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

bugleyman's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter, 2014 Star Voter. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 6,971 posts (7,081 including aliases). 80 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters. 16 aliases.


1 to 50 of 726 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Some people seem to believe that actual, true color blindness is a thing (it isn't), and that white privilege is therefore an illusion (again, it isn't), or even that so much as acknowledging white privilege is itself inherently racist simply because it involves acknowledging that different races exist (no, seriously).

The bottom line: White people such as myself have very little credibility when it comes to truly understanding the black experience in America, but it doesn't take a genius to see that that experience differs from my own...and generally not in a good way. I think we white people should mostly just let black people tell us about their experience, and take them at their word. Right now, they seem to be saying that they're tired of getting shot by the police. Maybe, just maybe, that's because they're tired of getting shot by the police, as opposed to the "they're all criminals" narrative being offered?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

5E sorcerers have meta magic.

But ultimately, what does it matter? If someone doesn't like 5E, they don't like 5E. There is no "wrong" answer when it comes to preferences (Miracle Whip excepted -- that's just wrong).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Diffan wrote:
Except for the severe lack of skills for the Fighter and the bad save (who requires Strength saving throws?!) it's probably one of the most powerful classes (damage wise) in the game.

Not many things do, but I think an argument for things like Web could be made...especially if the initial Dexterity save failed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I thought 5E's change to Knock was inspired.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
David Bowles wrote:
I dislike the lack of dynamic range of 5th edition greatly. Getting rid of all the "+1's" makes 5th ed combat pretty boring to me. Also, clerics got eviscerated. No thanks. I honestly prefer 4th ed to 5th ed. At least 4th ed was a good tactical combat game. 5th ed feels like a time warp to 1988, and I've already burned out on 2nd ed.

I respectfully suggest that you may not remember 2nd edition all that well. ;-)

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I'm totally fine with the replay rules as they exist. However, I'm not nearly as active as some people. I have a friend, for example, who has something like seven scenarios he hasn't played in total.

One change I would like to suggest in support of those avid players is to allow free replaying for no credit. To me that seems to remove the incentive for folks who just want a chronicle while keeping things as open as possible for people who just want to play. After all, isn't that the point?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just grabbed a booster at the FLGS:

10 Firepelt Cougar
13 Lamashtu Thug #2
14 Shifty Noble
27 Forest Drake

An overall solid entry in the line. If you regularly buy these minis, then you won't be disappointed by this set. Definitely much better rarity and general figure choices than the last set, but there remains some room for improvement (why two boggards? The world really needs a 2nd wolf much more than it needed that second boggard). Good sculpts, generally good paint jobs (the exception being my shifty noble, who is completely faceless). The cost per figure remains relatively high, but in fairness I think that's just the price point needed to sustain the line. To warrant five stars at this price, however, I believe a set needs to be packed full of figures with a very high utility. This one is close, but not there yet.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

What's my excuse? Someone asked Manson out before I did. ;-)

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I hereby petition for a campaign in which all PCs are goblins. :)

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Perry Snow wrote:
Sigh! There you go again... treating me seriously.

Nah, I knew you weren't truly serious, and that Paizo has no desire to split the player base with multiple rules systems. Although I'd seriously play such a thing.

**

3 people marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
Wild speculation is always entertaining. :)

I'm calling it now -- they're adding PFS hardcore mode. Anything that happens to the character happens to the player. Solves GM shortages overnight!!! :P

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Compton wrote:
I can see how the cannibalism trap could be distasteful for some groups...

*groan*

I see what you did there.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Perry Snow wrote:
I'm going to be the dissenting voice here. I'm waiting for someone to just say 'Screw it' to this Gordian knot of a mess of PFS and then say 'Let's start over... from the ground up'.

I wouldn't expect that unless/until there is an edition change. Just my opinion. of course.

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Victor Zajic wrote:

It would help immensly with problems getting GM volunteers if Full Statblock(of relevant stats, skills they aren't going to possible used don't need included) for every single monster in a scenario were published. PFS is the only living campaign I've ever played in that doesn't have full statblocks of every monster in each adventure, and it's also the only living campaign I've ever played that there is a problem getting judges to volunteer. Rewards can help bribe judges into volunteering, but nothing will help more than removing obstacles to judging, and lack for monster full stat blocks is a big obstacle.

It would increase game quality too. All the time I spend prepping the monsters for a scenario (which is the vast majority of the couple hours I spend prepping for running a game) I could instead spend on getting to know the scenario better and think about ways to provide a better experience for the players.

It would also greatly assist situations where a GM is forced to run something with mimimal prep time. I realize that in PFS games in the areas where the Paizo Staff live are very well organized and this isn't a problem. But it is a very different situation for a large chunk of your players. Sometimes only 4 people show up to an event, and 1 person has already played what you prepped. Sometimes a judge is a no-show at an event and you have to scramble for a replacement. Sometimes someone could be really familiar with a scenario and able to run it with little prep, if only all the material they needed to run it was presented in the scenario itself.

I understand that word count is important, and even if I don't quite understand why, you seem like you are trying to shorten the length of scenarios. If the word count freed up could go towards complete monster stat blocks, it would be greatly appriciated, and immensely helpful. Especially for monsters that aren't in the Beastiary 1, if you have to exclude some statblocks.

All stat blocks, all the time would be fantastic. But allow me to invoke the cliche about not letting the perfect become the enemy of the good. ;-)

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

All good news, but...

Quote:
  • Provide an appendix that includes the full Bestiary and NPC Codex pages referenced in the adventure as well as an un-tagged copy of any custom maps that appear in the scenario.
  • Cap the number of required GM resources at four books per scenario (including the Core Rulebook). This should be relatively easy if the Bestiary pages are already included in the back of the adventure, as in most cases approximately half of the books referenced are Bestiaries.
  • Include full stat blocks for creatures modified by the advanced, giant, or young simple templates. The exception to this would be modifications that appear in the "Scaling Encounter XYZ" sidebars. For example, if the adventure says that there should be an advanced otyugh, the full stats for an advanced otyugh will be there and ready to go. If the scaling notes say that a four-person group should instead face a young otyugh, those stats would not appear. This should at least cover the essential modifications and reduce the amount of on-the-fly adjustment that a GM needs to do.
  • Limit the number of rules subsystems in scenarios. Subsystems aren't going away entirely, but we need to avoid relying on subsystems and simply save them for the times that they'll have the greatest impact. Should an especially large subsystem such as mass combat appear in a scenario again for whatever reason, it would be advertised on the product page. Simple point-tracking mechanics that only the GM sees (for example, keeping track of how many clues the PCs uncover) are likely to show up a little less often but are still a useful tool.

...are particularly welcome. Great update!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Krensky wrote:
You're just a few IRS forms away from being a SuperPAC.

More forms? Why do you hate the 1st amendment?

Seriously though, I'm actually several million dollars short of being a SuperPAC. :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bugleyman 2016!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Down with the ACA; let's go straight to single-payer. Say what you like about wait times...the simple truth is that single-payer is outperforming us almost everywhere in the developed world. For whatever reason, the free market isn't delivering efficient healthcare (personally, I think it has to do with the highly price inelastic nature of the demand for healthcare services, but that's another thread).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:

But if you're denouncing an idea because of a misunderstanding of where it is on the political spectrum, that's even worse.

It is however, judging by recent history, quite possibly very effective in the general political discourse.

Meh. What goes around, comes around. In 2008 people were saying the Republican party was on life-support; now's it is the Democrat's turn. By 2018 or 2022, pundits will be pontificating about the impending doom of the Republican party again.

As long as it's all about the Benjamins, nothing will ever change. Nothing can ever change. Thanks, SCOTUS! :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
If you could see the discussion we are having in the VO forums, you wouldn't be worried about PFS.

Curse you and your super-secret forum of star-bellied sneetches!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey, where can I get my "Team keep it simple" T-shirt? :P

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Seriously though, this conversation is giving me some insight into how to handle the surprise round when everyone is waiting on character X. It now seems obvious that I should have X roll initiative normally, then assume everyone else delayed until right after X, ordering them in sequence according to their rolls on the same count (but immediately after) X. For some reason I've struggled with that in the past. So thanks for getting me to think about this. :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
The 4E Rules Compendium was made available at dndclassics.com / DriveThruRPG / RPGNow before 5e was published, so your statement that they current D&D rules haven't been available for years is disingenuous.

I suppose you could count the Rules Compendium as an example of a current version of D&D being available electronically, except it doesn't contain the information required to actually play the game (no classes, powers, or races). So I don't. And I'm not even being disingenuous.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
sunshadow21 wrote:
As an example, microfilm. It seemed like a great idea at the time, and it saved a lot of space, but nowadays, not even most researchers deal with it that much. Most digital offerings are the same way. A new OS comes out on a new device on a new network, and all the old information either needs to be copied over or left behind; maintaining the old device and software is simply not an option in most cases given the sheer number of devices and software iterations that would have to saved and that's before you get into the issue that most devices today rely more and more on the cloud for basic functionality. That's very different from a book that short of physical damage or loss of possession can always be accessed, even if it isn't always understood. As a book owner, I have full control over that book and the material within. Yes, things can happen to that book, but they all require direct access to the book itself. As a digital owner, I'm at the whim of the hardware manufacturer, OS developer, application and protocol maker, the creator of the actual product, the power company, and in many cases, my ISP. Much harder to claim to have control over that product when a decision by someone else on something not directly related to that product can effect access to the product both short term and long term.

Unicode is operating system and platform independent. Store it locally and there's really no way a third party could interfere short of physical access (which, as thejeff has noted, also applies to printed matter).

As for DRM: Interesting point. It is entirely possible that misguided "content owners" could succeed in restricting digital technology through legislation sufficiently to obviate its many advantages. Very discouraging, but not implausible.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Terquem wrote:
Are you guys serious? Free pdf's of everything you "needed" were released before the Player's Handbook. Were those just not "good enough" for you?

Actually, no, they weren't. If I want to play a gnome, or a druid, I need the PHB. As a consumer, I'd like to be able to purchase and consume that content in the format most convenient for me.

Just because you don't personally care about a format doesn't mean that people who do are being unreasonable. If a movie you were looking forward to owning were only released on VHS, would it be unreasonable of you to be disappointed that you can't get it on Blu-ray? Would requesting it be released in that format also be unreasonable?

Personally, I'm tired of this whole argument, but your posts really reek of "I don't want to play that way, so no one else should." Can we quit crapping on people who do want to play that way so we can stop having this inane debate?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Terquem wrote:
They may want it, and that's their choice. Me, I want a pretty pink birthday cake with my picture on it, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.

Except that in 2014, literally ever other RPG I want to play is readily available in PDF. Expecting some form of electronic support for D&D is hardly unreasonable.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I haven't read the whole thread, but is there a reason why this person can't play an entirely different, non-spellcasting class (fighter, rogue, etc.), use traits to get training in Spellcraft and the ability to cast a cantrip or two, and just role play him as a wizard who can't access his power? That way he can be a fully-contributing member of the party while exploring the concept. Surely this sort of subtle customization is one reason traits -- minor non-class related mechanics which don't warrant a feat choice -- exist?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
lorenlord wrote:
But like many of you, I wish and hope that they get a bigger digital presence out there.

Unless and until they do, 5E is dead to me.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My favorite part: The BBEG's reaction upon receiving an explanation of why his son got smacked around. :)

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I believe it might be literally impossible to know *every* rule. I know I have absolutely no interest in trying.

To me, the best course of action as a GM is pretty straightforward: Learn the Corebook inside and out. And then learn it again. Review specific rules, creature types, and spells that are part of a scenario during the prepping process. Yes, this does mean more time and effort.

The onus is on the players to understand the their characters. If they don't, then they can use a different ability. If they do, and it sounds too good to be true, then you ask for a reference. Yes, that's going to slow things down. Unfortunately, I don't see a way around that, other than making swaths of material illegal for PFS, which doesn't serve the stated goal of PFS as a marketing tool.

Ultimately, the only "fix" is a simpler game. As much as I'd love to see Pathfinder become a simpler game, that's not the reality of PFS today.

**

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I believe rules mastery is overrated as a gauge of GM quality. YMMV.

**

7 people marked this as a favorite.

You can't please everyone all the time. For my part, I'd prefer to know things are being looked at.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The best thing WotC could do right now is follow Paizo's lead:

1. Release water-marked PDFs of the 5E core books on dndclassics.com.
2. Make a licensing deal with Lone Wolf for Hero Lab support.

However, because this course of action would be both effective and extremely fast, it is almost guaranteed not to happen. :P

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Brock wrote:
We've got a solution coming to this that we discussed in a meeting last week. I'm not ready quite yet to reveal it, but I think a fair number of the player base and GMs will like it.

Color me intrigued.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Generally, additional rules options don't add much for me personally -- other than unnecessary complexity. But I've (mostly) made peace with the fact that I'm in the minority in this regard. :)

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Otherwhere wrote:
For me, I GM a home game, and all of the new books have seriously made me want to abandon PF for something simpler. I find it hard to design when they keep adding more and more feats, traits, archetypes, etc., etc.!

You want something simpler?

CRB only.

I love core only. For me, the appeal of Pathfinder is greatly increased when rule elements are limited.

You can also take things further and model your game on the Beginner Box, just adding the extra content (classes, spells, etc.) from the CRB.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I never even tried to keep abreast of all the new rules...I simply do not have the time. Instead, I lean -- heavily -- on the players to know their own characters. Only if something sounds too good to be true do I typically ask to see the source material. Seems to work well enough, especially since problem players typically make themselves known rather quickly. :)

That said, sure, I wish there were fewer rules add-ons. But they're popular, so I understand why they keep coming.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
jemstone wrote:
Off topic, but in my Perfect Jonah Hex Movie, The Devil is played by the same actor that portrayed him in the Constantine (pronounced Kon-Stan-Tyyyyyyyne) movie, in the same manner, wearing the same suit and with that same "I'm so tired of life" drawl to his creepy word machinations.

Agreed; that portrayal was the best part of the movie.

jemstone wrote:

Also off topic, but I haven't seen anything of The Flash or Constantine TV series' yet, but someone please help me believe that they won't keep up the mispronunciation of R'as Al Ghul that they dragged over from Batman Begins and into Arrow S2? Please? I need the reassurance.

It keeps me up at night.

Batman begins had it right; it's Arrow S2 that @#$@# it up. Rawr! ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:

Okay, about all those fighters and barbarians that dump Cha?

Occult Adventures Playtest wrote:
Ego Whip I through V

My name is Aaron, and I approve of this message. ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Insain Dragoon wrote:

My friend is the only one I know who inferred that from viewing the cover. His words were something like

"This is the most viewed and important page in the book and it has a glaring error on it. How can I trust the insides to have more care taken than the front cover?"

That's actually a pretty fair and reasonable statement as a consumer. I would liken it to not dressing for the occasion for a Job interview. From the viewpoint of an employer giving interviews how the applications dress for their interview is an important indicator of how seriously they take the job.

Note that I was dumb enough to purchase the ACG PDF at 12:03AM its release date. Within 30 minutes I regretted that decision.

Fair enough. I'll have to agree to disagree. Had the contents been up to par, I wouldn't have cared about the cover snafu.

And you weren't "dumb." You had every reason to expect the book would be up to the standard set by previous books.

Paizo has said they're unhappy about the errors in ACG and will strive to do better next time. Personally, they've got more than enough goodwill with me to take them at their word (and I say that as someone who doesn't like splatbooks).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Insain Dragoon wrote:
ACG is a mess of errors, terrible balance choices, broken (in both ways) archetypes, broken feats, classes without clearly defined abilities (Hunter tricks?), an obvious lack of communication between freelancers and core devs, the removal of important abilities to clear space for artwork, and lots of unclear language. It having a jacked up cover is just the gravy.

None of which could be accurately inferred from the misprint on the cover. That it happens to be the case that those things are (imho) true doesn't make the reasoning ("the cover has an error, therefore the contents must include errors") any more sound.

There are plenty of legitimate issues with the ACG -- literally judging a book by its cover is a distraction.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Brock wrote:
You will see some changes coming down the pipe that tweak the way scenarios are put together. John is going to start taking a very hard look in how best to help shorten scenarios just a touch so we can bring back play to the four hours they were always meant to be. The five hour slot is also supposed to include time for paperwork and mustering. We are acutely aware of the problems with scenarios running long and John is going to right that ship. In addition, weare aware of how much time some of the newer scenarios are taking to prep, as well as how difficult some scenarios can be for a newer GM to prepare. We are sensitive to all of these issues and I think you will start seeing some positive changes that make playing and GMing scenarios more timely and easier to GM.

Fantastic! When this comes to fruition I'll look at upping my GMing from one slot a month to two. =D

Michael Brock wrote:
You are also going to see PFS shift away from a meta plot that revolves around an AP. We are looking at giving PFS it's own meta plot each season. We may have a multi-parter (similar to Destiny of Sands) that touches on the current AP. But, the entire team was in agreement PFS really needs its own Metaplot, similar to Year of the Shadow Lodge.

Huzzah!

Michael Brock wrote:
Please keep your feedback coming.

Since you asked... ;-)

Please update the rest of season zero to PFRPG. I know it's a resource constraint issue, but even one scenario a quarter would get us there eventually.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheRavyn wrote:
I'm curious as to if any of the Paizo staff has given 5E a whirl, and what their thoughts are on the new edition of D&D.

They could tell you, but then they'd have to...well, you know. ;)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
houstonderek wrote:
Organized play is probably the last thing I think about when I am evaluating a system. It was always just a way to get into conventions for free for me anyway. Filling out paperwork is something I get paid to do, not something I do for "fun".

For those of us who struggle to manage a regularly scheduled game, OP can be a godsend. The paperwork is a necessary evil (which doesn't stop me from occasionally referring to PFS as "Paperwork Filing Society").


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Iammars wrote:
For Windows computer - NitroPDF Reader has an extract all images function that gets the maps out cleanly.

And it worked like a charm. You, sir, are the bomb.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
If you bray like an ass, it grates on my ears.

...well you could have said something sooner.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've never seen a ghost, but I certainly be open to the experience.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Excellent. Building stat blocks for monsters with class levels is completely unwieldy.

1 to 50 of 726 << 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.