! Heeeeeeyyyyyyy~! TS! Good to see you here!

I strongly recommend trying out some solo games!

They can be pretty great, though, of course, the pacing and structure is vastly different from multi-party games.

Glad you seem to be doing well!

HELLO 'LION!

I may give solo play a shot if I can find the time...though to be honest, I have as much fun writing games as I do playing them. :)

Celestial Healer wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Celestial Healer wrote:

Also, Arizona sounds lovely. Why is that?

BECAUSE IT'S COLD AS F#$+ OUTSIDE.

FREEHOLD!!!!!!!

CELESTIAL HEALER!!! How are things in NYC? In finance? In gaming?

Going well! I'm engaged, which is exciting. The big day is in December.

Work is good. Gaming, not so much apart from PbPs. Nothing like our awesome one-shot.

Congrats, that's wonderful! Just please please don't get married in a non-climate-controlled barn in Rochester. ;)

captain yesterday wrote:

I have a gamer wife. :-)

I mean kind of, she wasn't one when we got married, but she has fun with it. :-)

Nice! How long did it take her to join you?

My gf is more into digital and board games than ttrpgs, but she's played a couple of sessions of PF so I can already talk to her about D&D tropes and quirks. :) Also, I have free access to Dragon Age through her laptop. Which is a totally new game for me!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Celestial Healer wrote:

Also, Arizona sounds lovely. Why is that?

BECAUSE IT'S COLD AS F#$+ OUTSIDE.

FREEHOLD!!!!!!!

CELESTIAL HEALER!!! How are things in NYC? In finance? In gaming?

Freehold DM wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:

HEEEY FREEHOLD!

...Didn't want to bump the other thread with a return greeting. ;)

I'm living in Arizona, working at a solar power plant, and enjoying a gamer girlfriend! What's up with you?

incredibly happy beyond words that you are happy with not just the move but the job and the girlfriend who games!

So good to see you are doing well.

For those who don't know, tequila is the FIRST PAIZONIAN I EVER MET IN REAL LIFE and introduced me to baron arem hasevaum and a few others. He is wonderful.

Aw, shucks! I'm glad to hear that things are better for you since the last we emailed. :)

How's the Paizo scene looking in NYC? Sadly I'm not doing any gaming myself, but as always, I am tinkering away at a fantasy heartbreaker. ;)


6 people marked this as a favorite.

HEEEY FREEHOLD!

...Didn't want to bump the other thread with a return greeting. ;)

I'm living in Arizona, working at a solar power plant, and enjoying a gamer girlfriend! What's up with you?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nathanael Love wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Cole Deschain wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
When someone says something that is unrealistic in my opinion, I say so and provide reasoning for my disagreement. Simple as that.

Indeed, there's a lot of reading intent going on here...

Could the Pathfinder rules be tidied up? Sure.

Could that be done while maintaining backwards compatibility with published material, which is one of the stated reasons why Pathfinder has its own rulebook in the first place? Far more challenging.

Could they do it without inventing a whole new raft of bugs that would have some people demand a third edition which radically changes things yet again?

*Compares various D&D editions*

My takeaway:
1. There will always be bugs.
2. So long as you're learning from past mistakes, the new bugs are lesser and less in number than the old. PF is itself proof of this.

*Looks at fifth edition with bugs that make 1st edition look goods*

*shakes head*

Nope. . .3.5 had by far the least bugs of any edition of D&D ever released. 4th edition was a massive step backwards and 5th editions bounded accuracy means that inherently, at its very heart the system is a bug.

Your response looks a lot like flamebait in the form of brash opinion stated as fact...but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that you simply forgot to add "IMO."

That said, two questions spring to mind:
1. Which factors do you think led to 3.5 being the least buggy edition, including PF?
2. Do you primarily play 3.5? Why or why not?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RDM42 wrote:
Cole Deschain wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
When someone says something that is unrealistic in my opinion, I say so and provide reasoning for my disagreement. Simple as that.

Indeed, there's a lot of reading intent going on here...

Could the Pathfinder rules be tidied up? Sure.

Could that be done while maintaining backwards compatibility with published material, which is one of the stated reasons why Pathfinder has its own rulebook in the first place? Far more challenging.

Could they do it without inventing a whole new raft of bugs that would have some people demand a third edition which radically changes things yet again?

*Compares various D&D editions*

My takeaway:
1. There will always be bugs.
2. So long as you're learning from past mistakes, the new bugs are lesser and less in number than the old. PF is itself proof of this.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jim Landon wrote:
If one wants pathfinder 2.0 just go play 5th edition, well at least until they abandon it in favor of the next thing.

Yes, the advantage of having a less conservative fanbase is that your hands aren't tied behind your back when it comes to your game.* :) You can be creative, innovate, go retro, it's all good! Because every new edition will cater to some portion of your fanbase, thus pleasing more of them. Heck, the collectors will buy every new edition just because it has that logo on it.

The downside, of course, is that some of them will abstain from editions they don't care for, as I am now.

*Well, one hand is tied when it comes to WotC. :p


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

I understand that fighters don't get a lot - my point is that backwards compatibility was a real straightjacket.

It was a self-imposed constraint that a Pathfinder fighter be basically "the-same-but-a-bit-better" as a 3.5 fighter - that constraint was hugely important to the fanbase.

Milo v3 wrote:
I actually think the biggest constrain on paizo innovation when it comes to fighters is the fanbase. Think about all the backlash from making classes that are better than the rogue at it's role, simply because they were making Better Balanced Skilled classes like investigator, inquisitor and slayer.

Yep, it's the double-edged sword of having a largely conservative fanbase: You get lots of brand loyalty, but you're constrained to making a better X, Y, and Z, rather than being free to simply make a better game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Avaricious wrote:

Hell why not make Pathfinder 2.0 Paizo's revision of WotC's 4E?

...I'll show myself out.

I'll show myself in. :)

...Though cleaning up all that brain matter would be a chore.

Spoiler:
'Cause, ya know, half of the fanbase's heads would explode. ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just finished Fate/Stay Night, and I think it's allowed me to finally put some of my anime-thoughts into words:

I often get the sense that I'm missing a lot of philosophical themes when I watch anime. I don't know how much of it is my tendency to miss dramatic subtleties in general, how much is due to the themes being lost in translation, and how much of it is culture clash. Or maybe I'm just overthinking things, and not missing anything.

Anyhow, an example from Fate/Stay Night: Shirou is an idealist who wants 'a world where nobody cries.' During the course of the show's two dozen episodes, several characters ridicule his idealism, calling him a 'hypocrite' for caring more about others than he does about himself. And I don't know what to make of that. It sounds a lot like the 'Nobody is selfless because everyone who helps others gets something out of it, even if it's just a warm bubbly feeling' nonsense. But maybe 'hypocrite' is the closest translation of a Japanese word that we don't have; or maybe it's just a bad translation.

Anyhow again, Night has proven to be as visually spectacular as Zero. The dialogue was a bit slow at times for my taste, and some of the characters' actions made me facepalm. (You just got done telling Shirou how much easier it is to kill masters than servants...so why are you ignoring the enemy master?!) But overall a fun watch.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think it's interesting how very progressive this company and much of its fanbase can be, while at the same time being so conservative when it comes to game rules.

I suppose it just goes to show how compartmentalized we humans can be.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

All characters -- even bookworm NPC wizards who never use their dagger for anything more than cutting a rare steak -- automatically get better at stabbing things as they gain experience, at a gradual linear rate. (BAB)

But aside from the rare exception -- like the monk -- anyone who wants to learn how to dodge has to spend special resources to do so. (AC) Additionally, the most worthwhile dodge options create sudden dramatic improvements in a character's skill at dodging.

Meanwhile, non-combat skills advance at a gradual linear rate, but require intentional investment.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scarletrose wrote:

I feel many people started to evaluate alignments not for what they can potentially do, but for the wackiest stereotype they can think about it.

Why do so many people let some bad actors define what alignment are allowed in their campaigns?

I don't know if anyone has mentioned yet, but you can thank the old school alignment descriptions for those stereotypes:

2nd Edition AD&D Player's Handbook wrote:
Chaotic Neutral: Chaotic neutral characters believe that there is no order to anything, including their own actions. With this as a guiding principle, they tend to follow whatever whim strikes them at the moment. Good and evil are irrelevant when making a decision. Chaotic neutral characters are extremely difficult to deal with. Such characters have been known to cheerfully and for no apparent purpose gamble away everything they have on the roll of a single die. They are almost totally unreliable. In fact, the only reliable thing about them is that they cannot be relied upon! This alignment is perhaps the most difficult to play. Lunatics and madmen tend toward chaotic neutral behavior.
2nd Edition AD&D Player's Handbook wrote:

Chaotic Evil: These characters are the

bane of all that is good and organized. Chaotic evil characters are motivated by the desire for personal gain and pleasure. They see absolutely nothing wrong with taking whatever they want by whatever means possible. Laws and governments are the tools of weaklings unable to fend for themselves. The strong have the right to take what they want, and the weak are there to be exploited. When chaotic evil characters band together, they are not motivated by a desire to cooperate, but rather to oppose powerful enemies. Such a group can be held together only by a strong leader capable of bullying his underlings into obedience. Since leadership is based on raw power, a leader is likely to be replaced at the first sign of weakness by anyone who can take his position away from him by any method. Bloodthirsty buccaneers and monsters of low Intelligence are fine examples of chaotic evil personalities.

Obviously, alignment has changed quite a bit over the years, and there have been some very...quirky ideas written down in published books. As time goes on and fewer old-timers cleave to those quirky ideas, alignment becomes less of an issue. But echoes of some of these quirks are hanging on for dear life, even in modern D&D:

Pathfinder SRD wrote:
Some neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run.

So, moral of the story: History and gaming culture can be a witch.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
The overwhelming majority of house rules I've seen posted in that subforum don't actually solve any problems. Many just overcomplicate things under the guise of adding realism or "fixing" a problem. I'd say a good portion of houseruling comes from folks who just want to say they came up with something.

There probably is some ego involved most of the time, but I think it's a mistake to think of game tinkerers as gamers who just want the gamer cred of writing something. There are easier ways to get that cred, starting with simple one-shot adventures.

I'm a frequent tinkerer myself; I've written many bad house rules, and a few good ones. My driving motivation is "This game doesn't work the way I want it to work," as well as the sheer enjoyment I get out of the very process of tinkering with rules. The second one just as much as the first; for example, there's a long list of problems I have with the 3e family of games. (My 2e list is longer.) Literally every time I scroll over the Paizo forums, I see thread titles that make me think "I'm so glad I don't have to deal with that anymore!" Because I have 4e, which plays like a dream. So all those arguments about optimizing and Stormwind, alignment, paladins, broken classes...they're total non-issues for me, because I finally have an edition of D&D that I don't have to butcher to have something that I'm really excited to run.

...And despite all that, I'm working on a 3e-spin-off game that works as I want 3.x to work. Sure, if I ever finish it I'll be able to say "I was the first guy to make multiclassing work in this particular way!" (Assuming someone doesn't beat me to it.) But I'm writing it mostly because 3.x is still in my head, I guess, and because I love tinkering!

TheAlicornSage wrote:
Two different views on the same thing, one sees a problem, the other doesn't. I'm pretty sure that one person trying to fix it would cause a problem for the other.

Sometimes. But other times, I'm convinced that the one who doesn't see a problem would be just as content either way...so long as it was the way he/she grew up with, or the way that the devs wrote it down.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
I find people that b#~$# about everything tiresome, I don't understand why it's so hard for some people to see the positive side of things :-)

I don't understand why it's so hard for some to see both.

(Not necessarily referencing current discussion, here.)


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Blayde MacRonan wrote:
July 3rd... Season 2 of Knights of Sidonia comes to Netflix.
Blayde MacRonan wrote:
They announced last week that season 3 has entered production.

*Squeals like a nine year old girl*


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So to summarize the trigger warning issue: Some magazines use content-warnings as a favor to their readers, some people use 'TW' as a part of obvious jokes, and some law students are requesting TWs to maybe avoid genuine issues and maybe skip class.

Yeah, I can see how that last one could be a problem; but overall, color me unimpressed with all the gnashing of teeth over TWs. I wasn't even aware of this TW thing until someone on the internet complained about it -- and I've been through college twice -- so from where I sit all of the noise is coming from people being triggered by trigger warnings themselves. Maybe the internet needs a new TW...

Trigger Warning: The following text contains the words 'trigger warning.'


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

I don't like Harry Potter, i think Rowling should've killed Ron off, he was a D-Bag.

Also i've never made it past chapter one of book one, so my opinion of Ron is based entirely on the 5 movies i've seen (i haven't seen the last 3)

One of the nice things about the Harry Potter series is that you could actually see JK Rowling becoming a better writer in each book. The first one was (IMO) not very good -- but by book 3 they were well worth reading. There are a lot of things I think went wrong with the last book -- but last books are hard, especially when everyone in the world is reading over your shoulder.

I mean, she's no Ursula K LeGuin (whose Earthsea books remain my favorite YA), but she's no Stephanie Meyer either.

I can understand this I was not into HP when I was a kid but when I began to date my now wife she convinced me to read the books and yes the first one is mhee but you have to realize the first to the third books are more of kids books and the last four are YA she did get better as they continued but the final battle I the movie was WAY better then the book

HP has the unusual distinction of being a series that very noticeably changes tone as the series progresses. In #1, the protagonists are innocent kids, and the tone and conclusion are 100% rated-G. A few books later, the climax of the book is a good kid dying right before teenage-Harry's eyes. And of course #7 ends with beloved characters being killed in the very first chapter, and things don't get any softer for the protagonists as they're forced to grow up all too quickly.

And at the risk of triggering Kryzbyn...

Spoiler:
OMG HAVE YOU READ HARRY POTTER YET, IT'S THE BEST SERIES EVAAAR?!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
pH unbalanced wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Monte Cook specifically called out the "Timmy Cards" as being completely intentional. Given that so many of them exist in Pathfinder, I have to assume they are following that (horrible) design paradigm.

I'm not a Magic player, but my understanding of the reference is that "Timmy Cards" aren't traps -- they are just big, flashy, and hard to set up. Not just situationally useful, but situationally awesome. So if you use them, it is just incumbent upon you to understand how to make sure you can get in those situations.

As opposed to a "trap" which would be useless in all conceivable circumstances. There may be some of those in 3.x/PF, but they are not intentional.

DrDeth copy-pasted some of it, but I have the whole passage saved on Wordpress. 'Timmy' cards are explained here, and then discussed in more detail here. From the first article:

Mark Rosewater wrote:
Each set, R&D makes sure to design a certain number of cards for Timmy. Timmy cards, as we call them, tend to be big creatures or spells with big effects. In general, Timmy cards are exciting but not too economical.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
Quiche Lisp wrote:

I think there's a special layer in the Abyss dedicated to game designers who implement "trap options" in 3.x D&D and PFRPG.

I regularly fall for trap options, which might explain the above sentence.

There are no "trap options". (well maybe some errors like "Prone shooter"). As long as you understand them and they fit your character concept, then they are not a trap.

There are no 'mysteries,' so long as you understand everything.

1 to 50 of 309 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 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.