carmachu's page

I have it. I enjoy it quite a bit. Its got more then a few creatures i would definately use.

I like it better then alien 3 from piazo

Announced for August! Product image and description are not final and may be subject to change.

Sounds alot like the Beserker stories by saberhagen....

That doesn't mean you "can't", it means you choose not to. Different things.

Wont because i dislike pdfs. Cant because i have neither computer, tablet or kindle.

But irregardless, 10 pdf is worthless to me

or you can buy it for 10 bucks

Dont do PDFs. I need paper products. So no, not really.

That is not what the book says, Rysky. What the book does say is, "the game assumes that in typical settlements you can find and purchase anything with an item level no greater than your character level + 1, and at major settlements items up to your character level + 2. The GM can restrict access to some items (even those of an appropriate level) or make items of a higher level available for purchase (possibly at a greatly increased price or in return for a favor done for the seller)."

"Appropriate level" is level + 1, or level + 2 in larger settlements. The book is quite clear about this.

Actually no. You are leaving out the critical part that says "no greater than."

Which means the top end is level + 1. It could be just level.

Mostly I was trying to convey that the Plane of Fire chapter is very nicely done, such that even someone who doesn't think that fire is an exciting element might reconsider that stance after reading this book.

It's not that fire isn't exciting, it's tgat fire is overdone in comparison to the other three planes- there are 4 different city of Brass done. Fire was the main opponent in temple of elemental evil. And so on.......folks have wanted more ofvthe other planes.

The problem is that I don't see much love for it when I'm reading forums for reviews. Is there something inherently wrong with the AP, is it because it's still relatively new, or is it backlash for traditional fantasy after Paizo did something so out there with Iron Gods?

Besides many of the other items that folks have already said in this thread about items in giantslayer.....the answer is yes, actually. There is a segment that does feel that way. To quote another person in this very forum:

"It's the most boring Paizo AP to date. I mean, it's not badly written or with structural problems, but it just doesn't have a single theme, NPC, location or idea which grabbed me. It feels like if after Iron Gods Paizo decided to put out a super turbo conservative AP to placate the grognards and compete with WotC in the field of traditional adventures."

I think the problem is that some posters on this thread are expecting Paizo to go to places that they don't feel comfortable going on a mass basis. To them I must reply: Paizo is not writing for your group; they're writing for all groups.

The corollary is that if you're writing for all groups, you're really not writing for any groups then. You really cant please all people.

Looking through a few threads, it seems like Giantslayer, much like Iron Gods, has been a bit of a divisive issue. I count myself on the "Iron Gods" side of that equation, and I've been considering canceling my sub for Giantslayer, but before I do so, I want to be sure that I've given it a fair shake.

I consider myself a pretty open-minded guy; I enjoy 'traditional' dungeon crawling as much as anyone, but I also like to spice things up a bit with new ideas.

I'm on the other side of the fence. I've long since canceled my subscriptions because piazo has gone on "wacky" encounter design and adventures. (among other reasons) SO this will be the first paizo product I buy in a long time.

I like traditional adventures. But that might just be the old player in me. So giants, orcs and dragons sound like fun.

Don't think its that troubling. Sounds much more reasonable then the debacle of the OGL/GSL process back in 4e days. He's not promising a license is coming, materials son, keeping folks hanging on but nothing forthcoming.

Its a slower, reasonable approach. Quality is a problem with OGL. OGl had great freedom, and openness, but lets be honest, there was a ton of crap produced as well. And no one wants to see anther book o erotic fantasy again....

memorax wrote:

We will just have to agree to disagree Bill. When two companies both in the business of making a profit and sell RPGs. I think it is consumer hypocrisy to accuse one of greed and and not the other. Haters gonna hate for any and every reason.

"Consumer hypocrisy"?

Does that apply to all businesses competing in the same field? Differences in behavior, ownership or business plans between the companies can give no reason to consider one more greedy than another?

Depends. when one dresses up "greedy" as paying their bills and paying employses....how is it any different.

It depends on points of view. I've seen ones posting WOTC marketin the new edition as greedy, but some how paizo is not? A flip sie view could be, paizo is just as greedy, look at all the products paizo is pushing, how much splat paizo releases.....how I that not greedy in another's opinion, any different from WOTC? Dressing it up as how it was characterized earlier in the thread doesn't make it any different.

Anti-Paizo Mini-Rant, spoilerd for the sensitive

*snip*

Thank you for that. That pretty much sums up the "jump the shark" comment I made earlier, and why I dropped all my subscriptions a while back. I didn't feel like arguing with s or mods. I've seen too many devolve once dissenting opinions of anything that someone doesn't like.

I just vote with my wallet. FGG looks good as does a few others.

Now of course if you are able to play multiple games and you are able, and want, to play both then you are lucky. Some of us don't have that luxury and have to decide which game they will run. I am planning on buying the books but I think my group and I will continue with Pathfinder while maybe playing a game of D&D every now and then in the future.

How about you?

I'm going to pick up the books and see. It looks promising, unlike what I saw coming out with 4e. And while I like the core pathfinder game, in many ways its jumped the shark with me, and I no longer subscribe as I was once a charter subscriber. paizo of today isnt the same paizo of 5-6 years ago, for me.

So looks promising, and since I'd be DMing, I'll give it a shot.

Yes they have a right to have fun.

They need Mentor or DMPC to help them make decisions.

Why? If a private company has an agenda to promote (whether related to their core business or not) why shouldnt they enforce rules on a forum in such a way to further that agenda?

Its a really good way to look customers. Playing devils advocate, one could notice that the paizo of 2014 is not the same one back in 2008, both in actions and deeds.

If you enjoy having the staff members be so that they can not say anything about their products... even product that is currently released, or barely coming here at all and the boards being so choked with moderation that it causes these boards to have little to no discourse like it has now.. then I am sure you would LOVE that slippery slope. Me I prefer to have the boards we have now with the staff/developers coming on here and being able to discuss freely with us as much as we do with them.

If you want to have that type of forum might I suggest another forum such as WotC's, Blizzard forum or Battletech?

You do know that its not a zero sum game right? The real easy cure for that is if you decide to participate, someone else should moderate. Therein removing ay conflict of interest and preserving even handedness

[]I do not see it as a conflict of interest. I see it as a passion for their product and that is all. THat and just plain passion for what they want to believe in and or discuss. When a staff member does moderate a post from a thread, even one they are participating in with their own discussions just means that they felt it was over the line and that is all. I am not going to say that any moderation is going to be perfect and that their own bias will not come in to play... but it is part of being a "human" moderator and not a robot. I would rather see a little bias rather then just a blanket moderation of a robotic post moderation I have seen on some sites.. To me this means that they will take the postings in context as well as the sites guidelines.

So lets not go down the slippery slope of preventing someone from modding a thread they are participating in.

If you passionate about something, you're not impartial. Moderation has to be applied EQUALLY. If you're siding with one side, it can be implied you might be applying rules equally. As per the OP xample, its not being applied equally.

So lets not go down the slippery slope of pretending things are beng applied equally.

I pretty strongly disagree with the idea that Paizo staff should stay out of moderating threads in which they are conversing. For me it's one of the great features of the board that we get to interact with Paizo staff as people and not just in their capacity as Paizo staff members.

Its a conflict of interest, or a perception of such. If your arguing passionate about something and then moderates the opposing view with warnings, time outs or pot removal, its hard not to draw that conclusion.

I've seen much worse over at sat the battletech boards of CGL. Their moderation is HORRIBLE, with mods getting into arguments and other mods slapping you down for responding. Its THE reason I left there and will never return, nor buy a single BT product EVER.

EDIT: That applies to just mods, not staff I should say.

Whether I like crane wing or the errata or not, cant I point out that unless your playing in PFS, you can just house rule it or ignore the errata if you don't like it?

Around here I know that some folks were already house ruling crane wing before the errata.

Similarly, desperate people in Mendev or Ustalav could want him free because the first thing he'd do (after subjugating Ustalav) would be going for the Worldwound.

Now that's an interesting idea. Almost popcorn by the fire watching the end of the world kinda show.

Not at all. We had a 'party deaths' chart up on the blackboard in the room we used. We stopped keeping track after a while. Fortunately, we had ways of coming back. Death wasn't the real threat, only a setback. Annihilation of existence was.

Ok that needs an explanation.

I'm getting a little concerned that Paizo might be trying a little TOO hard to shoe-horn in a socially progressive message..... and its starting to feel really forced and really gratuitous, to the point that I know it'll be a distraction to what looks like to be a superbly written story.

Yes. It feels that way to me frankly. I really don't care what two consenting adults(or three or four) want to do as far as a relationship. Its none of my concern or business. But when I compare it to say Oleg and Silvet? from Kingmaker. The later felt like a married couple, with his wife, her husband, Oleg and silvet intermixed. Where as the perception in Wrath is "her wife, her wife, her wife, her wife" repeated en nausuem as if their trying in big bold letters to get the message across this IS A LESBIAN COUPLE (in big bold letters)if feels rather forced and rather not as interested to pick up the next installment as its detracting from the story. But that's me.

Pathfinder has too many fiddly bits in the various player companions that have been released to get bonuses.

Example:

(I was an andoran sheep herder who juggled at a young age so you character gets +1 to survival from herding and +1 Dex based skills because you practiced at a young age)

I like parts of the pathfnder settle, but overall I think its a terrible setting, feels way to patchwork(here be priates, here are vikings, here is the land of the lost, here be technology)

Doomed Hero wrote:

This would be a deal-breaker for me. Love me, love my hobby.

Honestly, if your hobby is more important to you than your spouse, you have a serious marriage problem and you should re-examine your priorities.

(my use of "you" is generic, not specific.)

-Skeld

If your spouse is demanding you stop something that you like/enjoy/is rewarding to you, that's not causing harm either financially or eating up an inordinate amount of time, then your marriage still has problems. ones that have nothing to do with gaming.

Substitue playing pool, working on cars, motorcycles, Hiking or any other hobby for gaming and its STILL a marriage issue that's not about whats more important, but rather respect of your spouse(or lack there of) of things that are important or dear to you.

Lets reverse it- Lets say he grips, b%!##es, moans and complains every time she gets together with her friends. Every time. Doesn't want her to hang with them. But doesn't give a specific reason(haven't seen a real reason why she doesn't like gaming). Would you say the same thing about being more important then your marriage then?

Its not about what he's doing or it being more important. Its on her being jealous or immature or something that's not "fair" would be the best word to her spouse.

It just hit me today, kinda out of the blue, but I really miss Dungeon magazine. The adventure paths have their moments and all, but what made Dungeon so great was its variety.

That. A thousand times that. And not only the AP's, but with their module line doubling in page count but shrinking in release, it becomes another, well, mini-AP rather then a drop in adventure to fill out a game like Dungeon of old.

Missing a couple issues, but I'll fill it out soon. Dungeon had a lot more ideas you can plumb then Paizo currently.

The best I can say for 4e, is it created the Adventure paths and cool paizo products.

Sometimes the customers don't actually know what's best for the product line. Sometimes the developers can see failings where the customers don't.

In the case of modules: From what I understood the module line was constantly behind schedule. In addition I have seen complaints on the forums that the recent modules felt more generic. The idea for the module line now is to cut the line down in quantity of product while attempting to increase the quality of the products, by making it so module writers can focus greater attention to a single project at a time rather then having to be midway through writing on one project before being given a second. OR something like that (I don't know the specifics as I don't work at Paizo).

Irrelevant to the argument, whether the customer knows whats best for the product line. That wasn't the other gentleman's argument- it was what the customer WANTED. And in this case wanting more modules was what was wanted.....just like gamers wanting AP's and they got it and so on.

Instead we got something not really wanted- longer modules that are less likely to be dropped into a game, and released on a longer schedule that's not helpful. Generic is what some folks wanted- which was why Dungeon magazine was very popular(ell besides 3-5 adventures at a great price).

Boxed sets are hard to create and—because the costs are really high—hard to make money on.

Let's look at the Greyhawk "From the Ashes" box set, which contains:

• Two 96-page books (a setting book and an adventure book, more or less)
  
• Three 32x21 maps
  
• Five monster sheets
  
• 20 reference cards
  
• A box
  

Now, let's model a Pathfinder equivalent.

• 96-page books are the size of an AP volume. We sell those for $22.99.
  
• Our Map Folios that contain 3 33x22 maps sell for $19.99.
  
• The best equivalent for "monster sheets" and "reference cards" would be our Campaign Cards, which sell for $10.99.
  
• We sold our Treasure Chest empty box directly from paizo.com for $2. (That actually has very little markup from cost—boxes are expensive; if we had to cover our costs on that through the distribution chain, it would be higher; for this exercise, let's call it $3.03 because it gets us to a retail price that we could actually use.)
  

Would you pay $79.99 for that?

And even if you would... do you think game stores or book stores would be thrilled to invest $48 (that's 60% of retail) for each copy on their shelf that may or may not sell for ages if at all?

The counter argument is I and many other folks paid $120 for Ptolus brick of a city.

So.....yes, people will buy them IF they are good enough. If fact they would pay more then that.

I've actually noticed that the PFS Scenarios do a good job of having adventures that fill in the gaps. Plus they are scaleable which is nice. I see them replacing the Adventure Modules at being, well, modules. Check them out. They tend to be good even if you aren't in PFS.

Unfortunately, they don't sell them in print form. Which makes them useless to me. I'm not a PDF person. I like dead tree form. I've got every module they put out, but unless they start publishing PFS scenarios in other then PDF, wont do me any good.

very few groups stick with physical books nowadays, and the few that do, are either Analogue Era Elitists, or people who live in extreme poverty. it is around $800 for a decent laptop.

Sorry, but no. The only elitiest right now is you. Those are not the only reasons why folks would stick with physical books.

Not all comic book companies reset their setting. That's a DC thing, Marvel still is running the same main continuity since the 1960's

ABSOLUTELY AND UTTERLY FALSE. If you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you. The X-books alone have changed continuity- stryfe/cable and the overmind thingy reset things radically. Spiderman has changed a bit over the years, and punisher has gone through various incarnations.

Does marvel have less resets then DC? Yes. But please peddle your nonsense elsewhere if you thing marvel hasnt reset things from time to time.

If you put a hat on the platypus does its CR go up?

I'm a juvenile probation officer,

That explains everything about you in this thread. Its your mind set from the outset.

We cant change it becuase you see EVERYONE as trying to get away with something. Whether its gaming or other.

I'd like to hear some of the funny stuff said/done at the game table (in game please) that made the whole table laugh.

I was playing a NG cleric, who healed anyone in need regardless of circumstances. Looked after orphans, did all sorts of good stuff in game. goodly, heroic character....

But as a player I asked every other player what their max HP's were as they leveled and wrote them at the top of my spell list so I could sudo track their damage and see how hurt they were.

As as we hit 12th level or so, and as everyone ws getting something to eat and someone had leveled I asked said player his HP's and wrote them down.....said:

"Thanks. Now I know how many HP's you and everyone have just in case I want to kill you off. what, you didnt think I did all this out of the goodness of my heart did you?"

Every stopped what their doing and looked at me and the DM just laughed and laughed and laughed.....and then they joined in. it was so out of left field no one really considered the fact that that might have been what I was doing, nor were they too sure whether I was kidding or not.

Carmachu is, however, right. Players have just as much power as the GM when united. And few are disputing that if all of the players want something (such as reduced sundering, or a less dark campaign), the GM is going to have to either work with them or find a new group. Ultimatums will help neither side.

Which is why I called it the social contract- its both DM and players working together to ensure a fun game. Sometimes the DM has to give in, sometimes its the players.

My last game lasted 5 years before I had moved away. I loved my old DM and he loved us as players- because we all worked together to ensure a fun time- when the DM came to us to ask us to scale back one aspect of the characters beacuse he was starting to throw harder and harder monsters at us that might result in a TPK, but it was also making it less fun for him to design encounters- we did.

When the DM wanted changes to skills and rules, he didnt do it by fiat, he sat down, explained by and waited for feedback or objections. When players wanted spells or stuff from outside the set of books he set down at the beginning, he listened and discussed.

Social contract- give and take. Working together to ensure a fun game. Thats what its about. Personally I see the OP as a breakdown between the players and DM.

To make a very very long story short.

You, as a player, don't get to decide whether "Sundering" is used or not, that is entirely up to the DM.

actually they do. Its called firing your butt and finding a new DM.

The game is a social congratct that runs both games. You as the DM can do whatever you want. WE as the PLAYERS can decide whether we want to put up with the attitude above.

Wow people are brutal on these forums.

Everyone just needs to chill, read where the OP said they are going to RETCON this fight and lay off. This isn't your game, this isn't your GM, this isn't your campaign setting, so let the GM do what they feel is fair in their game and stop crying foul with all the rules lawyering.

Uhm no. Pulling the "its not your game, isnt yoru GM, not your campaign so leave the poor DM alone" crap doesnt fly.

Dont want to take the heat? Dont post your questions to the general public. Once you put it in public domain, it becomes discussion fodder.

Its complete BS to fall back on "dont critize since its not your game" when you come onto a forum and post your campaign up and ask questions about it.

Thats just a flag on the play.

The party was 8th level, and 3 Vrocks is a CR 12 encounter. Yes, it's very, very tough, but they knew going in that this was supposed to be a brutal campaign (I gave them warning, and the book - don't want to spoil anything, so no names - warns that characters will die).

So basically, in context, in an encounter thats +4 to their level you didnt give them the piece of useful information that MIGHT have given them a chance to stay alive, and your complaining that yoru players are b@#t$@ing at you?

No offense, but I think you deserve it. Knowing its a tough AND brutal campaign, you could have thrown them a bone and lifeline.

I was with you in the first post, but knowing the rest I think you're wrong.

Actually, I feel like not complaining was more a sign of a guilty conscience. I guess we might be over-analyzing.

OR it could be that its not a big deal with him and he rerolled. You could be very well over analyzing it.

To me, no protesting is a bigger sign that its probably not cheating. cheaters usually protest alot more.

If everyone shared your attitude, fantasy tabletop gaming would be a shivering husk of itself in twenty years or so.

I'd think revamping and rereleasing the game every 3-5 years like has been happening since 3.0 release is much more of a danger to FTG then his attitude is. You burn out your player base and their good will much faster that way.

"I say this to Paizo: give me a reason to turn me into a loyal profit base for you. You exist to serve me. I do not exist to provide free advertising for you. You need to provide me a reason to push your product."

You realize of course, with a little bit of changing, that ALSO applies to customers speaking to FLGS, right?

To FLGS I say this: give me a reason to turn me in toa loyal profit base for you. You exist to serve me. I do not exist to provide free money for you. You need to provide me a reason to frequent your store."

and that is solely responsible for the "This isn't D&D!" reaction we see. The rationale is that it looks different, therefore it must play different.

No not really. Your memory is a bit short on 4e's rollout, and how much the developers were trying to divorce and lesser extent, put down things before.

Power system is more icing on the cake then the main complaint.