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. 6,752 posts (6,859 including aliases). 73 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters. 16 aliases.


1 to 50 of 6,752 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

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. :/

Zalman wrote:
I couldn't agree more. However, everything 5e improves in this regard is done even better by other versions of D&D. I can certainly see the reasons for moving away from Pathfinder, but now that retroclones and OSR is a thing, I don't see any advantage to 5e in particular.

Network effects?

If the mini looks as good as the render, I'll be picking it up. Minis of the pregens are just too handy for PFS to pass up.

** seems like there is an intermediate scenario missing:

Slave Pits of Absalom
Slave ____ of Absalom
Slave Ships of Absalom

Possibly dealing with dysentery?

Pan wrote:
Anybody have comments on the released adventure material so far? This is something that could be appealing or not for me. My group wont even try 5E because they are in love with Paizo APs and chargen options. 5E cant compete at this stage for them, but I'm hoping in the future to get a chance to get my group to try it out.

Having read through Lost Mines of Phandelver and Hoard of the Dragon Queen, I found them both mediocre. Pretty much like most WotC 4E adventures: Certainly usable, but nothing special. Definitely not nearly as good as the rules themselves.

That said, I know the rules were a moving target, especially for Hoard. I have higher hopes for the post-Tyranny of Dragons material.

Majuba wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Having a minor issue in that I don't see any option to hold this until my next subscription. Do I need to place the order and have you guys do that on the other side?
Why would you want to hold this up?!?

Because money? :P

Looking forward to getting my hands on one. However, a lack of Monsters by Challenge index is a disappointing (and even a little baffling) ease-of-use ding. Much like not denoting the spells with the ritual tag in the class lists in the PHB. I guess they had to leave something to improve in future printings. ;-)

blahpers wrote:
The best two GMs I've played under were both women, for what it's worth. Honestly, I'll be happy when people don't even think to ask this question any more than they'd ask, "What do you think of short GMs?"

Short GMs are the worst...nevermind. :P


TOZ wrote:
the only way you get that damage is consciously choosing to as a GM.




Personally, I'm just going to avoid running the tech-heavy Season 6 scenarios, because I don't want to have to spring Technologist on any unsuspecting players. I have no issues with playing the Season 6 stuff, because I'm fully-informed about the existence and implications of the feat. :)


David Bowles wrote:
Yeah, there's a difference. The book is not that expensive, and no scenarios require the feat to succeed. Non-skill based PCs aren't affected at all. I agree that perhaps the feat should have been introduced in the guide to society as well.

I think it would be clearer. If not included, at least mentioned so people playing skill-based PCs understand the feat and it's implications for their characters.

And in fairness, it may still happen.


David Bowles wrote:
It makes it harder, I agree. Just as season 4 make things harder. It's this season's equivalent of loading up on cold iron weapons and anti-outsider tech.

I guess I see the difference as this: Cold iron is core. Technologist? That changes the way core skills operate. Heck, most people outside the boards whom I've asked don't even know it exists. Plus "Year of the Demon" is a pretty good hint you can expect to deal with Outsiders. "Year of the Sky Key?" Not so much.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
David Bowles wrote:
Get technologist on a skill monkey for season 6, and then just retrain it away later.

That works once you know about it. For some reason I can't discern, it isn't mentioned in the Guide to Organized Play (despite there being a "special rules for Season 6" section!)

But even so, how does a season 6 skill-money feat-tax make the game more enjoyable for anyone?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, you might not benefit directly by doing the right thing. But someone else does. And hopefully they remember, and maybe they even do the right themselves in the future...whether or not they expect to be rewarded. By acting selflessly, over time we can improve society for everyone.

Or, you know, FUGM.

I don't think it takes Confucius to figure out which one works better for everyone in the end. ;-)

TriOmegaZero wrote:
I wish I could book seats ahead of time.

AMC Centerpoint 11 in downtown Tempe. Reserved, comfortable seats for a very modest premium. Well worth it imho. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see more theaters head in this direction.

The truth? Because that's the setting people want.

But in fairness, a person of average intelligence (10) can't even learn to cast 1st level spells.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
I think they should be installed in the theaters.

Sadly, some people (Surgeons, Police Detectives, Jack Bauer*) need to be reachable at all times.

* Steel-toed boots not recommended for use on Jack Bauer.

Mark Seifter wrote:
We are talking about different things, but we are both right. I was talking about P(T2 broken) vs P(T2 broken | T1 broken). For sure P(T2 broken) is always constant.


Don't mind me. I might be slightly pedantic. And by slightly, I mean "very."


Papa-DRB wrote:

Can you simplify this for a retired dumb electrical engineer whose college days included transistor circuits?

-- david

edit: and use simple words, please.

In my experience, "dumb" and "electrical engineer" are mutually exclusive. ;-)

Mark Seifter wrote:

Sorry, the zombie and virus example is an actual quiz question from the class I TAed. I edited in an upshot paragraph for what the effect is, but it basically simplifies to something akin to Occam's Razor. Let's say you have a circuit that isn't working, and you figure it has to be one of three particular transistors that is causing it. You take out the first transistor and test it on the ammeter and it's completely shot. This lowers the chance that the other two are broken. Sure, they might still be broken too, but since transistor 1 being broken would cause the problem in and of itself, it's now much less likely that the other 2 are broken. But let's say transistor 1 works fine. Now it's become more likely that the other 2 are broken than it was before you tested transistor 1.

Does that make sense?


Each circuit is either broken, or it isn't. Once you've tested the first one, the amount of information available has changed, allowing you to be restate your original hypothesis.


I went to see this in the dollar initial reaction was "utterly terrible." I upgraded it to "just bad" when my wife pointed out that it may not, in fact, be possible to make a good Godzilla movie.

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Liranys wrote:
Seriously though, people still rend VHS???

Unfortunately, rending is an unavoidable down side of video tapes. ;-)

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Wiggz, that doesn't even make sense.

Your statement implies that the designers, developers, and editors at Paizo are spending X minutes per day specifically to focus on "LGBT flag waving"* instead of spending those X minutes "checking for rules compatibility" or "editing books" or "answering FAQs."

It's like you think there's some extra mental process involved in being sensitive to LGBT issues, instead of it being a trained part of your thinking. An editor doesn't read a book, then do another pass to check specifically for LGBT issues, and another to check for profanity, and another for rules language. It's all part of the same process--the editor reads the text, and if there's anything that sets off a mental flag**, something gets done about it.

* aka treating LGBT people (which includes many people on staff) like they're people... instead ignoring, marginalizing, or suppressing them.

** Whether that mental flag is "I don't think that's the correct name for the feat they're citing," or "we don't normally include f-bombs in our books," or "maybe this significant NPC shouldn't be a gay stereotype."

I don't always agree with SKR, but when I do, it's because he writes something like this.

First, Mark rocks for participating in this thread.

Second, can Pathfinder Unchained live up to all of these expectations? Well, since as someone pointed out, there are undoubtedly mutually exclusive expectations for the book, no. No it can't.

But a more useful question for each of us to ask ourselves might be "Can Pathfinder Unchained live up to my expectations?"

In my case, if it can deliver on the promises of "a new system for resolving player actions [which is] designed to speed play and dispel confusion" and "a math-lite system for on-the-fly monster creation," then it will go a long way toward addressing at least some of my disenchantment with the system.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

When I run the world, theaters will be required to employ someone with steel-toed boots to kick talkers in the unmentionables. :P


So, my 38 fame Dark Archive Hellknight Armiger CAN or CANNOT purchase the full Hellknight vanity when his fame hits 40 fame?

The bit about Scarab Sages and the Risen seem to indicate that he can, but the earlier part about retaining vanities seems to imply he can never become a full Hellknight.

Clarification from leadership would be greatly appreciated. :) Love this comic.

The 2014-2015 catalog lists Flip-Mat: Warship (PZO30065) in May 2015.

ShinHakkaider wrote:
Wow. I still have my copy of the BBB! My binding is fine and I used the HELL out of it. To be fair though this is my third one as I gave my older copies away to friends when they got hooked on the game.

It really seems that game books are very hit and miss. The binding 1E UE is generally considered to be terrible, but I never had a problem with mine.

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Things like Divine Protection... just feel like a someone missed a step. I can see this, and the warpriest as some ways for people to get their very own "build a paladin kit", but essentially this feat is a huge gift to a number of classes and builds.

Divine protection would have been fine it if gave a flat +1 sacred bonus to all saves. As it is, it is broken, broken, broken for Oracles.

Berselius wrote:
Nope...I'm pretty sure she's taking the -2.
When I said Inappropriately Sized Weapons I meant the rule that says you can't wield a large weapon that you'd treat as more than two-handed. You know, the rule that basically makes the Titan Mauler archetype not plain work whatsoever? that case, you're right. As a medium creature, she has the option to wield it 2-handed (instead of 1-handed), but should probably use the 1-handed damage die.

I'm not familiar with the Titan Mauler archetype. Wow.

137ben wrote:
Seriously, in every other industry, 'edition' means 'published revision.' Using the word properly, pathfinder is already on its sixth edition. And, arguably, pathfinder is itself the third edition of "D&D 3.0".

Yeah...that is confusing. They really should have gone with "version" or somesuch when they did 2E in '89. But they didn't, and it stuck.

Having owned the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 6th printings of the CRB*, I would definitely pay extra for a Smyth-sewn copy. Alas, I fear I am in the minority. Maybe if we get a deluxe edition some day...

* In fairness, none of the bindings failed. I gave my 1st printing copy to a friend when I got the 3rd printing, and I still have the rest.

Edit: I did have my copy of Champions 4E (the Big Blue Book) rebound when the binding gave out...I've been paranoid about the binding of large hardbacks ever since.

For the most part, I found the hybrid classes both conceptually and mechanically redundant. But then again, I'm very much a "core-only" guy, so the book wasn't really aimed at me.

Besides, I still bought the book in PDF for PFS purposes, because the price was so reasonable, and just to reward Paizo's digital-friendly behavior.

Papa-DRB wrote:
You're still kids.....

Fine, fine. We're getting off your lawn. ;)

DrDeth wrote:
2nd Edition was in no way a "edition" like the change between AD&D and 3rd or 3rd & 4th.

I recall. I was, as it happens, playing D&D at the time.

DrDeth wrote:
We who played 1st and 2nd edition just called the whole thing "AD&D"

Well, you did at any rate. ;-)

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
I was born in '91.


Wow, is my spot in the old folk's home ready yet? :P

LazarX wrote:
I'm not sure I could trust Mr. Hodges. After all I use Mac OS, and he's a PC. :)

Just more evidence of sound judgement on his part. ;)


Terek wrote:
I think I still need to put on it Paizo's community Use policy disclaimer because that paragraph is under the Permissions which has the text
As long as you comply with all of the above usage requirements, we hereby grant you the following permissions:

If I recall correcty my business law correctly, Paizo owns the copyright to the Bonekeep scenarios, and to any rendition of the maps which is contained therein. Paizo may have trademarked "Bonekeep" (and if the haven't, they probably should). However, they do not -- if fact cannot -- own the layout of the dungeon, meaning you would be free to post your map under the name "Skeletalcastle" or whatever (assuming you aren't using any copyrighted art). That said, if you can do what you want within the community use policy, it's probably easier for everyone concerned. :)

Also, IANAL.

Edit: Femur Fort? :P

DrDeth wrote:

Umm, no.

DragonLance, Dungeoneers survival, Wilderness Survival, Greyhawk, MoftP, OA, and UA. Not to mention that for all intents and purposes 2nd Ed was a splatbook for 1st ed and that had about TWENTY splatbooks.

I tend to ignore the setting specific ones (Dragonlance, Greyhawk, OA) unless I'm playing in those settings, though I had forgotten about the Survival Guides. As for 2E basically being "a splat book for 1st ed"...not exactly sure what you're trying to imply with that, but I don't consider a new edition a splat book for the prior edition.

As for what happens with 5E -- they've implied they're going to go slower than 3E or 4E, but who knows?

DrDeth wrote:
Sure. And if anyone on this board thinks that WotC wont VERY quickly start adding tonnes of splat books to add as many options, then you dont know the history of D&D.

We'll see.

The closest thing 1E had to a splat book was UA. TSR did, however, produce plenty of modules. Some of WotC's recent comments hint they might be going in a similar direction.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vod Canockers wrote:
|dvh| wrote:
Except you also get health care, etc. in Denmark.
Which you pay for as a tax.

You already covered that. No double-counting.

Berselius wrote:
So their letting Amiri slide past the the "Inappropriately Sized Weapons" rule because technically she can treat a bastard sword as a one-handed weapon and therefor a large-sized bastard sword is in fact still considered a two-handed weapon to a medium-sized creature who is proficient with it?

Nope...I'm pretty sure she's taking the -2.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
Alex Smith 908 wrote:
Yeah I was trying to point out how bigoted Wiggz post was. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Yeah Sadly I have read messages on the internets that were not satire that say similar things to what you stated...

In your defense...Poe's law

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Lisa Stevens wrote:
WotC wasn't immune to the crappy paint job every so often either

As someone who purchased at least a thousand, this is absolutely true. There were some real stinkers...but there were some really good ones, too. Just like Pathfinder Battles.

Of course it's a lot easier to overlook a dog when the cost per figure is $1.25, rather than $3+, but that's hardly Paizo's fault. After all, Paizo doesn't have Hasbro (who I hear knows a thing or two about large scale toy manufacturing) behind 'em.

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

Did someone say something?

Weird. My computer indicated someone made a post to this thread... but I'm not seeing anything.

Hmm. Must have been the wind!

** spoiler omitted **

*shakes fist in impotent rage*

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

Mark's post on negative conditioning has implications well beyond the FAQ.

For example, when I see a particular community member who posts negative comments on every single AP, it is much harder to recognize any valid criticsms they may have. So my eyes tend to slide past their posts.

Quoted for truth... for better or worse.

So THAT explains why you never read my posts. ;-)

1 to 50 of 6,752 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.