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

darth_borehd's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 1,445 posts (1,916 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. 1 wishlist. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 131 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You come upon what looks like a group of large flying insects that seems to be laughing. Upon closer inspection (Perception DC 10), you see that the insects are tiny flying humanoids. These creatures are sprites and are a type of fey that are generally not hostile [Knowledge (Nature) DC 10].

If the party stops to speak to them, they will behave friendly towards them and give directions or answer questions about the area. They will run and hide if the party is rude or attacks them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You're not my supervisor!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Trying this again without the bolded large text.

Suggestions:


  • Drop Spellcasting
  • Kennings are still possible as a SLA
  • Rage Song should qualify for Bardic Performance feats.
  • Full BAB/Level

What do you think?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My bottomline is this: Drop the spellcasting.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't see what's wrong with starting with the bard, dropping spellcasting, and swapping in some barbarian abilities and some of unique skald abilities to compensate.

Seem the most logical way to go.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I propose the following changes to the skald:


  • Drop spellcasting
  • d12 hit dice
  • Full Bab
  • Martial Weapon Proficiency
  • Give them Bardic Performance
  • Change Rage Song to a type of bardic performance than only skalds can do (and allies can benefit from if they choose).
  • Change Spell Kenning to a special type of bardic performance as well. The Perform DC would be 20 + spell level. If successful, they can cast any spell from any class as a spell like ability once a day. (Twice at 11th level and thrice at 17th level.) The maximum spell is equal to the skald level divided by 4 (for 6th level spells at level 16).

I think that will be an awesome class to play.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ricardo Pennacchia wrote:


The answer for your question is simple: just play a barbarian bard. My intention here is trying to contribute to the discussion about the skald.

Fixed that for you. Can we put away the snarky comments now?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ricardo Pennacchia wrote:
Well, i'm pretty sure is too late for that suggestion, but maybe the skald would fit better in the concept of the bloodrager: full BAB, d10 Hit Die, 4 levels of spells taken from the Bard spell list (up to 4th level spells).

How about d12 hit die and no spells?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:

We're revising the skald.

As mentioned in today's blog, raging song will be changing—your allies will be able to jump in or out as they need to, it'll "play nice" with other rage class abilities.

We need to clarify what rage powers can be used.

You'll see an upgrade in armor and weapons, and a couple of other things that'll push it more toward the barbarian side of things than the bard side of things.

What about losing the spellcasting?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

In Norse legends, a skald can levy a litany of insults and condemnations on an opponent so severe that it could cause bleeding from the ears and loss of honor if the recipient does not attack immediately. Other cultures have similar legends about their bard-type members.

With that in mind, I would like to also to suggest the following abilities:

Saga of Insults (Su)Starting at first level, a skald can select one opponent to loudly proclaim a string of insults upon so severe, it causes damage. The damage is 1d4 + CHA modifier of the skald (minimum 1 damage). This ability increases by 1 die for every two levels (2d4 at level 3, 3d4 at level 5, etc). This is a mind-affecting and language-dependent effect. A skald can use this attack a number of times each day equal to his class level + his Charisma modifier. Those targeted by the insults can attempt a Will save for half damage. The DC of this save is equal to 10 + 1/2 the skald’s level + the skald’s Charisma modifier. This ability can be used at any range. The only restriction is that the target see, hear, and understand the skald.

Proclaim Nithe (Su)This is a word so insulting, that to call an opponent this is to invite an instant attack. In Norse cultures, this was called nithe or nīþ. Starting at 4th level, a skald can use the word against a single opponent. The opponent must attempt a Will save or be affected as if by a Rage spell of a caster level equal to the skald's class level. The DC of this save is equal to 10 + 1/2 the skald’s level + the skald’s Charisma modifier. A skald can use this attack against a number of foes per day equal to one for every 4 levels he has. He can target any number up to his maximum at once, but all must be able to see, hear, and understand him. Even if the target makes the save, if it chooses to ignore it, it still loses honor or reputation points equal to the skald's level, but this has no effect if the target does not use honor or reputation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree, Level 1 Commoner, with more weapon selection.

So far, we have on the table:


  • Dropping or Diminishing Spell casting?
  • Inspiration through rage
  • Full BAB
  • 4 + INT or 6 + INT skills?
  • d10 HP
  • Martial Weapon Proficiency
  • Expanding Rage Song
  • Turning Kennings into a SLA activated through bardic perfomance


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Glutton wrote:

Ok I'm going to take a run at this.

Yeah, I'm with you, Glutton.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Moved this from a thread that was closed. Apparently, they want all discussions to happen within the same thread.

Anybody else feel that skalds should lose all spellcasting in favor of something else?

Maybe they can get more bardic abilities. I think spellcasting is just all wrong for Viking skalds.

I understand that skalds in some Viking sagas had some type of magic, but it was not like the typical bard spell list. Sorcery and witchcraft, or sejdr, were considered evil and cowardly.

The magic they had were more like supernatural abilities contained within songs.

Trickery, illusion, and charm spells do not fit the flavor.

You can keep the kennings idea, but make it part of their bardic performance.

Like the Assassin prestige class, this class is just better without spells.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Anybody else feel that skalds should lose all spellcasting in favor of something else?

Maybe they can get a few hexes or more bardic abilities. I think spellcasting is just all wrong for Viking skalds.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Male Dasun (half-orc) Oracle 4

Will Save: 1d20 + 5 ⇒ (18) + 5 = 23 +1 if fear thanks to bless.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Male Dasun (half-orc) Oracle 4

Rushing to his side, Nästrod puts his hands on Thorgrim and brings soothing energy through his hands.

Cure Light Wounds: 1d8 + 3 ⇒ (7) + 3 = 10


3 people marked this as a favorite.

They also have been known to eat cookies, prevent those that pay them homage from getting viruses, keep tabs on things, aggressively attack creatures that pop-up, and are a known enemy of Trojan Horses and malicious robots.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

People who complain that there is not enough realism in fantasy games just don't get the point of fantasy games.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Changing Man wrote:

A family-friendly Pathfinder AP that would be suitable to be played with kids aged 10-15 (perhaps as an "after-school extracurricular" offering)

Something to introduce younger players to the game, yet not "freak out" anybody (especially uptight parents).

That'd be nice (and useful for my line of work...)

I also would like kid-friendly adventures like was mentioned above. Something like The Labrinth, Shrek, or the Neverending Story.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Comedy Campaign Guide!

I am so tired of campaigns that are clones of ultra-serious fantasy worlds like Lord of the Rings and Game of Thrones. I like those too, but there are too many of them!

I want to see campaigns like The Princess Bride and Discworld.

Please.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Rolling for stats always produces better average stats than is statistically possible. Nearly every player will throw away "sets" of rolls that are not high enough as "practice" and start over again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This whole thread is a guide on how to start Paizo message board arguments!
Here's my list. Any of which I guarantee would start at least a 50 post argument.


  • There is nothing wrong with leadership. It is not the best feat in the game. If your GM thinks Leadership is broken, its because they don't know how to GM properly.
  • All the classes are approximately equal in power level. Wizards/Druids/Clerics/Summoners are not overpowered. Fighters/Rogues are not underpowered. If you have anecdotes that show one is superior to the other it's because of a crafty player and an unskilled GM.
  • Paladins should act like knights in shining armor.
  • Evil characters suck. PCs should be heroes, not villains.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shore wrote:
As the title says beating down vamps while holding a sunrod. I can't seem to find any definitive information on these things, which is surprising considering every adventure and his grandmother have one tucked away.

Yes, but it only works on vampires that sparkle in sunlight.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Some archetypes that seem to have been overlooked:


  • Noble (A bard that does not cast spells but whose presence boosts those around him and can requests resources the party needs.)

  • An archetype for cavalier that does not have a mount or any other kind of "pet." (Like Eric from the D&D cartoon or Captain America)

  • An alchemist who makes gadgets and clockwork constructs.

  • A druid that gets shapeshifting at level 1.

  • A summoner that does not cast spells but instead acts as a combat partner for the eidolon (i.e. Gilgamesh and Enkidu) or has roguish skills (Pete's Dragon).

  • A witch that casts with charisma and focuses on illusions and mind control, especially with the opposite sex.

  • A sorcerer that really needs no material components at all (all SLAs or supernatural).

I would also like some witch hexes that are good-only.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kennethray wrote:

Oh and another one I just recently found out. Clerics can chose to leave a spell slot empty and spend an hour (or 15 mins if less then 25% of spell slots) during any point of the day to fill that slot. Its under Divine casters in the Magic chapter in the core book. LIFE CHANGING, well it was until I just made a crap load of scrolls.

K-Ray

All casters that prepare spells can do that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's a fantasy game. Some people, like me, are bored with Tolkien-esque elves, dwarves, and halflings and want to play something different.

Another reason is that playing iconoclast monsters are cool. You saw Shrek, right?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I research the movie myself before I take the kids to see it. I also watch all the cartoons with them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As a parent, I find the movie rating system completely useless. It seems to me it is designed more as a marketing tool than an actual advisory for parents.

I decide for myself what to introduce them to, but if they express a desire to see something, I have never censored it.

I find the kids naturally want to watch what is appropriate for them, so there is little need to micro-manage what's on the screen. Really, if the kids are going to be more influenced by something they see on the screen than by me, then I'm just not doing a good job.

If it frightens them or they run away, which has even happened with so-called "G" movies, I take it off or we leaved the theater. If they are enjoying, I let them watch it.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

"When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.” -- C.S. Lewis


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How about this:

Shooter has quickdraw feat and just keeps drawing multiple loaded crossbows. He drops the empty ones as a free action.

Loaders keep loading the empty ones. Then use Sleight of Hand to place the loaded crossbows back on the shooter's person.

Would that work?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Shadow Clone is an illusionary figment. It can't attack. It is simply there to confuse enemies and hopefully take a hit for you.

So, the swarming ability of ratfolk does not apply.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I miss the noble class from Dragonlance. I think it filled a missing roleplaying niche for a variety of different character concepts.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The press is having a field day calling these things white house scandals.

IRS: Not a scandal really. The white house had nothing to do with it. It was a couple of office workers who were trying to cut their workload by getting creative in search terms. It amounted to profiling. So, how do you feel about profiling now?

Benghazi: I fail to understand what they are trying to find. So we get things wrong occasionally? The IRS does not have a clairvoyants on staff? I just don't get it.

AP News: Remember when you had a problem with Bradley Manning leaking information? Well, now you see the other end. What do you think now?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Werthead, I vehemently disagree that Doctor Who is not serious science fiction. The show holds, in the both the 20th and 21st centuries, the top 5 best characters and plots ever.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think what Dinklage was talking about are the stereotypical roles that small people are usually handed.

There is a tendency for fantasy races to be flat characters with unidimensional personalities. What I don't like are the typical lazy fantasy worlds where you draw a map and throw the races at it like a Jackson Pollock painting. The dwarves go here. The dwarves are stout, dour, and like to mine things. The elves go here. The elves are beautiful, haughty, and wise. Halflings like to steal things, but prefer their comfy agrarian holes-in-the-ground with fine food .

But humans. Humans have many different cultures, languages, countries, personalities. They are treated as individuals.

I usually play halflings, but roleplay all my characters as unique individuals--so much so that DMs have gotten upset with me for not playing halflings "correctly".

In some eyes, all halflings are either Bilbo/Frodo or hyper-active children.

I say as long as a player halfling is more than a walking cliche, but a full-fledged character, then it's not what Dinklage meant.

I take offense to the idea that any PC needs to behave like a stereotype or is being played wrong.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The reason medical bills are so high is due to the cost of college education.

It works like this:


  • Doctors graduate from medical school with around $200,000 to $300,000 in debt.
  • Doctors have to charge more for their services to help pay back their loans.
  • The hospitals need doctors so they pay it.
  • The medical equipment companies see large sums of money changing hands, so they charge hospitals more for the equipment.
  • Hospitals pass these costs on to the patients.
  • Patients can't pay such high costs, so they turn to insurance companies.
  • Insurance companies pay hospitals for the care and patients pay their insurance.
  • Hospitals, doctors, and medical equipment people charge the insurance companies more because they have more money.
  • Insurance companies respond by trying to pass more costs to patients and deny care as much as possible.
  • Providers respond by charging more.
  • Health care providers and insurance companies merge to leverage their size in a market power arms race.
  • The last 5 steps repeat in an endless recursion as the costs climb.
  • Meanwhile, patients get progressively worse care for progressively more cost.

There you go. Notice it all started with the cost of doctors attending college. That's where we need to start. Obamacare is a band-aid for the symptoms of a broken system at best.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

DMCA -- Digital Millenium Copyright Act

Anything you do that could possibly help someone else infringe on copyright is itself an infringement. Also, somebody can demand a take-down of material without proving that any of their copyrights have actually been violated.

Now that's pretty silly.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vod Canockers wrote:
I am not interested in a "generic" Deities book. If I am making my own world, I will make my own Deities.

That is exactly what I would want from such a book--rules and advice for creating deities. Nothing more.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ObligatoryHuman wrote:
darth_borehd wrote:

[list]

  • If you are a good-aligned witch, some of the best witch hexes are meant exclusively for evil witches and none are meant exclusively for good witches.
  • I only see one that's clearly listed as evil: Cook people. The only other one I could see counting as evil would be Nightmares (because it acts as a spell that has the evil descriptor).

    No, these don't have the evil descriptor, but it is obvious they would be only used by the evil-aligned:

    Blight
    Coven
    Cook People

    And the questionable ones like child-scent, death curse, and poison-steep.

    Other ones are just plain vindictive and nasty, but not necessarily evil like Agony, Dire Prophecy, and Infected Wounds.

    And where are the good witch hexes? <crickets> Uhmm, I guess Healing is good, right? Unless you heal yourself or your evil minions. And uhm. . . . yeah.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Lawful Good would work from within the government to free the slaves. He may reluctantly bend the rules to help slaves from being killed or tortured, but would turn himself in for it. He might also find a way to raise the money to buy all the slaves and free them. If he felt the authorities would agree, he would offer himself as a slave in exchange for freeing all the other slaves.

    Neutral Good would work within the government to help free the slaves, but also might sneak out to operate an underground railroad helping them escape. Whatever it took to help people, they would do.

    Chaotic Good would reason that any government that would condone slavery is too corrupt to reason with. They would use any methods to defy the current authority and free the slaves or incite them to rebellion.

    Lawful Neutral would go with whatever made the most ordered society. If the slaves seemed to be mistreated, he may campaign to change the rules for better treatment. He would demand strictly codified rules for slaves and their owners alike. As long as the system "worked" for the most people, he would have no objections to it.

    Chaotic Neutral might feel sorry for slaves that are missing their freedom, but would always value his own more. He may talk to the slaves about the value of fighting for their freedom and may help those who agree to seek it. Ultimately, he would move on if he felt his own liberties were being curtailed.

    True Neutral would not care about slavery as long it doesn't affect him or the people he personally cares about. He may help free the slaves if one of his friends or family were pressed into service.

    Lawful Evil would abuse the slave laws to their own advantage using loopholes. He would favor Draconian laws punishing freed slaves and abolitionists. He would use his slaves to primarily wait on him but also to keep up his estate and businesses. He would consider himself a harsh master that does what is necessary to maintain order.

    Neutral Evil would want all the slaves to suffer as much as possible. If they were being treated well, he would try to arrange for harsher treatment. He would keep slaves as a source of his own twisted amusement. It would not matter to him if the laws said he could or not.

    Chaotic Evil would keep slaves and punish them constantly. He would enforce their loyalty through pain and violence. He would have no need for mealy-mouth laws on what he could do or not do with his slaves. He would kill, or perhaps even release, slaves on whims. He would consider that slaves are slaves because they are weak or lack ambition.


    3 people marked this as a favorite.

    1. Wasn't born one.
    2. Don't know anybody else who is.
    3. Didn't win the lottery, a game show, or happen to be in the right place at the right time for some fortuitous event.
    4. Live in the United States during a time period where if the above are not true, the system is rigged against you ever becoming a millionaire.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    kevin_video wrote:


    Things that make me leery are:
    1) House rules that make me completely question a GM's sanity.

    One thing I always question is when a DM/GM feels he or she has to use an excessive number of house rules. I would say is "If you have to change so much of the rules, this isn't really the game I know any more. Maybe you should try some other system?"

    A few simple house rules might actually be fun and add flavor to a campaign. I would say keep it around 25 words or a single page if you are a really experienced DM.

    I once played in a campaign where the DM handed out a 100+ page booklet of house rules. Complicated house rules. Very boring house rules. Yeah, I suspected he might be suffering from OCD.

    Quote:
    2) Evil cackling and giggling whenever they know full well that they're about to kill a character off in a battle that none of us had a chance of winning.

    Come on, GMs do lot of hard work, they need to have some fun every now and then! Seriously, GMs who take an adversarial relationship to their players are probably playing the wrong game. I always try to make it difficult but not impossible. I do like to see players enjoying a heroic struggle that seems to be "against all odds" but I also enjoy seeing them win in the end.

    Quote:
    3) Obvious favoritism towards a particular player. Namely their significant other, or their best friend they've known for forever, while the rest of us are destroyed regularly, or kept out of the loop for information. "Military" campaigns are especially bad for this (where their best friends are captain and lieutenant, but you're just a grunt who's not allowed to do anything unless your commanding officer says so).

    Agreed. I hate this. I once played in a campaign where one of the other players owned a monopoly on everything in town and the DM allowed him to run NPCs who were actually his employees. Conflict of interest? Yeah.

    Quote:
    4) Not being allowed to build your own characters. At all. Only the GM gets to roll your stats, pick your race, class, background history, etc. Because only he knows what'll fit in his campaign and you can't.

    This is a mistake. If the GM wants people to be immersed in their characters, he must allow you to create them. Players, however, should also be considerate and ask if a particular character they want to create would fit.

    Bottom line: Work together!

    Quote:
    5) This is more for 3.5 but "Core Only". Why? Because everything else is broken and therefore not allowed. Bull. That's a stupid rule. Complete Warrior wasn't broken. You can't tell me that Samurai class was better than the fighter.

    Ever hear of Pun-Pun? That's your reason for wanting core only. It doesn't sound like you are one of them, but there are some people out there--Min/Maxers, Power Gamers, etc--who study ways to break the system. The more books you allow to be used, the more the odds that such a players will find the "I win!" loophole and create a character that will give you a headache. Remember, GMs do a lot more work than players in preparation. Would you like it if somebody created characters that would make your hard work worthless? The samurai from CW is a bad example. Yes, he's not that much better than a fighter, but then you add all the feats, spells, other classes, prestige classes, and so on in that book, you can see how it makes a GM's job progressively more difficult. The rest of the Complete books in 3.5 had even more exploitable content, getting worse with each release over time. Pathfinder is the same way to some extent, but I believe Paizo has much better quality controls in place. I still restrict which Pathfinder books are allowed to Core, APG, UM, and UC.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Funniest show currently running on the air.

    2nd Funniest TV series ever after WKRP in Cincinnati.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Rincewind is fairly intelligent, he's just too lazy to learn new spells (after the Octavo left). Remember he is also one of the best polyglots on the discworld.

    I would make him a 1st wizard who uses his 1st level slots for Cantrips. He has demonstrated some simple tricks like casting the Discworld equivalent of Detect Magic. I would dump the Expert levels and make the rest of his levels as Charlatan Rogue. He is not useless in combat, provided he can sneak up on the person and knock him over the head with a sock-with-a-brick-in-it. (Which fits nicely as rogue sneak attack with a sap).

    He should have, Run, Fleet, Endurance, and Dodge feats.

    One of his titles is something like "Chosen by the Lady" (can't remember the exact phrase)--The Lady being the Discworld goddess of luck. I would work as it he always can use Hero Points to somehow escape death but he immediately must do something that appears heroic to earn a hero point back (whether he wants to or not).

    The luggage I see as a Rogue Eidolon. Twoflower would fit nicely as a summoner (hence how he was able to make a mental dragon construct) and the luggage could have been his eidolon which somehow became independent. Or maybe its just its own creature as luggage constructs seem common in the Agatean Empire.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I know lots of girls (and some guys) who would totally buy a My Little Pony campaign setting. You should try a kickstarter and see what happens.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
    darth_borehd wrote:

    • Monsters like drop bears, jackalopes, and killer bunnies

    Might I suggest the Book of Beasts: War on Yuletide, released today from Jon Brazer Enterprises. The monsters include (among others) a giant gingerbread man, a fruitcake monster, and a toy soldier construct. They might be what you are looking for.

    [/shameless plug]

    I bought it. Funny stuff. My favorite is the dreidel swarm. :)


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Bruunwald wrote:
    We're playing a game set in the American Revolutionary War. Most of the PCs are fighter/ranger, fighter/gunslinger builds using archetypes to remove or replace anything not suited to the time period (such as armor training), and with a few levels in NPC classes to round out their professions and in-town abilities (plus to get a few extra hit points so they don't immediately die versus Cthulhu-type creatures). The urban ranger archetype and the brawler are getting a workout.

    I'd like to see a writeup for that campaign. Who is the alchemist playing?


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    "I run a charitable organization dedicated to getting homeless veterans off the streets."

    Which would be true.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I think players who spend that much time with back story and role playing should be protected from boring death.

    If a character puts that much thought into his character I think the GM should put equal thought into his death. It would have to be something worked out with the player from the beginning. The GM promises that the character won't die as a result from random chance but the player agrees that his character will die in a dramatic and epic fashion.

    In contrast, players who simply roll up characters to min/max everything and just treat it as a video game or wargame shouldn't be upset when they die by random chance.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    The Demon-haunted World by Carl Sagan

    1 to 50 of 131 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 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.