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

Zombieneighbours's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Society Member. 3,830 posts (3,903 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 10 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,830 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

You could try Maid rpg and Golden Sky Stories, through you might need to trim down some of the weirder stuff from maid.


Our experiences couldn't really be more different. Fate has basically become my system of choice.

If there isn't a good reason I want to use a specific system for a game concept, such a strong system/theme ties, or a mechanical conceit I really want to explore, then I use fate to do it. It's flexibility, player engagement with the environment and speed make it a no brainer.

In fact, other than trying out a few indie games, their are only a handful of games currently that can drag me away from it as a GM.

- Warhammer fantasy role-play (nostalgia)
- Wraith: The oblivian (cause it is a work of art)
- Call of Cthulhu (Nostalgia, system familiarity, massive amounts of content, player base, and being a better fit for setting)
- Trail of Cthulhu (because it is the best fit for Mythos gaming in my opinion)


What with Call of Cthulhu and Trail of Cthulhu, I have never seen a need for it. The only real area it might be useful (i.e. superpulpie games)can now be covered with Fate, thanks to the Achtung! Cthulhu Fate hack by Modiphius. I guess, given the thematic differences between pathfinder as a system and the setting, my question would be; "why do it?"


Christopher Dudley wrote:
Zombieneighbours wrote:
Oh, before I forget, there is also the supremely cool night's black agents.

I'm going to guess you're a fan of the Role-Playing Public Radio podcast. A bunch of the games you've mentioned I've originally heard of from them. I've been wondering how Base-Raiders plays.

Other games I've played and enjoyed because I heard of them there first:
Monsters & Other Childish Things
Godlike/(the modern version whose names is escaping me now)
Eclipse Phase

it plays like fate, which is to say, that if you get it, it is easily the most rewarding RPG experience you can have, but if you don't I imagine it is pretty rubbish.


Christopher Dudley wrote:
Zombieneighbours wrote:
Oh, before I forget, there is also the supremely cool night's black agents.

I'm going to guess you're a fan of the Role-Playing Public Radio podcast. A bunch of the games you've mentioned I've originally heard of from them. I've been wondering how Base-Raiders plays.

Other games I've played and enjoyed because I heard of them there first:
Monsters & Other Childish Things
Godlike/(the modern version whose names is escaping me now)
Eclipse Phase

I am, but the only game I have mentioned I that i discovered through them was base raiders. I didn't mention eclipse phase, which I did discover through them.


Kthulhu wrote:
All of the GUMSHOE games are pretty cool. My favorite is Trail of Cthulhu, of course, but I think the GUMSHOE monster book "The Book of Unremitting Horror" is one of the creepiest monster books I own.

The stuff on spectres for wraith: the oblivion is creepier in my opinion, but not by much.


Oh, before I forget, there is also the supremely cool night's black agents.


Artesia: adventures in the known world

Dogs in the vineyard

Houses of the blooded/blood and silk

Paranoia

Base raiders

Cyberpunk 2020/Cybergeneration

SLA Industries

Deadland


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:

That's kind of one of the things you have to just accept and move on...

There's basically two economies in a pen and paper fantasy world.

1) The economy driven by PCs buying and selling magic items.

2) The economy driven by in-world NPCs and trade and the like.

They don't really play well together, and it's best not to make them try in my opinion. At least, not without completely redesigning how the game handles magic item pricing, balance, and creation from the ground up.

I actually think this is missing a trick. There is game to be had in their only being one economy, and PCs utterly destroying it. ;)

The "money in the root of all fun: economics in gaming" panel from gencon this year is definitely worth a listen.


Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
Zombieneighbours wrote:
'white van man' is a moron
Spoken like a true liberal.

Audrey, I grew up in trade. 'white van man' was the people my father worked with and drank with. My dad was a 'white van man'though a very atypical one, a plumber who trained as a chemist before that. My opinion of 'white van man' does not derive from liberalism. It derives from hour upon tedious hour in their presence. From listening to them spouting opinions I could identify as moronic as early as seven years old.

It is my experience that are a lot of men, who make their living in trade in Essex who are decent people, and there are a lot who are really nasty people, but hte vast majority lack the educational basis to understand anything other than their trade, and a RABID disinterest in changing that, and a equally rabid interest in maintaining their world view through the red tops.

If anything, my feeling on the matter are a failing of my higher self. Being self analytical, I consider it very much a right leaning line of thinking, one I am not entirely comfortable with. It is an emotional judgement, based on anecdotal experience. Pretty much the antithesis of the way I aspire to form my thoughts on such matters.


Sissyl: Not it really wouldn't be a joke.

Scotland is doing it by the book, and that is great, but it is a book that is going to make things worse.

A yes vote will destroy relations between the English and the Scots, largely because 'white van man' is a moron, but the effect will be the same. Years of old national hatreds will very likely re-surface. The red tops will scream in rage, and the big three will use it as an excuse to do everything they can to scupper the split and scotlands chances at long term viability. Out leaders are vindictive toff [censored]s, who will be personally insulted by a yes vote

But there are many English people who actually support Scottish independence, and a electoral process in which people from all parts of the UK get to vote, and in which independence was one would be far easier to defend from the awful human being with power in this country.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Regardless of considering it a little odd that a decision that effects all UK residents only gets to be voted on by a portion of them,I broadly support Scottish independence. I'm just really not keen on what it is going to mean for England. Scots MPs represent a liberalizing force, which have managed over the years to keep westminster some what closer to representative that it otherwise would be be thanks to the first past the post. If scotland becomes indepentant, we can look forwards to decades of rule by the conservatives and ukip. That is not a nation I want to live in. Ironically, that makes scotland pretty much the most attractive place in the world for me to go and live. Political climate I am happy to engage with and be governed by. Potentially nationalised oil industry providing the money for an extensive program of civil society and research funding, a nation that will actually fund education... Yeah, a yes vote is a vote for me to move to scotland :D


Buri wrote:

I think the folks in this thread are too caught up on PDFs. When you're talking about digital distribution, there are so many more options and many of them better than PDFs. The ebook format, for example, is better at publishing book-like material than them with even more device support. But even then, these are just two of many formats.

Have a read...

Beyond the device formats, since a myriad of devices have browsers in them, you can even do away with specific formats altogether. So, the point I'm trying to make, is to not preach PDFs as the One True Way and anyone who doesn't do it is doomed. That's incredibly short sighted and ignorant of the technology and business landscapes.

Both .epub and .azw have positive points. Both are certainly fine for casual users. However, for a user who wants to actually make use of the the document, as opposed to just read it, there is a significant adventage to PDF.

Also both formats lack the near ubiquity of PDF.

As for dungeonscape, I'll believe in its existance when it turns up. WotC do not have a great track record with Major IT projects.


bugleyman wrote:

Steve:

I never said piracy was not unethical. At no point did I advocate, endorse, or defend piracy.

While discussing the intricacies of piracy as an ethical dilemma, specifically regarding the idea that it is theft, I did poss the idea that lending and borrowing are as ethically unsound and that it was dangerous to refer to piracy as theft, lest we all be consider thieves. Because that is where the logic(in the absence of other factors) leads us.

I did also point out, under a rather specific and arcane circumstance, that just because something is unlawful, does not mean that it is unjust.

Neither of these is to say that Piracy is ethical, or even 'not unethical'

Even if it where, it would still not be advocacy for piracy, because Piracy is against the law, and laws should be followed in all but the most extreme cases. There are also really good practical reasons NOT to engage in piracy, from legal repercussions through to virus threat.


Chris Lambertz wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:

Our Community Guidelines did recently change, but they do say this:

Illegal Activity
Do not advocate or disclose intent to commit illegal activities on paizo.com. This includes (but is not limited to) posts that encourage fraud, piracy, or violence.

Here's the thing: At no point did I advocate, or disclose intent to commit, piracy. Yet my posts were still removed. So while I now know to avoid the topic entirely, it might save time in the future if that policy were explicitly stated.
These posts were removed because the piracy discussion was veering the thread fairly off course, and probably belonged in a different thread, which was indicated in the post removal notification.

While I am personally in favor of organic thread development, and believe that discussion should be allowed to grow and shift(in fact the most interesting threads often develop out of this, in my opinion) I do understand that paizo mod team has a lower tolerance for it.

Glad to hear you took the knife to the thread for the right reason.


Buri wrote:
bugleyman wrote:

Alternatively, perhaps it's because no one in said thread ACTUALLY ADVOCATED PIRACY? Observing that something exists is not "tacit endorsement." Unless you're referring to a thread I haven't seen, of course.

And no, of course piracy isn't "kosher." With a title like that, one might think you're trying to use the mods to shut down people you disagree with.

Sure, they did. It's just a form of advertisement, right? Aren't advertisements good? Aren't they wanted? Let's 'advertise.' That is a tacit endorsement.

That post was the one that came closest to advocating piracy, and it was a country mile ahead of even my closest statement.

While the way poster phrased his post badly, the core of his argument was valid point, which was not, in point of fact, advocating piracy.

That fact is that, is that their is reason to believe that piracy can drive sales. Which is a point of relevance, when a discussion has turned in part to whether a companies choices regarding digital distribution are sensible or not.

Discussing the nature of piracy(its effects on industry, how industry can deal with it, what constitutes a lost sale, ect.), is not advocating it.

You would be well advised to see what Advocating piracy actually looks like, so that you know the difference. I would suggest reading "steal this article" by Charles Davis, after which you might be better equipped to differentiate.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

*Tried to calm down thread before it turns into 4e edition war.*

random guy wrote:
You had one job ben, one job.


Irontruth wrote:
If it's something other than just PDF's, it's not going to work for me. I have an old iPad (gen 1). I can't upgrade the OS, which means I can't download 99% of new apps. Basically it's a pdf viewer at this point.

Even if you could, I am going to hazard a guess it would fail anyway. I mean, new formats are hard to get right, and for all it faults, there are reasons PDFs are ubiquitous.


I don't often say stuff like this, but lets not go any further down the routes that are openning before us.

Rather can I ask, has anyone seen much in the way of edition warring over 5th?


Now it might just be because I am only really watching form here and the WotC boards, but this edition change over seems a lot friendlier to me.


Chaos Monkey wrote:
Bill Webb wrote:
Probably not to 5E--we did that for PFRPG in Stoneheart Valley
That's too bad, I was hopeful after seeing The Wizard's Amulet for 5E that we would see the rest of Stoneheart Valley.

I would certainly buy a stone heart valley conversion


bugleyman wrote:
Irontruth wrote:

Excluding me as a customer is a compromise?

I'm not sore about it. It just seems silly to try to even rationalize at this stage.

Not getting money from you is just part of WotC's brilliant plan. :P

Brilliant.

You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means ;)


That is sad. Well, time to get converting
:D


Bill Webb wrote:
Thank you everyone!

Hi bill. Do you know if your going to be converting W1: The Cruicible of Freya to 5e as well as the wizard's amulet?


Set on the swordcoast?


Are their any character concepts that would work particularly well with this adventure? Are their any that should be avoided?

A friend may be running it, and I want to make a character that will make sense and fit well with the adventures premise.


Irontruth wrote:
Zombieneighbours wrote:
Morain wrote:
I might take a look at it and consider it if Paizo try to make a new version of Pathfinder. For right now though Pathfinder is near as makes no difference to the perfect rpg, so I don't see the point yet.

For you..

I mean, it isn't call of cthulhu, or fate, so it isn't near to the perfect RPG for me, and it isn't 5th so it isn't as close as anyone had gotten to the perfect fantasy rpg for me either ;)

Or Dark, the perfect stealth rpg.

Seriously, until you play that game, you have no idea how well stealth can be done in an RPG.

I'll have to check that out :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.

[bro]Derek is on board, yeh, lets do this!!![/bro]


Morain wrote:
I might take a look at it and consider it if Paizo try to make a new version of Pathfinder. For right now though Pathfinder is near as makes no difference to the perfect rpg, so I don't see the point yet.

For you..

I mean, it isn't call of cthulhu, or fate, so it isn't near to the perfect RPG for me, and it isn't 5th so it isn't as close as anyone had gotten to the perfect fantasy rpg for me either ;)


Lilith wrote:
Zombieneighbours wrote:
...you remember when the post monster was a constant and loving companion; and Ctrl-A was a requirement before any post longer than two sentences.
...and you still copy-paste your responses before hitting "submit."

I haven't been around much the last two years, so I am out of the habit ;)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

...you remember when the post monster was a constant and loving companion; and Ctrl-A was a requirement before any post longer than two sentences.


Irontruth wrote:

Okay, here's a point by point rebuttal.

1) Attribute bumps

The character doesn't really change. My strength is now 18 instead of 16. If I'm the "muscle" of the group, it's not like the roleplaying options are changing or people are all of a sudden going to perceive me differently. I'm still going to be essentially the exact same character, just attack/damage improve a little.

Unless you roll amazingly well, the majority of stat bumps are going to your classes primary stats. A wizard is going to increase their intelligence most of the time until they hit 20. They might bump Con or Dex if they feel they really need a boost to survival, but again, there's not an amazing depth of choice that really molds a character or represents how they change over time.

In the post I was initially responding to, you said

Irontruth wrote:
but I get to make a choice at 3rd level. That's pretty much it.

Attributes are a choice you get to make after that point. Now you might not see it as a real choice. You might see raising your primary stats as being so important you can't not do it, but I don't know if the game supports that idea.

The combination of combat/exploration/social model of 5th and bound bonuses, means that hyper specialization less desirable than say in 3.5.

If you hyper specialize as a fighter to be good in combat, you may well leave yourself unable to contribute meaningfully to the other two thirds of the game. Not to mention leaving yourself vulnerable t attacks against your attribute saving throws.

Now take into account the fact that a 12 basic orcs are still conceivably a threat to a 4 person 10th level party, and an a 1st fighter 13s in his primary and using a weapon he is proficient with, hits a CR 17 adult red dragon 25% of the time. In short, you don't need to hyper specialize to be good in 5th, you have a lot of wriggle room in 5th editions to improve other aspects of your character, and good reasons to not hyper-specialize, because you know, not failing cha, int, and wis saves as regularly may be more important for your character than making your str, dex and con saves a little more often.

So while it might not be a choice YOU would make, it is still a choice. It could be driven by the greater inherent viability of generalism is 5th, or by a desire to place an aspect of character concept over mechanical optimisation, but it is a choice.

Also a character learning more about the world, or becoming more perceptive are changes to the character.

Irontruth wrote:


2) Backgrounds

As far as I'm aware, this has nothing to do with advancement. The choice is made at creation and is set in stone at that point. There are no choices of advancement or character development.

I actually think this is a missed opportunity. I like inspiration and tying it into options from the background, but pushing it further and continue to influence future choices would have been cool. Not just "what happened in the past influences the future" but actual new choices involving the background. Like if I choose criminal, maybe later one I could choose "reformed" or "crime lord". Knowing that I have this choice coming up at a future date would force choices in the roleplaying that feed back into making this choice later on.

While the thrust of your comments had clearly been that there were not many choices after character creation, you also voiced a concern that all barbarians would look the same mechanically.

Irontruth wrote:


I get to play the character how I want, but mechanically, if I made 3 barbarians, they're all going to be very similar to each other IMO.

Well, while there is some truth to that, your choice in backgrounds go a fairly long way to making characters different an unique, in a manner that interacts mechanics.

Now it is true that by default there is no way in which elements of background change(that i am aware off), it is a pretty reasonable application of common sense and rule zero that elements of a characters background such as ideals, flaws and bonds change over the course of a campaign. Not all character development is numbers getting bigger after all.

Irontruth wrote:


3) Feats

First off, you have to give up your ability score advancement. You can still get a 1 point boost in some cases, but this is a lot to give up. Usually the feats broaden options, but are relatively low in actual power, they're closer to a very mild form of multi-classing really. I looked them over and none of them really seemed that interesting. The ones that at first blush seemed like they might often gave me several things I already had access to. If I'm a warrior type, the warrior...

your entitled to you opinion on this but there are a lot of feats I would happily take rather than a +2 an attribute score.

Alert for instance, +5 initiative, never be surprised while conscious, denying ambushers advantage against you.

Or Inspiring Leader, with its awesome temp hit point buff.

Sentinel with its movement shut down and retributive attacks

Shield Master is basically a version of evasion, with added bonus to dex saves and a bit of battlefield control.

Great Weapon master Power attack AND regular bonus attack generation.

And that is before going into the really interesting feats like Observant that makes you a powerhouse in the social or exploration parts of the game. Seriously, in an investigative social section lip reading, attribute boost AND +5 to passive perception and investigation, that is absolutely amazing.

I am pretty happy to say that, as I play humans as a rule, most character I play will have two feats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Irontruth wrote:
Zombieneighbours wrote:
Irontruth wrote:


I'm playing a Barbarian, which I get that it's supposed to be one of the simpler classes available, but I get to make a choice at 3rd level. That's pretty much it. I get to play the character how I want, but mechanically, if I made 3 barbarians, they're all going to be very similar to each other IMO. The differences will largely be superficial and purely in how I present myself to the group.

You get to choose how to spend you attributes at 4th level, and again at 8th, 12th, 16th, and 19th level.

If your using backgrounds and inspiration; how you play your character is a mechanically significant feature.

If your using feats, those attribute increase slots suddenly individualise your character even more.

You can disagree with me if you want. You're welcome to your opinion.

My opinion, is that I do not find the limited choices available to be satisfying. You can tell me why YOU don't find that to be true, but I have read the game and am playing it currently. My opinion on the game is also valid and is true to my own experience with it.

I like character creation. I like how the rules create interactions between the players and the game world. My one complaint is that character development is lacking. I'm fully aware of what you've outlined and I still feel this way.

I wasn't commenting on your opinion that there isn't enough mechanical choice in the barbarian. I was pointing out that their was a little more choice than you had stated you believed there was, that is all.

For me, honestly, the absence of the plethora of choice doesn't really matter that much, because A, the system is structured in a very permissive manner, more like an Indie RPG than 3.5, so I feel more comfortable going to the DM and saying, "dude, can I make a attribute test to achieve this thing I want to do?" or some such, and B, all of the mechanical choice available are interesting and roughly within the same ball park.

Every time I read a class in detail, I come out of it with a character concept I want to play RTFN for at least each of the paths. In some cases, more because of a feat or background combination with the class.

I cannot say the same for pathfinder, either because complexity puts me off, or because an archetype just doesn't really do what it is meant to do, or because I just am not keen on the implementation, or because to do what I want to do with a character I have to give up something I consider core to the class I want to play.

I am not an optimizer, I actually pretty much loath the process of making a character for pathfinder or 3.5, because the people I play with are optimizers, and the only way to remain even remotely reliant to the game is to play the same way, even though every time I cut out some cool aspect of the character to achieve relevance it makes me hate the game a little more.

The lower level of choice, and bound bonuses mean that those guys will be able to munchin it up to their hearts contents, and I won't have to, and the differences between our characters will not be insummountable


Irontruth wrote:


I'm playing a Barbarian, which I get that it's supposed to be one of the simpler classes available, but I get to make a choice at 3rd level. That's pretty much it. I get to play the character how I want, but mechanically, if I made 3 barbarians, they're all going to be very similar to each other IMO. The differences will largely be superficial and purely in how I present myself to the group.

You get to choose how to spend you attributes at 4th level, and again at 8th, 12th, 16th, and 19th level.

If your using backgrounds and inspiration; how you play your character is a mechanically significant feature.

If your using feats, those attribute increase slots suddenly individualise your character even more.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To say that I have switched, is perhaps a little disingenuous. I had stopped playing pathfinder with any kind of serious regularity about two years ago, and while I do play in one 3.5 game, I do so to play with friends, not because I enjoy the system.

On the other hand I am now actively preping to run a 5e campaign. It runs like a well oiled machine, and feels more lke the DnD I feel in love with when I was 9 or so.


Well, I have to say, I think I am in love.

While I really liked certain aspects of 4th edition,and I will play 3.5 and Pathfinder; 5th looks like a game I actively want to run campaigns for.

I certainly want to play some 5th, as character concept after character concept jumps out at me as I read.

To say that I actively want to run it is actually a big deal, as I really dislike running 3.5, pathfinder and 4e. But having run a little 5th, and read a bit more, I find myself in a position where it looks set to join Call of Cthulhu and Fate, as a mainstay of my gaming life.


Yep. It is now dead.

Sad news.


Oh I have sooooo many ideas.

Cyberborg barbarian with double handed chainsword.

Gunslinger based on Revy from black lagoon.

Spell slinger based on Gene Starwind from outlaw star.

Ranger, based on Ygritte. "You know nothing, Jon Snow."


Zombieneighbours wrote:

As a GM, I like what ever my players have fun doing.

In my Tatters of the King Campaign, we had multiple 6-8 hour sessions, where the plot of the campaign moved on little more that a page or two. For more than a year, playing once a month for that long, we saw only three combats.

The group got massively into the soap opera aspects for the characters lives, and the low key weirdness that was slowly starting to over take and destroy their characters lives.

I am actually just about to return to running this game, and I will be shifting the pacing. They have gotten to a point where the campaign picks up speed very quickly, and the focus shifts markedly. What is going to be really interesting is how I can target aspects of the characters lives, that they have invested in so heavily, to heighten the horror of the game.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

As a GM, I like what ever my players have fun doing.

In my Tatters of the King Campaign, we had multiple 6-8 hour sessions, where the plot of the campaign moved on little more that a page or two. For more than a year, playing once a month for that long, we saw only three combats.

The group got massively into the soap opera aspects for the characters lives, and the low key weirdness that was slowly starting to over take and destroy their characters lives.


Demonskunk wrote:


Zombieneighbours wrote:

I tend to favour games who's designers have asked jared sorensen three questions.

1) What is your game about? (Not "what is the setting, but what is the theme/what issues do you want to explore?)

2) What in your game makes it about that? (What design choices have you made to bring that element into play, and what mechanics exist to make that a game about what you want to explore?)

3) What behaviours are rewarded? (What happens at the table to make the players want to explore your theme?)

The focus of my game is intended to be exploration and discovery, whether it be lore, a new perspective, or a sweet set of magic gear.

I'm... not exactly sure what mechanics I could put in place to encourage exploration and discovery... what's a good way to do that without going to 'mmo-style' discovery XP? I suppose finding interesting items and encounters would encourage exploration and discovery.

I put a lot of mechanical rewards into encouraging role playing like Miracles granted from deities.

Well, lets see.

I guess that depends how much you want to get into the guts of OGL, and how much you want to work on them.

Keep it simple:
- Make sure that important aspects of exploration have skills associated with it. Navigation, Cartography, wilderness survival, overland movement, sailing and the like, all need to be backed with skills, and Mechanically important to the game. If a theme matters, it needs to be reflected in the mechanics

- Make sure that you have a fun and simple(but meaningful) encumbrance, supplies and moral system. There should be a reason, other than selling loot, to return to town. If the parties moral suffers over time, from sleeping rough every night, and that feeds into a drop in combat efficiency, you'll suddenly find that character behaviour will change to accommodate that. You might for instance find the party buys a number of caravans to sleep in. Make sure that the system covers mounts too. If at the end of an encounter the PCs are pretty low on resources, as it stands, they just camp where they are, making it matter if mounts have grazing or not means that you can make that choice a dilemma. Do we risk ourselves in the short term, by riding on to find grazing? Or do we camp here, but have our horses loose condition from another day without proper grazing.

- Get rid of experience, replace it with milestones. one for content, two for discovery.Once the PCs have achieved all three, they level up.
Example: to level up, the PCs must have climbed the Torakka Pass into the plateau of Chen, seen the sunrise behind the monolith of Zi, and defeated down the 10,000 serpent people of the silent city.


Gallo wrote:
Regardless of one's views on the issue, at least this time around all the people of Scotland will get a say, not just a small elite.

What about the people of england, wales and northern island.

Do they get say?

After all, it is a union nations. Scotland is not an imperial province.

Should the sundering of the union be only the choice of the scots? Especially when said sundering may have profound implications for the whole of the UK.


I tend to favour games who's designers have asked jared sorensen three questions.

1) What is your game about? (Not "what is the setting, but what is the theme/what issues do you want to explore?)

2) What in your game makes it about that? (What design choices have you made to bring that element into play, and what mechanics exist to make that a game about what you want to explore?)

3) What behaviours are rewarded? (What happens at the table to make the players want to explore your theme?)


Chemlak wrote:

I'm all for self-determinism for the Scots (I'm an English Southern Softie).

However...

If they want to break from the UK, then they have to completely break from the UK. Import/export duties, customs, law enforcement, military, banking, company registry, stock market, state benefits (such as the NHS), you name it: they should be no different to France in all of those respects, even though we share a land border.

If the Scots want that burden independently, more power to them, and I wish them the best of British luck.

So their taking their oil with them too right?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

If they get Independence, there is a good chance I'll be moving north of the border.

Scots politics is far friendlier to Further and Higher education professionals, and students, than England is currently. But then Britain is going to hell in a hand basket right now. Almost every institutions I value, in Britain is being destroyed, privatized or perverted by the Tories.

So once I have teacher training finished, I'd see about my partner and I moving north.

I have no desire to live in what it becoming a fascist nation.


Mmm....

Wonder what I could do with a Hastur Mythos inspired scenario in Pathfinder. I think the focus on combat in the game would probably make it very hard, but something worth exploring maybe.


The many-angled ones live at the bottom of the Mandelbrot set.


I like it when I can play intuitively, focusing on whats cool and thematic as an action rather than what it the optimal move right now, without getting smeared; but also feeling like each battle was a close run thing.


GM Gatsby wrote:
I don't know whether it's really on the radar, but I urge anybody to look up Trail of Cthulhu - it is one of the most beautiful source books I've ever seen, and that's not even mentioning the rules themselves...

It's pretty well know among cthulhu players in my experience. It made a BIG stir in the Lovecraftian gaming crowd when it was first released.


Snorter wrote:

A UK company called Modiphus held a successful Kickstarter last year, to print a WW2 setting, 'Achtung Cthulhu' for Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu, and Savage Worlds.

The Players' and Keepers' rulebooks were sent out in December, and there's some scenarios still in the pipeline, along with a range of figures.
A search for 'Achtung Cthulhu' on Kickstarter should provide you with links to the company site.

Yes. Yes, they did. They actually already have a number of scenarios out.

1 to 50 of 3,830 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.