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. 6,799 posts (6,906 including aliases). 77 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters. 16 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 6,799 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
**

Michael Brock wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


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.

That and conversion document pdf for the 21, 3.5 modules. Check.
Seriously? Or is that friendly sarcasm? Because if you're serious, that would be freakin' awesome.
I don't see a smiley face or a /sarcasm anywhere. Like I said, some things will be changes that happen very soon while others will take a bit longer to see happen.

Woo hoo! I now officially have a man crush on you.

Edit: Message received on the "not happen right away" thing. Still....awesome.

**

Michael Brock wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


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.

That and conversion document pdf for the 21, 3.5 modules. Check.

Seriously? Or is that friendly sarcasm? Because if you're serious, that would be freakin' awesome.

**

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.


I think the show is good so far, and has the potential to be great. I hope it gets there.

As for episode 3...it was far from subtle, and had a few cheesy moments, but I enjoyed it.

**

BTW, has anyone else noticed that the Silverhex Chronicles do not appear in the Quests section under Downloads, but rather under Season 6?


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. ;)


1 person 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.


Iammars wrote:
For Windows computer - NitroPDF Reader has an extract all images function that gets the maps out cleanly.

Awesome; I'll give it a try!

I wonder what changed.

**

One thing I'm not entirely clear on: Can a submission employ both sides of the same flip-mat?

**

John Compton wrote:

A scene in need of heavy development wrote:

The dastardly Villain laughs uproariously as the PCs enter area Q14 and holds up a hand to halt them. He congratulates the PCs on reaching the end of his Death Dungeon, but with a voice dripping with mock-regret, he informs his foes that they are already too late; he has already decided that his hostages should die. He then explains the background of the scenario in full, punctuating particularly juicy bits by slitting the throat of each of the seven hostages. Near the end of his monologue, he walks up to any paladin PC or good-aligned cleric and slaps hims before casually returning to the dais to finish the speech and cast haste, divine power, fly, and fickle winds. With that, he ascends 40 feet into the air and beckons for the PCs to fight him if they dare! The GM should then have the players roll for initiative, for the final encounter has begun!

Later in the adventure:

Once the PCs reduce Villain to 20 or fewer hit points, he leaps to the edge of the balcony and tells each PC in detail how that character will die in their next encounter. Before any of the adventurers can reach him, Villain dives from the railing only to be caught by his Colossal dragon ally and carried off to safety. It seems Villain's plan has been thwarted for now, but he has gotten away yet again!

Well you could have said something sooner!

<deletes file>


Joana wrote:

The rules deck was printed after Sean left the company. And his clarifications were never an official FAQ, just his opinion.

Given Vic's above response to people's reaction to the AoO card, I'm guessing this is official. But I guess we'll see next month. :)

I sincerely hope that's the case. I'd love to put that ambiguity (and some others) to rest for good.


I'll be very interested to see if that "attacks of opportunity" card is final, as it doesn't jibe with SKR's clarifications. At all.


Hmmm...looks like cutting and pasting the maps is a no-go, just like the earlier season 6 scenarios. Is this a deliberate change? If so, why? If not, may we please get it corrected? Unfortunately, this is a pretty major blow to usability for people who play on VTTs.

**

John Compton wrote:

As noted in the submission guidelines (see the bottom of the Get Involved page), the submission is a full Quest--the actual adventure, not a proposal--of 2,000 words or less.

There is no deadline for submitting a piece. The sooner you send in something, the sooner I can review it and--assuming it meets or exceeds my standards--get you an assignment. That said, don't rush. Thoroughly review your work, and ensure that it is a positive reflection of your writing and adventure designing abilities before sending it in.

Hi John; I have a quick question (and comment) about the submission guidelines.

According to the guidelines, the submitted Quest:

Submission Guidelines wrote:
"...must utilize a single map taken from the GameMastery Map Pack or GameMastery Flip Mat lines."

My question: Does that mean only a single side of a Flip-Mat?

My comment: The text should probably be updated to "OR Pathfinder Map Pack of Pathfinder Flip-Mat lines." Most people here probably understand the branding change, but new folks may not.


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.


TheRavyn wrote:
bugleyman wrote:

D&D 5E really needs a "delay" action.

.

Looks like this is now covered by "Ready" (Basic Rules pdf p72)

Dunno. It seems like that replaces the "ready" action in Pathfinder (or 3.5, etc.), but there doesn't seem to be a "hold all of my actions and decide to jump in later" option.


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.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
EntrerisShadow wrote:

Not to derail, but after going through and reading this thread I'm noticing something - a lot of the posters hate Pathfinder. And not in the sense that, "I'm ostensibly a fan but I find a lot of fault and pick apart the system" hate, but like, "I hate Pathfinder and think it's beyond redemption" actual hate.

Which makes me ask, why are you here? I mean that not in a snarky, "Ew, why is he here?" sense, but just out of legitimate curiosity.

I don't hate Pathfinder, but I wouldn't say I like it much, either. I tolerate it for a variety of reasons: The quality of organized play; the game's ubiquity; Paizo's other products, etc. Besides, my presence on this website predates the Pathfinder RPG anyway. Why should I leave? ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
EntrerisShadow wrote:
Stylistically (the art, race and class descriptions, etc.), do you prefer the 5th Ed. style or the Pathfinder style?

5E, and it's not even close. But keep in mind I find WAR-style art annoying.

EntrerisShadow wrote:
Mechanically, what did it do better than Pathfinder?

Almost everything. It's just simpler, more consistent, less fiddly.

But killing full attack dead is worth pointing out separately.

EntrerisShadow wrote:
Mechanically, what did it do worse than Pathfinder?

I don't see sufficient value (yet) in having six saving throw types -- so far, I prefer the fort, reflex, will approach.

Humans defaulting to +1 in all attributes is just odd. Aren't humans the benchmark against which other races have bonuses or penalties? If not, what is?

D&D 5E really needs a "delay" action.

EntrerisShadow wrote:
Among those things it did better, can or should any of them be translated to the PF system?

Pathfinder is just needlessly complex, stuffed with special cases that pay lip service to "realism," but really just complicate matters. The core desperately needs to be revised to look more like 5E (or better yet, more like the Beginner Box).

And please, for the love of all that is holy, kill the "Full Attack."

EntrerisShadow wrote:
Among those things it did worse, was the PF mechanic the clearly superior option, or could they be fixed with small tweaks?

Saving throw issue could be addressed by revising the spells and monsters to more evenly reflect the various saving throw types (and better reflect the nature of the attack). There are several spells that really should be Int saves, but seem to have been left as Wis saves for no discernible reason.

EntrerisShadow wrote:
I'm sure there are more questions to be asked, these are just the first four that popped into my head. Feel free to add more.

The real question is: Will I switch? Despite my strong affinity for both 5E's mechanics and style, I just can't see myself adopting 5E as my "go-to" fantasy system, for the following reasons:

1. Wotc refuses to release the core in PDF. Or even to give a straight answer about having done so. Sorry, but a proprietary, DRM-laden "app" is not an acceptable substitute. Customers want digital access, and many want it in the form of industry-standard PDFs. When you don't give customers what they want, you fail. I mean seriously: How could WotC possibly have not learned this lesson from 4E? Wasn't putting one edition in an early grave enough?

2. Ignoring the OGL. Boo! When the initial excitement wears off, plenty of people will just go back to developing OGL material. It's easier and less risky.

3. Limited and (so far, at least) poorly-run organized play. Adventurer's League is light years behind PFS.

4. See #1. This is really the deal-breaker for me. Which is a shame, because I like the game, but I refuse to continue supporting a company which stubbornly clings to an out-dated distribution model at its customers' expense.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is clearly a very polarizing topic.

As stated, I do believe that most police officers have good intentions. I also believe that people with good intentions make mistakes, and that they should be treated fairly when they do.

However, I also believe serving a no-knock warrant using flashbangs in a residential area at 2AM -- apparently without confirmation of who was/was not in the home -- represents a serious lapse in judgement. Something about the way that department operates must change.


I believe most police officers are good people trying to do the right thing. However, grenade to a baby's face == not ok. Ever. Sorry, try again.


Good start -- however, it felt a bit rushed. I wish they had been able to let out the seams and do a 2-hour premiere. I'll definitely watch it again.


thejeff wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
Where have I heard the phrase "check your papers" before?
Arizona?

Guilty as charged. :(


Technology helps protect, rather than undermine, our privacy (for once)?

Oh the humanity!


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

More Ferguson:

Mom of man killed by St. Louis cop: He was unarmed

OMFG. Wow, just wow. How is that not a headline?

I guess you have to credit them for perseverance. If your first attempt at igniting a race war via police brutality doesn't succeed, just try again.

**

If someone playing a pregen can just retroactively decide he was playing a newly created character, why even make them go through the formality of reporting a character dead? It's not like you can run out of numbers...

And before someone comes back with "data quality," consider this: They still haven't added the new factions to the reporting system. :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Caineach wrote:
These swat team assaults on innocents are hard to keep straight.

Well these so-called "innocents" should have known better than to get in the way of the police! ;-)


Funny how the comments make a big deal about how "strong" the spider is. If you were that size, you could move that rock, too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wow, that sounds like quite a bird-en.

Heh.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"Hip and edgy?"

Whatever.

I don't care who takes the blame, but "baby takes grenade to face" is a thing that should not happen. Ever.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This outcome, though terrible, is a symptom. The problem is a society which authorizes its police to play Navy Seal with its own citizens in the name of "protecting" them.

**

Victor Zajic wrote:
This also happened to me at gencon. It was rather frustrating, especially considering the GM was talking about finally getting his 5th star, and that it was the final scenario for my character, and I burned the emerald spire elixer boon for the scenario(it was also frustrating that said soon to be 5 star GM didn't have any idea what the Advanced Template was, and had to read it multiple times to figure out how said template worked).

Sometimes when running complex scenarios, I miss a mechanical detail or two, and wonder if other GMs do as well. Then I read stuff like this, and I feel better. :P

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm of the opinion that, if and when the GM makes a mistake, he should chalk it up to experience, rather than "retconning" adversaries back to life. If retroactive adjustments are made, they should always be made in the player's favor (IMO). The goal is to challenge the players, not kill their characters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The more I see of the system, the more I'm convinced I'll be using 5E for the stuff I home brew, but that I'll stick with PFS for organized play. I just don't like they way WotC's organized play program is set up -- especially the part about not being able to run Expeditions at home. Besides, Wizard's PDF hostile stance means I won't be buying anything past the 5E core anyway (which I've had pre-ordered for months).

So for me, 5E in a nutshell: Nice system, backward policies. It really seems like 4E all over again (sadly).

On the other hand, with Pathfinder I may have to put up with a somewhat clunky system, but I get very customer-friendly policies and the best-run OP in the business.

**

I've run this mod twice, and while I loved the setting, the mechanics weren't very well communicated. It wasn't entirely clear whether the fly check applied everywhere, or just in the room in which it was mentioned. I went with everywhere, but it would have been nice if that had been more explicit.


Steve Geddes wrote:
The question is easy to resolve, I'm curious whether people are reading 5E rules in the same manner as they read other modern games.

I think it largely depends on the tone of the game. It could be argued that games which attempt to simulate everything in the name of "realism" are simply reaping what they have sown.

In the case of 5E, I'd just rule "of course it applies" and move on.


13 people marked this as a favorite.

Because Windows 7 ate 9.

I'm so, so very sorry.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you have Adobe Pro and the file security allows it, rasterize the PDFs to match you display resolution. Then your computer just has to re-draw a bitmap instead of re-rendering a vector-based image every time you scroll.


Erik Mona wrote:

I'll be interested to see what you think of the Strategy Guide when it comes out in December.

Had I the opportunity to do it over again, I'd probably call it something like the "Starter Guide" or "Beginner Book" or something.

Elements of it--especially VISUAL elements of it--are very similar to the Beginner Box.

Sounds very promising.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe this thread should be renamed "People who can't buy 5E."

You paying attention, WotC?


Sir Jolt wrote:
I don't see how you could continue buying AP's without buying the rulebooks. Looking at the Mummy's Mask AP and the books it expects you to have, out of the hardbacks you need a fairly up to date collection. Add in the softcovers and it's overwhelming. PF has more softcovers OOP than most games (successful or otherwise) will ever release.

As others have pointed out, the rules from the hardbacks are part of the SRD. Which admittedly doesn't help if your intention is to run a core-only game. Since my affinity for core-only stems from a desire for (relative) simplicity, the renders the AP line less useful to me as time goes on. Such is life.


Alex Smith 908 wrote:
OH NO RULESBLOAT TOO MANY BOOKS!!!

Making caricatures of people with whom you disagree is a great way to resolve problems and foster understanding...

...said no one, ever.

Anyway, I rather liked the Beginner Box, and wish the Core Rule Book resembled it.


Any chance we can get a 3-panel landscape screen? Pretty please?


I personally can't see any potential for cannibalization in releasing updated compilations of the 3.5 paths, but who knows? And there is always the resource issue.

I'd rather spend my time on the "update the Season 0 PFS mods" soapbox. :)


thejeff wrote:

And these days, if you really want to do this, it's easy to buy the PDF and print the pages that you want to include and put them in the binder yourself.

Well, for pretty much everything except 5E that is. We're still waiting to see what their digital solution will look like.

The fact that they think they need a "digital solution" tells me all I need to know. :-(

**

1. Good to see Quests aren't dead (and got reworked).
2. The art on page 8 is fantastic. More please.


Themes86 wrote:
The problem is, your not using Miracle Whip. Miracle Whip is levels above Mayonnaise!

(1) You're.

(2) Miracle Whip is the devil's work.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rogues are definitely not "fine."

I just don't bother participating the those conversations much because they're pointless. :/

1 to 50 of 6,799 << 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.