|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I usually do some minor changes to any published adventure to tailor-fit it to my setting (even only switching places in the same setting) and to my players's needs - as a large group has very specific requirements.
Sometimes published material needs to be fleshed out in certain areas (which are usually indicated as purposely left out to individual DMs to customize), sometimes certain areas of the material need to be cut and replaced entirely - and very rarely you ask yourself "why? just why?".
Sometimes I need to do some serious work.
Sounds nice, but doesn't change the facts: it's not a pebble, cespite the wishful thinking.
As much as I despise theorycrafting and character builds, this one made me laugh.
Well played, sir.
Doesn't the Dragon Age system use 3d6?
It does indeed.A rather different feeling, considering only the basics of attacking and dealing damage - low level monsters are really low but keep their danger level for a while longer, and boss type monsters are deathly scary pretty much forever.
It's not readily comparable to a d20-switched-to-3d6 system due to its inner variants for the magic system, class level abilities, and the stunt points system.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Only if resorting to cannibalism would be clearly and without any doubts in order to survive and thusly defeat a greater evil.And after that a life of atonement.
Otherwise a paladin would rather choose a martyr's death through starvation, staying true to his/hers code of honor and personal purity, in body, mind and spirit.
Being one of the original... patrons (before being a backer became commonplace) of Sinister Adventures timeframe, and having not folded my pledge, I can't praise enough Louis, Nick, Rich, all the awesome guys who contributed to the effort, and the fine people at Frog God games that made this possible.
Same answer from the other thread:
Well, after my disappointment in the D&D Next playtest, I fell for it, downloaded the pdf and read it (thank you tablet!).
It's actually good enough to take the place of the Rules Cyclopedia (maybe not the free pdf, but the hardbacks will surely do), as a medium-low complexity game, it does feel like the D&D I grew up with, and perhaps I'll whip up a game or two using the rules.
It's not a ruleset that entices me to cast aside other - more interesting - games, both less, equally, or more complex.
It's nice, it has the right feel, but lacks pretty much everything else that make an RPG interesting.
Let's hope that splatbook apocalypse will not kill it too soon.
Doesn't mean you have to like it.Well, I do, but I also wouldn't (or couldn't) force it on anyone.
Be extra careful with healing necessities and time needed for getting back in action. Try something alchemical to make up with the lack of magic, maybe with some fun after effects.
Same with large groups of bad guys swarming the PCs, as they'll sorely miss crowd control spells.
Take care using monsters that feature really high AC values. These take into consideration magic buffs to be properly dealt with, and relying only on class levels, feats and ability scores could be dangerous, especially at higher (8+) levels.
That said, you'll discover that player ingenuity and creativity will solve most problems, and some "fodder" monsters will take back their nastiness.
HPs (for playing characters) is a catch-it-all value that includes fatigue, stress, demoralization, and actual damage.
It's strange that a game so much concerned with combat (not just PFRPG, the whole D&D/D20 thingie since the start) it keeps chugging along such grey areas...
Hayato Ken wrote:
Note that some people say everything but a horse is an exotic mount.
I myself usually go along that baseline, but then again, the camel and the dromedary are pretty common mounts in real world cultures, and boy! they do ride quite differently than the horse, and use very different saddles and equipment.
In a fantasy world where riding dogs are common (even if only in some cultures/races), the saddle and equipment for riding a wolf should differ very little from the norm. Trained animal, tamed animal, or whatever.
Honestly I have no real arguments against it. Tabletop lingo (PC, character, etc.) was used since a while ago in most digital RPGs - both single and multiplayer - and now the digital lingo is making its way back to tabletop. The same could be said about calling low level enemies "mobs".Cross-pollination, feedback influences, whatever you want to call it.
I'm more concerned about talking about PCs/toons only as tanks, DPS, healbots and such, limiting the tabletop experience in equivalents from the digital framework and discarding or not taking in consideration anything else (social interaction, investigation) that doesn't quite compare to combat proficiency.
But that's just me.
James Jacobs wrote:
A few of the NPCs will probably utilize some Mythic rules, but the AP is for non-mythic PCs.
James Jacobs wrote:
This adventure path isn't about baby steps. It's about us pushing the boundaries after doing over a dozen other adventure paths, some of which have started to take those baby steps ("Rasputin Must Die") already. The time for baby steps is behind us! :-)
Enthusiasm falling... back on the fence.
Perhaps a little devil's advocate, but I sure would be angry if my GM saved classes for special snowflake NPCs and denied them to his PCs. The players are supposed to be the heroes, not the supporting cast.
While I absolutely agree, I also feel compelled to say that they're the heroes because of what they do, not (only) because of what they are.Important NPCs must be special as much as the playing characters, even exotic or exceedingly rare, and even moreso due to their limited playing time in a show focused on the PCs.
Players requesting to have "all the options" to perform as protagonists is not a valid argument - at least in my book.
Seen it. Once, then they learned.
Short story, the group charged into melee, crashing headlong into an orc multi-tribal horde.
The rest of the party went through a lot of hurt, while trying to get their comrades back to safety, harassed by lowly troops and slowed by the occasional elite enemy (orc warchiefs, ogres, an handful of giants), and ran for their lives as soon as possible.
Back at their base camp, they also suffered the indignity of an army officer berating them for risking their lives of most capable warriors and spellcasters just for a few dozen orcs.
tl;dr: split the party. Wreck their strategy.
1. Yup. Tabletop RPGs, boardgames, wargames (even that old grognard stuff with hex maps and card counters!!), videogames (mostly puzzle/platforms, RPGs and FPS).
2. Not needed.
3. Not needed. We agreed very early in our relationship that each one had his/her own hobbies and need for space/personal time. Gamers do understand.
4. At my FLGS, while buying the Tome of Horrors. Ah!
5. She pushes me further, with something along the line of "Oohh, shiny...get it!". Can be hard on the wallet.
6. No spawn.
I do have a tablet, with a couple of CAD apps, which I do use to make annotations, corrections and updates "on the field" (naval engineering).
Do I appreciate the sheer usefulness of the whole thing? Sure I do.
Do I like the CAD interface (precision, usability, responsiveness, etc.)? Nope.
Do I think the two things should look the same on the two very different environments (desktop with keyboard and mouse vs tablet with touchscreen)? Nope, again.
Is the tablet apt to be used for prolonged typing (as in writing lines of code, or just detailed reports), or digital drawing with layers, filters, effects, and a hundred other professional kinds of work? Nope, for the third time.
An handheld, portable device such as a touchscreen tablet is really usful for minor corrections, small and absolutely not complex updates, or even generic sketching a layout of a new work. But it's close to useless for detailed, in depth or long term working (don't get me started on batteries duration).
A single, unified user interface is ANTTDNW (another nice trick that does not work), at least with the current technology.
As far as user interfaces are involved, unifying the desktop and mobile environment is simply stupid. I'm not using my CAD the same way I'm fiddling with my tablet, get over it once and for all.
And this is true for a hundred other professional softwares.