Sean K Reynolds wrote:
TimD: The companion no longer provides cover, at least as far as the slayer is concerned, so there's no need to create a new trick for that.
Thanks, Sean.I was reading that as removing the -4 penalty for the target being in melee penalty (per the shooting targets in melee rules), not the -4 penalty for shooting through cover provided by combatants (per the cover rules).
Interesting changes. Looking forward to playtesting the revised version.
I play-tested a Hunter a bit over a week ago in PFS (in the Confirmation) and hadn’t yet had a chance to write-up any sort of good feedback on it yet.
I do want to address and brainstorm a bit on the stated goal of the Hunter (or at least paraphrased what I recall from Jason B. saying at D*Con) – this is the class that is the best class for fighting with an animal companion.
I think that the teamwork feats thing is a good start and mechanically appropriate given what we have, but makes the class very similar to one of the inquisitor niches, which I think it would do well to expand on a bit more. (I’ll skip the weirdness of armor & shield thing as the devs have already said this is something they are looking at.)
The first main weakness I would address is the lack of ranged combat utility for what is would be a thematically appropriate strength (which I think the devs have already said is something they are looking into). I would like to see the AC and not count as cover / concealment or as “in melee” for ranged attacks from the hunter. I think it would also be interesting for the AC to be able to extend this ability at higher levels to be able to provide a similar benefit for allies who are adjacent to it (effectively “herding” the target into ranged attacks). This would give the Hunter a bit of a niche and some Feat-related benefits (Precise Shot, etc.) that are still limited to use with their companion. Mechanics-wise, I would probably take the ranged attack verbiage from the Divine Hunter and modify to reflect the AC.
I would love to see some additional mechanics that allow the AC & the Hunter to use Aid Another actions more efficiently as well – especially in non-standard ways. There is some precedent amongst archtypes, orders, etc. to allow aid another to do something other than the static AC or to-hit melee bonus. Stacked with my recommendation above, I would like to see the Hunter to be able to used a ranged attack to aid another the AC who is in melee or benefit from the AC giving an Aid Another action to move the target and give the Hunter a bonus on a ranged attack. I think that both should be able to give Aid Another actions faster than a standard action as they gain levels as well. Thematically, I could see adding Bodyguard, In Harms Way, etc. to the teamwork bonus feat options as well.
The lack of Ranger spells also hurts the class. I know that there is a Ranger Archtype (Nirmathi Irregular, I believe) that has the ability to gain a druid spell. I would like to see something similar for the Hunters to gain Ranger spells, even if in a limited manner (perhaps the ability to use their bonus spell slots on Ranger or Druid spells, or to choose one spell per level from the Ranger list to add to their repertoire, or to be able to memorize at one level higher?)
Finally, I would address the Animal Focus ability. As written, I frankly completely forgot to use it when I should have, so can’t comment much on its utility. Because I knew I would only get it for a minute, I basically wrote it off for most of the adventure and only remembered it when “mopping up” on rather low risk opponents. Because of this, I would like to see something a bit more akin to the abilities that can be broken up throughout the day.
I’m hoping to play-test at a higher level before the open play-test wraps - unfortunately the disadvantage of play-testing through PFS means that almost all of the feedback is for very low level characters.
Gnome hatred, not fragility. Especially Svirfneblin.
Depends on the campaign. I mostly ban things based on them not fitting the campaign theme (ex don't expect guns in a no-gun campaign)...
Psionics are banned on principle that they are on a point-system in a vancian game, but if PF ever puts out a vancian psionic system I'll check it out and may allow it.
Leadership is often banned, but not always.
Rogues get extra abilities so they don't have to sit in a corner and sob "Ninja, Vivisectionist, Gunslinger, Seeker Sorcerer Dip" over and over again.
Gnomes are usually banned as I have a hard time NOT killing them and I don't want the players or myself to waste a lot of time on them.
Step 1: Assess the GM … sober?, high?, age 12 or less and on a sugar high?, lost a bet?, sleeping with one (or more) of the PCs? (if none of the above, proceed to step 2)
I don’t often post in the PFS forums as I’ve not been playing as long as many folks and don’t feel that my play experiences in PFS are broad enough yet to contribute as well as I can in other threads.
That said, the two main reasons I was so late in getting involved in PFS was the lack of support for higher level play and the alignment restrictions.
Both of these initial concerns, however, remain to some extent. They also causes a chilling effect when I try to recruit folks that I game with outside of PFS into trying it out – especially those who have tried out other organized play campaigns in the past. I guess it goes towards my grognard nature that I feel more dirty mentioning that gunslingers are legal, but that lawful evil characters are not.
Removing a safety net between a player and a PFS GM who may have VERY different views on how alignments should impact and interact with character & player choices seems like a very large step backwards to me. Of all of the points of gamer contention, gaming alignments are probably the biggest area of contention amongst a whole hotbed of things that cause gamers to go into full-on Nerd Rage™ *. I think that PFS is best served by continuing in its current trend of looking at the circumstances more than the spell descriptor when casting spells to determine alignment infractions rather than opening the TARDIS full of worms that would occur from changing it to match rules clarifications aimed at non-PFS play.
*TimD’s use and interpretation of the terminology of Nerd-Rage™ does not imply that Jim Butcher has either participated in such alignment debates on the internet or concurs with behaviors described.
Marc Radle wrote:
So, out of curiosity ... is there any particular reason you are compiling this data?
Dotting thread as campaigns that go to multiple worlds & planes can almost always use a bit of flavor from somewhere else.
Pleasantly surprised by the Shaman.
Clerics can also divert some of their wrath at Life Oracles to Shamans. With the Life Spirit & appropriate Feats you can channel healing as a standard, swift and move action in the same round. 3 channels for 4 uses, but yikes that's a lot of dice.
Also, not a fan of the use of "Hex" for their ability - would prefer to see that remain with Witches as it could be confusing if a character has both a Witch Hex class feature & a Shaman Hex class feature (such as through multi-classing into a Hexblade Magus). Sadly, most words that might substitute probably already have game terms associated with them. (Maybe "malocchio"? - but that may be a bit too enshrined in a specific culture. Manifest? ... hmmm)
moon glum wrote:
It's a copy-paste from one of the gunslinger abilities.
Edited as post was more harsh than intended and not helpful. Boat long-since missed on Gunslinger abilities.
I've used a modified version of the chase rules to good effect at least once. It was basically the PCs rushing to try to get ahead of a group of kidnappers, so combat was possible, but not the point of the encounter.
The "problem" with murder mysteries, missing persons, etc. in PF & similar games is that magic makes it much easier to "cheat" and its a bit harder to work around from a storytelling point of view than in a system or setting that doesn't involve magic. Magical disguises, flight, invisibility, altered memory, shared memories, scrying sensors, stone tell spells, etc. all complicate both sides of obfuscation scenarios.
That said, I recall that there are a few threads around giving lots of good advise on alternate encounter types.
One piece of advise I would give though, no matter which way you end up going, is that if you are trying to replace the combat with something else that you make sure that (like most combat) it is not reliant on a single roll from either side of the conflict. Measures of success or failure based on multiple attempts usually work much better (and give you more to work with when flavoring the conflict, whether it be a debate, catching witnesses in lies, or trying not to trigger too many traps when walking across the guildmaster's challenge in a dead magic area).
OK, I lied... 3 pieces of advice... :)
2. Play to your PCs strengths & weaknesses when it comes to skills and abilities (both in and out of play). Much like your monsters may try to attack the guy without armor, the Inquisitors will likely not want to hear everything from the Bluff Maestro if they can pin down other characters and interrogate them. Likewise, if one of your PCs has super-specialized skills that rarely come up, make sure it's at least marginally useful in part of your non-combat encounters. Social encounters are also an excellent way to be able to use "out of CR" things to either set the tone or put your PCS in debt for their raise dead if they didn't get the hint that it's not all combat.
3. Make sure there are always at least 3 vectors for your PCs to get information to continue their plotline.
I've found that the higher level campaigns one needs, the less imaginative they tend to be. High level game play is more for power gamers or video gamers than actual role-players.
I've found exactly the opposite. The less imaginative players tend to become frustrated after discovering that all of their low-level tactics can't be used effectively at all levels of play and tend to stick to lower levels of play because the learning curve is easier.
Short answer to the original OP: it's much easier to cut encounters on the fly than add them.
Diego Rossi wrote:
The save is "(DC equal to the dragon's frightful presence)" so it is fairly hard, but it is a spell like ability, so anything that protect you from a 1st level spell should block it.
Thanks for pointing that out, I apparently completely misread that.So, save is higher ... I still have no issues with it. It's a great thematic ability.
I think this is clearly in the area of a “for GM adjudication” issue.
The save DC is somewhat laughable, given the fact that it’s an adult dragon (specified as 1st level spell, so 11+Cha Mod of the Dragon, so starting at DC 13 as an Adult [CR 11] maxing out at DC 16 vs. a Great Wyrm [CR 19]).
On the other hand, I play a bit differently than many do and like to ambush PCs, which is apparently a no-no by some folks “modern” gaming philosophies where apparently the PCs are always supposed to be the only pro active ones in a combat situation. I also try to use dragons very sparingly, excepting where a specific plotline may put PCs at cross-purposes with numbers of them.
This sounds like an alignment expectations issue.
Pathfinder is not a “grey scale” game at its heart, which annoys some people to no end. Alignment is, however, very hardwired into the system, and requires some effort to remove without losing a lot of the thematic elements of the game (especially when it comes to extra planar opponents, paladins, clerics, and alignment spells). If you are concerned about role-playing purity, though, go with what you think your character would do, but remember that just because your character doesn’t think they are evil or that they are committing an evil act that doesn’t mean that they aren’t – in Pathfinder Good & Evil are absolutes, not moral justification that comes from self-analysis (and this is coming from someone who likes playing for Team Evil).
I’d recommend talking out of game a bit more about alignment & role-playing expectations before your next game session so that this doesn’t devolve into bitterness and a shattered gaming group.
I would suggest modifying rule #1 and eliminating rule #9 if you’re giving advice to new GMs.
Instead of “Find out what your players want to play” I would instead recommend “Make sure that you are your players are willing to play the same type of game you want to run”. This is especially critical for new GMs who are playing with more experienced players or players who are also experienced GMs. It’s one thing to encourage an experienced GM to try to expand their repertoire a bit by trying something different, but a new GM should pick a theme and style they feel comfortable with and go with that. Managing expectations is important, but it’s the GM (especially a new GM) that’s putting in most of the work and trying to get the delicate balance of the type of story they are envisioning. This is not to say that player input isn’t important, but if a new GM has done hours research and work on his campaign and is inspired to run a low-magic campaign world with only a few non-human races focused on seeking out an artifact before a great evil can become manifested upon the world and a player wants to play a undead illithid GlitterBoy Pilot they should feel it’s ok to say “not in this campaign, maybe the next”.
Bonus advice: I always recommend that the first “session” actually be everyone sitting around talking out-of-game about character concepts, background and the GM being able to give advice about what will work best for what they envision. Trying out accents & talking over concepts to see if it’s something they will want to stick through for more than a session or two is also important. Bad accents and annoying personality traits may grow stale rapidly and it’s best if it’s resolved before game-on.
Instead of “Always say ‘yes’ or the ‘Rule of Kool’ “
Not all games are run the same and some games attempt a bit more verisimilitude than others.
In some games wuxia attempts at random badassery of spinning back kicks from your concealed position under the water to snap a guards neck while you wearing 150 lbs of sodden equipment and full plate armor are just “Cool”.
Neither is bad, in and of itself, but it is important to realize what sort of game you are running and how consistently you want to maintain the style and theme of the game.
The real question to ask yourself is “how can I make this either fun … or engaging?”.
Actually, the most important rule I can think of for new GMs is “It’s ok to say no”.
Over the years, I’ve seen many new GMs get flustered or frustrated when they did not say “no” in time and then feel obligated to allow players to continue to play things that are disruptive to their game (this was by far the worst in Rifts, to be fair). Especially when you are a new GM, it’s ok to say “no”, but be sure to communicate your reasons for saying “no”. If someone wants to come in with a psionic character and you’ve barely managed to start to understand the magic rules, it’s ok to say “no, I’m sorry, I’m not currently allowing psionics or other 3rd party material. I may allow it in the future.”
Good stuff to try to get out there, though.
P.S. My top 10 for new GMs would be:
1. Expect the unexpected – and embrace it, don’t fight it.
Instead of trying to craft an item which gives an additional generic swift action several times per day, why don't you instead try to craft one that specifically addresses arcane armor training or arcane spell failure?
In my experience, niche items are generally more balanced and flavorful than items which give both flexibility & action economy, and therefore more likely to be approved by GMs.
As always, YMMV. :)
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
Tim can you explain your opinion that having an animal companion at +50% your level isn't overpowered? Consider that by 20th level it would be a 30th level animal companion.
An animal companion is only one aspect of a character's class & advancement.As mentioned above, the chart only goes to 20, so the ability pretty much caps at 12th. In addition, assuming you decide to go beyond 20 on the chart, when I'm running a game at 20th level the animal companion is generally much less effective than at lower level for the PCs as it doesn't get its own WBL to play with.
Frankly, a 30th level deadly performance for 20th level bard or +20hp for each laying on hands for a tiefling paladin is probably a lot more troublesome at 20th level play.
On the other hand, my play experiences, especially at levels 15+ seem to vary wildly from what I read about on these boards, so as always YMMV.
I'm at about 1.25 on the opinion table offered - It works & it's strong, but not OP.
A few comparisons were offered above in thread, I'll throw a few more out for comparison purposes:
Half Elf Summoners – Extra Evolution Points (Feat gives +1 EP, Half Elves gain 1 Feat every 4 levels)
Also, not all abilities are created equal – intentionally so. Are Aasimar's completely badass as Oracles? Yes? Is this op/ broken? I don't think so, but YMMV.
I probably wouldn't allow it at all.
If for some reason I HAD to allow something like this (ex. I lost a bet or there was some sort of weird competition for pricing insane-O things), the crafting would be based off of Time Stop and would probably be around the 180k range. It's probably just shy of the power level of the metaphorical permanent "every swing" true strike gloves.
Leadership is very much a “depends on the campaign” type of Feat. Probably the most “depends on the campaign” feat out there, to be honest.
However, there are some times where it comes in very handy for both GMs & PCs…
times leadership isn’t as bad:
Too few PCs campaigns - if you only have two or three players, especially if some of them tend to show late, leave early or flake completely cohorts can really make a difference.
New PCs in an existing campaign - especially if the player is new and with several veteran players, having a cohort that can function as a gaming version of the grizzled non-com to give advise to the character of the newer player can be invaluable in making it both a fun experience in gaming in general and give a good mechanism for the game world-related questions the player may want to ask to be handled in game.
Higher threat campaigns – some campaigns are just a lot more deadly and dangerous than others and the leadership skill can be an excellent mechanism to allow for the occasional safety net for when the group gets partially or wholly tpw’d and needs extra resources to come get their bodies &/or stuff out. (I’m in a campaign where I got killed more than half the games I’ve attending at levels 13+ and having a cleric cohort helped keep us going more than once.)
Keeping the fun (but possibly useless) NPC around – sometimes a GM will introduce an NPC that the PCs will get attached to and want to keep around. Leadership is a good mechanism to give the players a bit more control over the NPC and make their character seem a bit more heroic by “recruiting” minions like a “proper hero” gets their sidekick.
“More action / less shopping !” games – another type of the “high threat” games mentioned above – sometimes both the GMs & the PCs may get tired of all the math involved in playing through the normal “magic mart” type of campaign, but not want to be completely stuck without the resources of being able to make desired or needed items. I’ve seen Leadership used to sort of bridge the gap and allow the GM & PCs to have a mechanism for an “in-game” hand-wave of a lot of the things needed to craft or upkeep magic items & alchemical expendables.
If you do decide to allow for Leadership, I would definitely make sure that you at least vet all of the cohorts who show up and make sure that you know what they are going to do to aid the PCs they are affiliated with. Be aware that those that aren’t “stay at home” cohorts will be affecting the speed of your combats and giving the PCs additional actions in combat. Decide ahead of time and try to communicate to your players if you are implementing any house rules (like simultaneous initiative, declared actions before the round, or a maximum amount of time to decide on an action before losing the turn automatically going on delay).
Hope that helps.
This has a lot to do with how different folks generate characters. Some start with an image in their head and build from there. Others start with a race/class(archtype) combination and build from that.
There was a really good Ravenloft one as well, which I see all over the web, so I'll drop below in case you want to use it.
Ravenloft Character Creation Checklist:
Name, race, age: Were you named after someone? Whom?
1) What do you look like? Are you alluring? Plain? Grotesque? Do you dress in finery or tattered rags? Do you have any scars or distinguishing features? A character's appearance may hint at her past. For example, a fighter hunting the weretiger who infected her with lycanthropy might still bear scars from the attack.
2) Where is your family? Where is your homeland? Are you native to the area, or were you drawn here by a quest? Do you have a cozy cottage to call home, or have you been banished from your ancestral estate? Some players may believe that loved ones can't be threatened if they don't exist, but consider this: a hero with no one to lose also has no one to turn to in times of need.
3) What is your greatest love? For what or whom would you make sacrifices? A romantic interest? A family member? Yourself? Your God? Magic? Youth? Knowledge? Power? Would you make a personal sacrifice or sacrifice someone else?
4) What is your greatest personal regret? Do you have any memories that haunt you at night? Were you unable to prevent a death? Do you have a mental or physical trait that you despise? Did you betray a friend in a time of weakness?
5) What makes your skin crawl? What are your hates or fears? Many elves are disgusted by the acrid scent of gunpowder, and dwarves are said to dislike the sea. Do you dislike the smell of livestock, or do you hate the sweltering heat of summer? Does witnessing an injustice set your teeth grinding, or does the sight of spiders send you into shivers? Do you find a race, culture, religion, or form of magic primitive or unnatural?
6) What fascinates you? What topics draw your interest? DO you attend operas, or do you read tawdry novels? Would you pore over the intricate patterns of a magic scroll, the strands of a cobweb, or the gears of a clock tower? Do you have a weakness for riddles? Do you live your life in search of new sensations?
7) What are your habits? Do you have any patterns in your life? A sorcerer might twist his beard when lost in thought; a caliban might collect "trophies" from slain foes; a bard might practice every night to hone her musical skills.
8) What are your secrets? Do you hide anything from the outside world? Are you disguising a trait, or have you buried an event from your past? Why do you keep this secret? If your secret was revealed, would you merely be embarrassed, or might you face persecution or put someone at risk?
9) Are you rational or passionate? Do you pride yourself on following your head before your heart, or are you a true romantic? Characters with chaotic alignments tend to be more comfortable with their emotions, but lawful characters are certainly capable of passionate outbursts.
10) Are you sophisticated or superstitious? Were you educated in the finest boarding schools, or were you raised by tanners who left their farmstead only to check their traps? A cosmopolitan character might be inexperienced in the skills of etiquette, while a refined peasant might know countless folktales about the fey.
11) How strong is your faith? Many denizens of the land scoff at religion, believing that the gods have long since ceased to care about mortal concerns. If religious, do you worship the prevalent religion of your homeland, or have you adopted a foreign creed? Are you pious or zealous? What draws you to this deity?
12) How self-confident are you? Do you continually question your own motives? Do you struggle with an inner darkness? Or do you stride boldly forth, knowing in your heart that your actions are correct?
13) What drives you to adventure? Why have you taken up the dangerous life of an adventurer? Are you simply mercenary, seeking treasure? Are you on a hunt for vengeance? Are you driven by altruistic motives? Do you believe you have a destiny to fulfill? Are you trying to reclaim a stolen birthright? Are you struggling to be reunited with a lost love? Are you seeking that love to be lost?
Hope that helps.
* Information on genus loci types of things – places of power, place spirits, ley lines/dragon lines, ley line nexi, etc. How they differ between Golarion & the First World. Maybe an alternate version of haunt mechanics for fae place spirits.
Step 1: tell your GM you are very, very sorry for hitting on or being hit on by their significant other / parent / sibling / some combination thereof.
Mythic Evil Lincoln wrote:
I know what a Swamp Thing is, but have never heard of the "vs. Robocop" part.
Sufficiently intriguing name, however, can you provide details?
Vincent T. gives some great advise above, but to expand upon it…
1. Know your own strengths & limitations.:
Some GMs work better in a sandbox or in a rail-road setting. Fun can be had in both ways. Some GMs will make up stuff on the fly with glorious abandon and take folks on a roller coaster ride that may or may not end up with a one-horned guy chasing them until they get home Others prefer to use the skeletons laid out from Adventure Paths to share a story that their players will be able to compare and contrast to other folks who have also played through similar scenarios. There is no right or wrong answer to this one, but a lot of it is about mind set, skill set, and time.
That said, I’m not suggesting you can’t improve. If you know you aren’t good at sandbox & surprise player decisions, there’s nothing wrong with starting with an AP until you get your sandbox skill set a bit more of a workout and use side quest opportunities or off-the-cuff adventures when not everyone is able to make a game to get a bit more experience. Likewise if your games tend to be an ADHD wonderland of 16 kitchen sinks and an industrial sandblasting machine that players sometimes lose track of, you may want to consider running a more “rail roady” game using a module or AP as a touch stone to make sure you are taking your players in a common direction.
2. Know what motivates your players.:
I find that even table top players tend to fall in areas similar to those covered by the famous Bartle Test :
Some players mostly show up to hang out with their friends (Socializers).
Others want to know what will happen next in your commonly woven story (Explorers).
Some just care about more loot, xp, and ways to advance their character (Achievers).
A very few (especially in PF) are more PvP or (more commonly) competitive style players (Killers).
Almost all are actually a combination of the above.
In addition to making a character feel special, it often helps to make sure that you use the things that motivates your players to show up.
3. Communication & Game Style Preferences:
Bit rushed on this #3, so may come back to expand on it a bit more later…
Know how to communicate expectations to players:
Know when your preferences & your players may not line up and how to deal with this dichotomy:
Hope that helps.
There's some good advise above, especially in personality quirks & traits and catch phrases - these are also very helpful mnemonic tricks to help you get back into character.
One thing I like to do, especially for evil or emotionally damaged characters is what I call "the other lesson learned". Find or think of a situation in their backstory that most people would have learned one thing from and twist it.
Thought I replied again to this yesterday, but guess it was eaten by the interwebz.
Upon additional reflection, I concur that an "Advanced Campaigns" or similar would probably be a better book - one that has both GM advise and player advise in it for running & playing in non-standard campaigns as well as adapting AP's and modules for black hat PCs.
The other option is to put hidden stuff everywhere for a paranoid BBEG. Every book case has a hidden compartment behind it (mostly with mechanical traps, book cases of tawdry romance novels, restrooms or refuse chutes - maybe a few with zombies for a bit of extra fun), interior doors are all covered by tapestries or curtains, trapdoors under most every rug, etc.
Depends on the level of the PCs & their opponents.
Links for time saving: NPC Gallery
A few more for you:
The lizards that entered the town were looking for something specific – perhaps an item of magical or religious significance that was left there when the humans pushed them out and first established the town. Now the PCs have to either stop them from getting it or stop them after they have it from escaping with it.
The lizards have a secret ally in the town who is sheltering them from the other townfolk.
The lizards are appreciative of the assistance and attempt to contact the PCs to repay the favor. Your call on how nice or horrific their “thank you” is.
PCs begin to have a scrying sensor follow them around from time to time. Could be the lizards, could be the town, could be Cheliax, or could be someone or something they have yet to even hear about – but, something is interested in them now.
The lizards are found ritually murdered as if by an evil cult. This has never happened in the town before and the PCs now have to try to figure out who actually did it as they are suspects. Extra fun – witnesses saw the PCs do it!
The lizards poisoned the water supply. Even the PCs need an alternate way to get water. Extra fun – it’s not a poison, it’s some sort of mutagenic or hallucinatory substance.
The townsfolk have a wall because they aren’t what they seem to be and didn’t want to risk accidental discovery. Your choice about lycanthropes, demon cultists, dopplegangers, etc. Extra fun – now that the PCs (and the lizards) have discovered their secret, the PCs (& lizards) have to be transformed or killed to keep the secret safe!
The “Chelaxian representative” was killed at some point and replaced by a doppelganger or similar shapechanger / possessing creature. PCs are implicated in their machinations and have to somehow prove that they were unaware of the duplicity.
Good luck, hope that helps.
I think it seems more of a chapter or two of out an Advanced Game Mastering book than a book in and of itself, but either as a stand-alone or as part of something bigger, I would find it interesting.
I definately think a lot of GMs could do with some practical advise on non-standard games, especially for alternate conflict types (like the above-mentioned paladin as an antagonist). Likewise, many also seem like they could use a good way to gauge player interest and campaign type compatability when it comes to PCs playing black hats or even just campaigns or characters that show a very different viewpoints on common tropes and storylines.
Ross Byers wrote:
It would have been 1906, if you go within the normal 'current year' math. What happened that year?
Ecuador-Columbia Earthquake was notable.San Francisco earthquake of 1906 was notable.
First audio radio broadcasts of entertainment and music ever made to a general audience.
... and, of course, that was the year Robert E. Howard was born!
More fun info on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1906
Ross Byers wrote:
Alternatively, if Rasputin Must Die! was merely travel in space and not time, that complicates the answer. That would mean 4713 AR is 1918 AD, which means 4606 (Aroden's death) was 1811. What happened that year?
New Madrid Earthquake was the most notable thing I saw, but ran out of time and have to run.
More fun info on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1811
Nice job with the Ad Hominem straw man arguments.
Also, while I won't deny my opinions are very far towards preserving the 2nd Amendment and what I believe both its intent and it's need are, I was actually addressing the fact that the OP did state it was for a survey.I've seen more "gun control: yes/no" surveys and arguements than I can count, but I've seen very few surveys which address how far people think their government should go and how they feel about Ruby Ridge happening to THEIR friends and relatives or how much they want to be around when the ATF goes shooting up their neighborhood because the guy down the street isn't willing to give up the guns he's been collecting for 30+ years.
Personally, I think it would be interesting to see how far people think it should go. Especially with the very good odds in some states of seeing the federal government and local governments at odds, possibly violently.
Nice job with the Ad Hominem straw man arguments. You're especially good at illustrating a position that pratically no one in the gun control movement has advocated, the stripping away of gun ownership rights. That's a product of NRA FUD, little more, and nothing less.
Interestingly, I think you may be misconstruing my own opinion. I find even current bans on fully automatic weapons distasteful and feel that "shall not be infringed upon" is pretty clear. Any law that infringes in any manner on my rights to own a weapon I consider the stripping of my rights. You may disagree with my opinion on the matter, but it is legitimately my opinion. Also, as mentioned earlier, I am not now, nor have ever been a member of the NRA.Either that, or you haven't been paying attention to the folks that are saying "give them a mental health exam and if they 'fail' they can't own guns!". Those folks I do define as "in the gun control movement", though you are free to disagree with that assessment.
I most definitely aren't willing to give any particular credence on vague statements on the order of "I work in the mental health field" So what?, of what relevance does that have
To be more specific, I am very familiar with the fact that if any four mental health professionals discuss clinical, you can generally expect at least five varying opinions of the proper course of treatment. Most especially if it involves someone getting paid.I was specifically addressing all of the "have them be examined by a mental health professional" proposals that pop up all the time. None of which seem to offer an option for any sort of defense or rebuttal should the "mental health professional" in question just basically be a rubber stamp for removing rights from veterans or others. Even if someone is accused of actually having murdered someone they are allowed their own professionals and an appeal as recourse - I oppose any measure which would not allow at least the same recourse when you are talking about removing someone's 2nd Amendment Rights. Doubly so if it is a veteran.
Hopefully that's a bit more clear, even if you disagree.
To the OP:
If you are looking for newer or more interesting survey data than what normally appears you may want to approach how people feel about the criminalization of themselves, their friends, or their neighbors and about how many law enforcement officers are unwilling to enfore more stringent gun control laws.
I’m also not a Chris, but will chime in nonetheless.
I would like to see some additional spells similar to or building on some of the very good or flavorful abjuration spells in the PF Campaign: specifically shield & it’s shock shield variant, dweomer retaliation, and spell absorption:
A spell which allows you to “hold” a counter-spell for a certain amount of time (1 min static?) and release it as an immediate action. If not used, you lose the “holding” spell, but not the spell you would have released to counter the incoming magic.
Retributive abjuration spells, which allow you to choose a school or specific spell when memorizing or casting (similar to how Spell Immunity works), if you counter one of the spells in the list it either aids your, hinders the opposing caster, or damages the opposing caster.
More variants on shield – maybe one that gives a resistance bonus or one that you choose a specific spell or effect when it is cast and gain a +4 untyped (or at least not resistance or deflection) bonus against it, so that it would add to other effects that the Abjurer likely has going from their CLA’s or other items or spells.
A similar random thought – more spells or abilities which encourage or reward taking Spell Focus (Abjuration) would be great, rather than it seeming like being focused in your main school of magic is great flavor, but incredibly useless.