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

deinol's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 2,656 posts (3,000 including aliases). 10 reviews. 2 lists. 1 wishlist. 4 aliases.


1 to 50 of 213 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
I'm gonna wait, like, another 85 days or so to even begin posting on this thread, and probably won't really start giving my opinion on what happened until we're staring down the barrel of the 2020 primary. :P
If you haven't already decided who you're voting for in 2024, you're behind the times.

Betts 2024!


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
Obama is going to be around for a long while, yet. I expect some of his most important, meaningful work will be done after he leaves office. The guy is going to have a hell of a legacy.

Carter is an example of how much an ex-president can accomplish. He's amazing. I wish he'd gotten four more years.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

Wrath of the Righteous is pretty laser focused, each book flows pretty well from one to the next.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
I could see awesome adventure paths set in all 12 of those locations.

I bet I know James's secret project!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

Instead of theoretical situations, I'm going to talk about an actual campaign from a published Adventure Path.

Of course, I just finished Wrath of the Righteous, which is mythic. Mythic magnifies the disparity so it's easier to see earlier, and it actually helps let martials do a lot more. But it let's wizards do even more.

Wrath of the Righteous:

Book 4 would be a slog without easy access to teleportation, flight, and planeshift. It's a sandbox on another plane, but nobody should want to slowly march through demon infested lands with a non-magic party.

Book 5 is more planar madness, with lots of trapped prisoners who once again need things like disintegrate, planeshift, and greater teleport just to function.

By book 6 it was clear the rest of the party was simply a colorful escort for the Sorceress who was the only one who could accomplish the final sealing of the world wound. We only fought encounters because she held back once we realized that maximized augmented mythic meteorswarm will kill anything dead. Anything. Sure, she could only do that a few times a day. But more than enough times to defeat all of the bosses leading up to the final stage. Without passwall, teleport, flight, dimensional lock, comprehend languages, and other spells, the final task is impossible.

So a party without a caster would need to be pretending to be casters using magic items and Use Magic Device. Or be escorts to an NPC wizard who, once again, does all the important tasks.

Edit: The game expects wizards and clerics at higher levels. The most use a fighter has is as bodyguard for the first few squishy levels until the casters are high enough level to do everything.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
knightnday wrote:
Now, there are third party products that have come out that I'm all over. I think that qualifies as something new in the last 15 years. But just because the newest shiny comes out doesn't mean everyone has to jump on board. Your mileage may vary. Play what you like, but don't assume other people are <insert negative here> because they didn't change games with you.

I didn't say liking Pathfinder was bad. That's not what I'm arguing about at all.

There's three major answers to the "Does Pathfinder need a 2.0" question.

Option 1: No, you like Pathfinder just fine the way it is.

Option 2: Yes, it needs a revised Core that brings it more in line with the errata and expanded material now out.

Option 3: Yes, it needs to fix fundemental flaws inherent in the base system, such as the martial caster disparity.

I'm arguing that if you are in camp 1 or 2, you will be fine. The majority of the Pathfinder fans don't want major changes, and Paizo is unlikely to release a radically different Pathfinder 2.0.

If on the other hand you want Option 3, you are going to need to look for a different game system. And there are already several that might meet your needs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Quark Blast wrote:

Yes the article does seem to conflate Paizo with Frog God Games but my thought was more along the lines of:

Ravenloft 5E and Boarderland Provinces are both new(ish) free-floating settings, rather than ready-to-run APs (or super modules) set in an existing campaign setting.

Except Ravenloft 5E is an adventure, not a new setting. And its a rehash of an existing, already long popular setting. It will get no more than two books and no ongoing support.

FGG supports a niche, and I'm sure they will do well for their standards. But they aren't likely to get their book on the shelves of Barnes and Noble.

It's hardly comparable, and I doubt anyone will be surprised by the results.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
James Sutter wrote:
I would LOVE to do a Distant Worlds adventure path, and it's really nice to hear this kind of enthusiasm for it. Please keep banging the drum, as we all look to the boards when making these sorts of decisions. :D

Bang Bang Bang

I'm in for some world hopping.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

It should be remembered that early drafts of the Pathfinder Beta had more drastic changes, but reaction to feedback pushed the game to be more conservative.

I don't think any 2nd edition will be innovative enough to be worth doing, because they will still be shackled to fundamental flaws of 3.5. If you want something radically different, try 13th Age or Fantasy Age or some other game with the freedom to be different. If you want something slightly more refined, just wait for them to continue tweaking things via Unchained style books.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Cole Deschain wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
A "box set" is a term for a much more complex and expensive item, though - one which involves multiple books, maps, and other accoutrements. I've never bought one myself, unless you count a couple late-2e equivalents of the Beginner Box.

Having bought a couple in my time (good lord,I've gotten old!), I'm always surprised that they aren't better sellers/profit engines.

A good box set is a treasure trove for the buyer- L5R'sSecond City box set four or five years ago is the most recent specimen I've encountered, and it was worth every single penny.

A boxed set is a great buy for a consumer. That's why they don't make money. It costs a lot to produce and package. Especially when you are collating multiple non-book items into the box, posters, tokens, etc.

It's far more economical from a production standpoint to only produce one thing, since typically you use different printers for books, boxes, posters, counters, etc.

The Pawns work because it's just one type of product in the box, it just happens to need a box to hold it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Shadow Demon wrote:
Also, you can't copy the entire SRD as a published work either because this would be in violation of its copyright.

As long as you include the OGL you can reprint the entirety of the open content in the SRD, and the SRD is supposed to only contain open content.

You'd have to reformat things a little, since you can't use the same trade dress (fonts, borders, etc), but you can indeed reprint the entire SRD. People did it for 3rd edition, and Pathfinder is basically built on that fact.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Zombieneighbours wrote:

Tru20, Iron Heros, and evolved Arcana had a relatively tiny readerships, most of which (near as I can tell), continued to purchases official DnD at about the same rate.

A serious competitor only emerged when WotC seriously upset a very significant portion of their readership.

My point was variant core rules did exist. Yes, it took Wizards abandoning and Paizo being in a position with enough existing readership to launch an alternative that would actually become a viable competitor, but people we making variants before wizards made their own 3.5 variant. People will probably start making 5th edition variants soon as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
EltonJ wrote:

What's good for us is that they made an SRD. What is bad is that people will think of running with it in bad directions. The DM's Guild is probably the best way they can think of to slow it down a little.

With Pathfinder, the genie is already out of the bottle. With the DungeonMasters' Guild WotC can -- hopefully -- keep it in. And no, not all of 3rd Edition 3rd party was bad (the World of Warcraft RPG and Advanced d20 Magic were good). But it was hard to pick the pearls from the swine (Mongoose Publishing, I'm looking at you).

Even working with a Pathfinder 3P Publisher, your work doesn't win a lot of friends. Some of my friends will only buy Paizo made material.

I don't think there is any reason to think that the DM's Guild material will produce quality material at a higher percentage than d20/Pathfinder 3pp. Uploading a product is an automated process, Wizards will only take things down if they are offensive/adult material, not because your homebrew half-vampire race is terrible.

In fact, since DM's Guild only gives you access to FR material but a lower sales percent, most quality 3PP for 5e will release OGL material directly on drivethrough for a higher percentage.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
WormysQueue wrote:
Norman Osborne wrote:
Frankly, as open as the tag-team of the OGL and SRD made v3.5, a competing system that used some variant of 3.5 was a certainty.

Well, the fact is, there wasn't. Noone was even trying to compete with WotC at that time, because a) noone would have stood a chance and b) why even try it when most of the (core) rules were already to be found at the SRD site?

And even Paizo didn't create Pathfinder to challenge WotC's spot as the RPG industries' #1 (at least it wasn't the primary goal; don't know if Lisa and Vic foresaw what would happen as a consequence of how WotC handled 4E) but to support their own products which an existing line of Rule Books.

So while Pathfinder RPG only was possible because of the OGL, It didn't come into existence before 3.5 support was officialy stopped by WotC.

Actually, there were. Nobody who expected to rival D&D, but long before Pathfinder there was True20, Arcana Evolved, and Iron Heroes. Those are just the things I can think of off the top of my head.

They had goals beyond just "revise and continue 3.5", but they were variants based on 3.X that competed in the same niche.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Epic Meepo wrote:
In these quotes taken from a Reddit discussion, the D&D folks at WotC have confirmed that they have no plans to add more content to the SRD aside from a few mistakenly omitted items. So, thanks to the content gap in the SRD, the biggest third-party "5e" reference site will inevitably become a D&D clone competing with (instead of complementing) D&D. *sigh*

I'm sure it will be complementary, not competing. The third party reference site isn't going to be making revisions to core rules, it'll just be hosting additional 3rd party content alongside the official SRD rules. Exactly like they do with Pathfinder.

I doubt we'll see any truly divergent forks until the 5E PHB is out of print.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
We'll wait and see how folks respond to this, but you do know that you can drop mythic opportunities in for your group in ANY adventure path, yes? All adventure paths are filled with important and memorable events that can double for a moment of mythic apotheosis.

Yes I know. In fact, I've been thinking the end of each volume would be the perfect place to add a mythic tier to most campaigns.

I just know I need to be vocal on the forums about my love of Mythic, since my subscription means my likes and dislikes rarely translate into measurable sales figures.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Norman Osborne wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Except that you can use any names that were released in SRDs for earlier editions and the rules can't be copyrighted anyway, so it should be pretty trivial to recreate most of the missing content.

Yeah, combine the 5E SRD with the 3.5 SRD, and suddenly the vast majority of the names you can't reference using the 5E SRD alone become available.

Most of what's left is stuff that was excluded from the 3.5 SRD anyway, so you couldn't use it even if you published for 3.5 or Pathfinder.

Through the transitive property of the OGL, you can now start converting Pathfinder material too. 5th edition summoner anyone? The possibilities for 3PP, especially ones with a library of existing OGL material, are endless.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Steve Geddes wrote:

Yeah, it's interesting - no doubt a work in progress, but at this stage all the feats other than grappler seem to have been declared neither open content, nor product identity. Presumably, you're under 'usual copyright laws' in those instances.

The OGL doesn't apply to anything not in their SRD document. So other material from other sources (IE, the actual PHB) isn't open content. Without an additional license, it is as legal to refer to that content as it was yesterday.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
My point was 4th edition was entirely about combat, with almost nothing to support what happens off the combat mat.

4e has as much support for non-combat and role-playing as Pathfinder.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Malwing wrote:
I'm more talking about it from an analytical standpoint. Analysis of 5e tends to compare to Pathfinder or previous editions of D&D not other games. I'm not going to knock it as a bad system but sometimes I suspect that people are getting their copies with complementary cocaine given how they react to it. Its like a super popular movie that's very cliche but pretty okay and all but everyone keeps quoting it and talking about it like it's the best movie ever made because it's good enough for a wider range of audiences.

It's been number 1 for the last two reported quarters (I haven't seen data for summer 2015 though, so we're a little out of date). It does a lot of things people like.

There's also this source of numbers, I'll repeat:

deinol wrote:

Both are doing well.

Here's a small slice of numbers, from one store in the bay area. But a large enough store that it probably represents trends throughout the US. And anyone interested in the business behind game stores should follow the Quest for Fun blog.

Some RPG Numbers

D&D and 3PP

Piepocalypse D&D vs Pathfinder Sales

Short answer is, they are both doing well, but D&D does so with far fewer products.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:

I could be wrong. I have been before. But I think something has to give, or Paizo will find itself on the trajectory I originally expected: Catering to an ever-shrinking fan base.

On the bright side, I think Paizo has established itself enough that it could continue to grow if it produced a greatly improved 2nd edition.

Paizo has one thing that few other RPG companies do: Subscriptions. They tweak or adjust lines if subscription numbers aren't meeting expectations. I've seen this first hand as a subscriber to Modules and Planet Stories.

If subscriptions to the core line begin to drop, they'll start tweaking things. If they continue to drop, hello 2nd edition. But from everything I've heard, subscriptions continue to grow.

I know I'm on the fence about continuing my core subscription. I think since Mythic I've been mostly disappointed in the non-bestiary books. I'm also one of the few people who thinks Mythic is the best thing to be added to Pathfinder since the APG.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
FatR wrote:
shadram wrote:
You are. Just because the adventure they're telling is not the adventure you want to run doesn't mean you're not getting what you paid for. Along with the campaign overview, the Adventure Background for part 1 also mentions that "agents and allies of the nymph Nyrissa are laying their own plans", so if you as GM ignore that, you're obviously going to fail to foreshadow what is to come.
Ignore what? In the adventures as written there is no way for all but most extremely paranoid PCs to even guess that Nyrissa is working behind the scenes. What you've quoted is a pitch. But from books that are sold for money I expect to get a finished product. So that, you know, I don't have to do as much work myself.

Kingmaker is such a terrible, unfinished product that it was last place in a recent poll of favorite APs. Oh wait, it's first place? How did that happen?

Kingmaker is the most open and flexible of the adventure paths. It's not for everyone, and it's not perfect, but it's pretty good. There is mention of the final foe in nearly every book, but its mostly in details to the GM. It's real easy to look back over the AP after its published and criticize, but it's not like all the adventures were turned in when part 1 went to print.

Kingmaker is a great AP, but the amount of freedom it gives the players requires a GM who is willing to improvise and go "off script" more than the more railroad style APs. I would suggest its only for experienced GMs willing to put extra work into the campaign regardless of minor issues with the final volume.

Edit:

Gorbacz wrote:
Running an AP before reading thoroughly all 6 books is a bad idea. And yes, I'm speaking from experience. *looks at Serpent's Skull*

This. Always this. I know its exciting when you get that first AP volume, but the reality is, at this point, you've probably got a dozen APs you haven't played that are concluded to choose from when starting a campaign. It always helps to have a better idea of where things are going before you start the campaign.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

d20 Star Wars did quite well. Wizards isn't stupid enough to make 10 years of products for a failing game line. They are probably kicking themselves for having let the license go.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
any more than it's fit-for-purpose for building economic models. It's not supposed to be SimCity

You haven't played Kingmaker, have you?

I must admit, I love Mythic. I was getting bored with vanilla Pathfinder.

Anyway, you say Pathfinder shouldn't be everything. This is true. But since d20 was used for just about everything (including Mutants and Masterminds, which I'd take over Champions any day), Pathfinder can be the chassis for a lot of things. Sure, it doesn't need to be everything in core. But being expandable into the game you want it to be? That's the magic of the OGL.

Also, I hate when Tolkien creeps into my heroic fantasy, because D&D/Pathfinder have always been terrible games to simulate Tolkien.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
It's not clear to me that this is the kind of activity that is worth supporting in Pathfinder. If you're going to be making a superheroes game, there are other superheroes games out there.

I dunno, with Mythic you can feel pretty superheroy. My mythic phalanx soldier feels a lot like the 300 version of Leonidas.

Not to mention it's pretty easy to be a Sorcerer Supreme straight outta core.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
The In-Universe Earth that player characters visit in "Rasputin Must Die" is part of Golarion's overall canon now, and as time goes forward in Golarion, time goes forward on Earth as well. If we were to publish an adventure this year, in 2016, where the PCs go to Earth again, they would visit Earth in the year 1921, which is 3 years later than the Earth in "Rasputin Must Die" which was published in 2013, 3 years ago.

Hm, It's probably (not) a coincidence that this is prime Call of Cthulhu era times. It wouldn't surprise me if Strange Aeons took a trip to a major mythos site on Earth.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Ryan Freire wrote:
They spent 9 years and millions of dollars employing 56 people to make a game that never came out and then sold the license and fired those people. How is that not a failure?

Right, CCP failed to utilize the IP they purchased. Which is different from what some people in this thread claimed, which was the release of nWoD was a failure that led them to be bought out by CCP. No. nWoD was a great success, which led them to be picked up by CCP, who then bungled it and killed the tabletop rpg company they purchased.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

It is hard to find, but they do keep the data online. Here's a compiled list with links to original articles.

And we aren't talking about a game that hovered at the number 5 slot. We're talking about a game that was the #2 selling RPG for 8 of 9 quarters from the time it was released to the time it was sold to CCP. It dipped to 3rd for a quarter when Warhammer 2E was released.

So yes, it falls off after CCP bought it and mismanaged it. But it was solidly the best selling non-D&D RPG on the market from 2004-2006. The release of nWoD was wildly successful. CCP killed it because they didn't care about the tabletop market.

Edit: Since we know what Fate's sales numbers are, it looks like ~2k in a quarter is about what it takes to make the number 5 slot, which is kinda sad.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

World of Darkness was in the ICV2 top 5 RPGs consistently from 2004-2009. It spent most of that time in the number 2 spot. That is hardly the sign of a failing RPG line. In fact, it's only CCPs decision to stop producing books that killed the line. Turns out, even the number 2 RPG makes chump change compared to video games.

NWoD was more successful than most non-D&D games dream to be.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

As far as I can tell, there is no litmus test that makes Rey a Mary Sue that doesn't also make Luke one.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

Magic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

When it comes down to it, the GM is the arbiter of odd cases like this.

If I were the GM, the real question I'd have is how do you realistically "hang" a claw or other natural weapon from the sash for 24 hours?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Barachiel Shina wrote:

Why is it the only reason for a new edition is because of splat books?

That's a terrible reason.

It is a terrible reason. That's not the reason some of us would want a new edition. The problems I would want fixed are fundamental issues in core that weren't fixed because they were shackled to backwards compatibility with d20. Of course, if Pathfinder 2.0 is crippled by compatibility with PF 1.0, then the fundamental issues will remain and you are right, why bother?

So I don't expect any significant revisions to PF for the foreseeable future.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Raynulf wrote:
I meant no offense regarding the writers working on the 5E modules—I've also played and loved some of their other work—however in the 5E adventures I've seen (noting that doesn't include Out of the Abyss) I've found a distinctly minimal amount of narrative, or material to use to create it: Towns tend to be meager in description and the few NPCs mentioned are usually little more than a name attached to a description of a "Quest" which is often unrelated to... well, anything else.

Which is also fair criticism. The way 5e is being handled, they don't have an in-house adventure writing team. So they are being farmed out to freelancers and I don't really know if they have a strong editorial style being mandated or what. Without an in-house adventure design team like Paizo (ok, they are using freelancers too, but the development team has a much stronger hand than what is coming out of wizards) they just don't have the institutional knowledge to make really outstanding adventures.

Whatever you think of the core 5e rules, support is far below what I would expect from a major player. I almost certainly would use a Paizo AP with 5e instead of one of the official campaigns.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
bookrat wrote:
Raynulf wrote:
In my experience the writing in the 5e modules is shallow, and stereotyped, and in my opinion doesn't hold a candle to the adventure paths Paizo produce.

This is just my opinion and has no bearing on factual matters. I disagree. Kind of. Somewhat.

There are three major campaigns released for 5e so far.

Horde of the Dragon Queen is one I haven't read, but I haven't heard good things about it. From what I understand, it suites your description just fine.

The problem with Horde of the Dragon Queen is it was written to a system in flux. So it has a lot of rushed editing issues as they tweaked monster stats at the last minute, and things got left out.

Wolfgang Baur is one of my favorite adventure writers. His pathfinder adventures are top notch. But that comes from the designer having much greater familiarity than writing for a new system that wasn't settled until right before publication.

It's no surprise to me that later adventures written after months of experience with the final system are starting to get better.

That's probably the biggest advantage Paizo had when it came to writing adventures for Pathfinder. And even they had a rough spot in the system transition. But since they had years of 3.5 design experience, it wasn't too difficult to shift the minor assumptions to Pathfinder module design.

As it is, I'm primarily an AP subscriber with the intent to convert anything I run to a system more to my taste. I've been itching to try 13th Age or Fantasy Age. 5e is a fine system for what it does, but it's still extremely conservative in its approach and not at all what I am looking for.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

The problem isn't just a few spells that punch higher than their spell level. It's that the entire spell level system is designed that each level of spell is vastly more potent than the last. A fighter goes up in level and gets another feat. A wizard gets spells which are far more potent than any feat.

Extremely powerful but limited use per day is not a balancer. Even when the caster is conservative in their spell usage, the adventuring day ends when they are out of spells. That's just the way it goes.


18 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
DM_Blake wrote:
It IS a game where normal people learn how to do cool stuff but magical people learn how to do cooler stuff than non-magical people.

That is the caster martial disparity. You can't fix it without abandoning this assumption.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Blackwaltzomega wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
Even in Lord of the Rings, only the wizard can summon the fast travel mount >.>
And solo a demon.
To be fair, that had nothing to do with him being a wizard and everything to do with him being a Solar pretending to be a level 5 wizard to watch over the party of an E6 campaign in case a Balor or Dragon showed up.

Stupid GMPCs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
KainPen wrote:
OD&D/AD&D were basically the same game. OD&D came out first, but as things were added, a compilation of sorts was needed. AD&D to me was more a compilation of all the stuff that was out there for OD&D and in essence was the same system, and basically completely compatible in comparison.

You don't think splitting class and race was a huge deal? I mean, yes, from an adventure/monster standpoint, the game was close enough that you could run Basic modules for AD&D. But from a character creation and capabilities standpoint, they were very different games. Much more different than 3.0 and Pathfinder.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Jabborwacky wrote:

I would probably say the main difference is that 5e gives the player more freedom in terms of roleplaying the kind of character he wants, whereas Pathfinder has very specific builds someone must play to be useful in a group.

Even though beastmaster rangers are somewhat underpowered in 5th edition, I can still play a halfling rodent wrangler with a dire rat companion and be effective as part of the group. In Pathfinder, it's "play a halfling outrider or go home."

You should definitely play with a more friendly group. I'm certainly of the camp that thinks anyone not playing a 6 level progression caster or better is already underpowered, but that doesn't stop me from playing a fighter and having fun. I've never played in a group that told another player to go home because their character didn't reach some optimization threshold.

Certainly I think 5e is a bit more balanced than PF, but 5e definitely has the drawback of being only a limited pool of options compared to previous editions, with no sign of further support coming.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

A good party wants access to high level arcane and high level divine spells. I really want to convince my next group to go full caster next campaign, to see how awesome it can really get.

As much as I am enjoying my mythic fighter in Wrath, there are so many problems we wouldn't be able to pass without a caster. Not to mention how much less gear we'd have if she couldn't also craft.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Nox Aeterna wrote:

Well , i admit i dont have the sale figures for either pathfinder or DnD 5.

Anyone actually got said numbers?

Cause saying one or the other is booming is easy , but without actual numbers one claim or the other is almost worthless.

Both are doing well.

Here's a small slice of numbers, from one store in the bay area. But a large enough store that it probably represents trends throughout the US. And anyone interested in the business behind game stores should follow the Quest for Fun blog.

Some RPG Numbers

D&D and 3PP

Piepocalypse D&D vs Pathfinder Sales

Short answer is, they are both doing well, but D&D does so with far fewer products.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

The fundamental problems can't be fixed and have any illusion of backwards compatibility. So it's not going to happen. If you just want minor tweaks, they already do that continuously via things like Unchained. Anything more major will cause a major revolt from the player base (see D&D 4).

If you are feeling overwhelmed, there are other systems you can try. 13th Age, Fantasy AGE, and D&D 5e all have their own strengths and take fantasy RPGs in different directions. And it turns out, Pathfinder adventures (the strongest products Paizo makes) can be relatively easily converted to other game systems, if you are willing to do a little work.

I should note that I've GM'd a Pathfinder campaign from 1-20, and probably won't do so again. I'm perfectly willing to play it (I'm in a Wrath campaign now), but as a GM I've found I prefer a tad lighter system. But I still pull stuff from 3.X/PF for my games.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:


A level 5 PC is roughly a CR 5 encounter.
If you double the quantity, you add 2 to the CR.
2 level 5 PCs = CR 7.
4 level 5 PCs = CR 9.
8 level 5 PCs = CR 11.

That's not how APL works either.

A CR 5 encounter is supposed to be an average encounter for a party of four fifth level PCs.

So the above math is correct for how to calculate the CR of that number of NPCs (who have PC levels of wealth), that's not the math you use for figuring out what CR a party should be able to face. (Although I've always felt the characters with class levels math skews weak for the appropriate CR, that's a discussion for a different thread.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

This being the Pathfinder forums, you'll mostly find Pathfinder supporters here.

I'm going to go ahead and say, yes, Pathfinder is a big ball of complex and maybe 5E would be better. Of course, I would highly recommend you check out 13th Age or Fantasy Age, two systems that are (like 5e) not as bloated and have their own simplicity and elegance.

I will also say I love Kingmaker, but I think it's one of the campaigns that requires the most customization to run well. It definitely helps to drop sidequests and extra dungeons around the map. The overland encounters are mostly thematic and often not too much trouble for a party given the 1/day use your best spells issues that pathfinder has.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
The Raven Black wrote:

My point is that those players who enjoy RP and see their specific animal companion as an essential part of their PC (the character, not the build) are royally screwed.

Very similar in fact to the PC who always want to fight with the family sword he started adventuring with at 1st level ;-)

The PFRPG system is just not built this way :-(

My 18th level fighter still has the first magic spear he acquired. I just had to keep upgrading it and it's been my trusty companion ever since.

As to the other aspect, I certainly have never felt slighted for wealth when it came to equipping characters with companions. Could such a character be more powerful with more gold? Of course. But they've always seemed on par with expected potency for classes of that level.

It's like a two weapon fighter complaining that they have to enchant two blades instead of the two handed fighter. It just comes with the territory.

Although most of the time in my groups the relative wealth by level of the group fluctuates. Found gear goes to the most needed character first, and it all balances out over time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

Since the dawn of the internet, the "Frequently" requirement of a FAQ has been fictional at best. But "Exhaustive List of Information" doesn't make nearly as good a TLA.

Everyone who is irritated at the process really is just being pedantic. Paizo has the best system their workflow allows. We have a place to get alterations between printings, and a place for all other clarifications and changes. It's not going to change. It's going to be called FAQ because people search for "Pathfinder FAQ" on google, they don't search for "Pathfinder Exhaustive List of Clarifications and Information".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
CBDunkerson wrote:

Not at all. The most common version of the 'disparity' claim is that casters can do all kinds of things that martials can't. First example in this thread... the caster teleports away to drink mojitos while the martial is stuck there. Not true if they have access to spell-casting. Nor does a caster with a caster cohort invalidate this... in that case all they've gained is more spells per day and possibly a wider variety of spells. However, since we're told that high level casters are all powerful ANYWAY you can't really get 'even MORE all powerful'. :]

Yes, it was tongue in cheek... but only because I think the martial/caster disparity is silly to begin with. It basically boils down to, 'non-casters are not good at casting!' That's difference, not disparity.

There a vast amounts of things in the game that can only be done via magic. So duplicating the same powers as a wizard costs a lot more for a fighter. If the only way to get a fighter close to a wizard is to play a fighter AND a wizard, that's kind of proving the point.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

I really don't see what the problem is. When compared to other gestalt characters, it seems rather underpowered. But why does it matter? Let the player be what the player wants to be. If it turns out he's not pulling his weight all the time, oh well. It's not like the rest of the gestalt party can't handle things.

Edit: Also remember this rules about hybrid classes:

PRD wrote:
Parent Classes: Each of the following classes draws upon two classes to form the basis of its theme. While a character can multiclass with these parent classes, doing so usually results in redundant abilities. Such abilities don't stack unless specified.

1 to 50 of 213 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.