golem101's page

Gamers are oh so lazy. ;D

I'd like to thank the awesome Paizo Customer Service (Erik!) for helping me solve a minor but vexing issue with my subscription copy.

Darwyn wrote:

I'd like to see Paizo rewrite the Stronghold Builder's Guidebook, personally.

I'd like this. Especailly if it got into more detail on the construction and mechanics for running a stronghold (economics, etc.). I do this in my own game, but having Paizo do it would be good. It helps the longevity of a campaign for the PCs to have something to do besides level up constantly.

Also as Paizo moves forward a rules compendium type book would be great to tie together the latest rules / errata to run the game.

While I feel that it would be a good fit for a large chapter in a "Complet e Subsystems" hardcover, getting it as a stand-alone 64-pages softcover would be awesome nonetheless.

Yes. We need some GM-focused softcovers. Even Companion-like staple bounds.

Has ROLL-playing replaced ROLE-playing for good?

"Don't tell me that my character is supposed to be a hero- his abilities and interaction with the other characters will dictate his role. If he has the capability of performing heroic deeds, he may evolve into a hero, if not- perhaps he will just be a disgruntled taxi driver."

For this player, yes.

His character is defined by the numbers, the racial/class abilities, and the equipment written on his sheet rather and the win/fail ratio that these elements determine, rather than by the actions he does (successful or not), the choices he makes (wise or not so much), the ambitions/desires/agendas he pursues (rightful or wicked), and so on.

I've seen players enjoy characters that rolled VERY poorly stat wise and had sub-standard loot even at higher levels, and others going on tirades for a character with 3 characteristics ranging in the 18+ and a single dump stat not even with a negative modifier.

It's not even roll-play vs role-play, it's the gut feeling that a player is protraying a super-heroic character able to shrug off any situation instead of having to risk limb and life at any other corner of the dungeon.
Some like only the former, some are at the opposite of the spectrum.

Whatever floats their boats.

Dotted for reference. Solid idea.

Never really liked the idea of anthropomorphic animal-themed races for PCs.

Monstruous humanoids (minotaurs, lizardfolk, etc.) are OK, but even remotely cutey-cuddly domestic... things just don't fit in my book. Since the Rakasta.

there is such a thing as "no action" is there not?

Yup there is; under the table "Actions in Combat" scroll down until you find the section "not an action".

BQ wrote:

James will there ever be a book that contains all these subsystems? I like the subsystems as my group and I are world builders so we like to have in game things to develop.

Plus I find the subsystems give a nice bit of flavour to the campaigns.

A book that contains all of these subsystems, revised and expanded as necessary, and perhaps joined by additional subsystems, would not only be cool, but would allow us to use such elements in Adventure Paths, modules, and other products with MUCH GREATER ease.

I would love us to do a book like this, and have wanted us to do a book like this since the start, pretty much.

Yes, please.

While I currently feel a little swamped by rules-bloat (maybe I have a low threshold), getting such a book would be a priority.

bugleyman wrote:

Vic Wertz wrote:

It is admittedly on its very last legs right now, and probably won't survive to our actual tenth anniversary, but considering it wasn't brand-new when we got it, it has held up very, very well.

Hey Vic: In case you're not aware, many copiers contain hard drives holding an image of everything that has ever been copied on the machine. If your copier does die, please be sure to securely erase, degauss, or destroy the hard drive therein. ;-)

The idea of our copier having a hard drive in it is equivalent to the idea of a Commodore 64 having a cold fusion hyper-processor.

The idea of my old but still working C=64, lovingly packaged and tucked away in storage, having a spanking new cold fusion hyper-processor is three kinds of awesome.

golem101 wrote:

The "$1 for everything" part reminded me of that weird spot in Robocop.

It has to be a helluva photocopier!

It is admittedly on its very last legs right now, and probably won't survive to our actual tenth anniversary, but considering it wasn't brand-new when we got it, it has held up very, very well.

Viking funeral!

Lo there do I see my toner.
Lo there do I see my sensor.
Lo there do I see my papers and my power cords.
Lo there do I see the line of my print runs back to the beginning.
Lo they do call to me
they bid me take my place among them in the Halls of Valhalla,
where the brave may live forever.

Mainly it was the fact that no matter how helpful the npc was trying to be he kept stating that he didn't believe him, he never had his character roll a sense motive, he just kept to his guns that the npc was going to lead them into a trap(which in the adventure he does). Once the trap was sprung he kept telling the other players where they should move to to avoid hidden thieves.

this along with other happenings has lead me to this feeling.

I thank you all for your help

Insta-kick.

The "$1 for everything" part reminded me of that weird spot in Robocop.

It has to be a helluva photocopier!

They're nice, but I managed to get a positive Will saving throw against nostalgia.

I've never liked the "Vancian" spell-slot system. It's the one thing that disappoints me about Pathfinder--although I realize it's there because Pathfinder is a much-upgraded version of 3E. I'd really prefer a system where all casters burn "mana points" to cast spells. I have been playing around with the Words of Power rules in Ultimate Magic, but is there a spell-point type system out there which I can simply swap into Pathfinder and go? I don't care if it's a commercial set or home-brew as long as it fits the bill.

The Thieves' World magic system (as in Thieves' world Player Guide by Green Ronin) has a mana-gathering check, based on a modifier similar to the Base Attack Bonus - as it's both class- and level- based.

It's a sort of hybrid between the skill check and the point-based systems.

The check must beat a DC value set by the spell level, the caster affinity with that kind of magic (spellcasting and rituals), the area magic level, etc.
A check that doesn't gather enough mana to cast the spell is not wasted, as it decreases the DC of a subsequent check.

The caster can start the day with some "ready to go" spells, as he can gather beforehand a limited amount of mana, and he can canvert the gathered mana on the fly for a different spell (tactical choices).

There's a simple appendix for translating 3.5 spells into this system, and it's pretty much as good for the PFRPG system.

Upset him again changing stuff, for the kicks, to prove that you're the DM and your game is not messed with so easily, and to make sure he's reading ahead. Then talk to him, privately.

If that does not work, change stuff again, upset him once more. The talk to him , in public.

If even that does not work, talk with the rest of the gaming group about having the cheater kicked. Straining the DM patience is not a good thing for anyone.

A book about aberrations (Lords of Madness), full of alien, inhuman, mind breaking - but not necessarily Lovecraftian - creatures to be unleashed upon Golarion.

A book about implementing war in actual play and not in some abstract sub-system (Heroes of Battle).

A new setting hardcover that deals with the inland areas of Casmaron, with the rough hard edges of the original Campaign Setting and without the content polishing of the Inner Sea World Guide (sorry: it's as beautiful to look at as it feels impersonal and aseptic to read, when compared to the original HC).

You get one specific weapon.
While it can be argued that most blunt type weapons work similarly (mace and warhammer, but less so a quartestaff), swords and axes - both slashing - or spears and daggers - both piercing - are intuitively quite different in the way they're handled and the battle style/strategy involved in using them.

So, one feat, one weapon. If you find this too much restrictive, talk with your DM about weapon groups (a 3.5 concept, but easily adapted to PFRPG).

Nice!

The gaseous head and the gaseous body merge together into a larger, formless gaseous form; afterwards, the body reforms complete, without severed appendages.

It's a kind of magic.

Welcome to the madness, Alexandra and Jerome!

Remember the basic rules: no bright light, no water spillings, and most of all, no food after midnight.
You have to guess who I'm talking about.

Pictograms, like paleolithic cave paintings done goblin-style.
Mostly focusing on things that die burning, screaming, twisting, crumbling and messily splattering innards all around. A lot of do & don't examples along the way, each of them clearly pointing to mistakes to avoid unless the goblin has a death wish...

Oooooh, nice.

I'll blunder a request for all my gaming group (I'm the DM), so it'll be a rather long list of stuff... let me start with just two of them, as I understand over-requesting would be bad for the artist (other than quite impolite!). I'd like to give them the portraits as a present of sorts.

- Half Orc male barbarian/cleric of Gorum, wearing chain shirt over simple and tattered/ragged clothing; rough and savage looking, almost feral in features - more orc than human blood in his veins. 6' tall and over 250 pounds in weight. Equipped with two handed waraxe, a spiked gauntlet (spikes are made from wolf/beast fangs) on his left hand, and three spears as ranged weapons.

- Human female cleric of Kurgess, wearing splint mail over cerimonial vest, exceedingly clean and neat looking; has shoulder lenght wavy blond hair, is just under 6' tall and slim (athletic looking, kinda like field jumping athletes). She's equipped with heavy wooden shield, morning star and light crossbow as ranged weapon.

1. Print/photocopy the adventure portion of the module so I don't have to ruin my lovely Paizo products.

2. Read the adventure.
3. Highlight and underline the portions of each encounter that I think I'll need at a quick glance or might miss/forget at the table.
4. Make extra copies of player handouts that may be needed.

After the session:

5. Type up what happened in a quick one page summary and email it out to all concerned. This allows them to email any solo undertakings for their characters and keeps any players that missed out that session up to speed.

I'm sure there's more but that's the basics.

Very good checklist.

Let me add a couple extras:
2.1 Double check the maps. Nothing slows down the game like a DM looking for the proper spot to run an encounter.
2.2 Triple check the creatures/NPCs stats on the Bestiaries/PF appendix. First, be sure to know their special abilities, magic powers, spell-like abilities, quirks, weaknesses. Try to think ahead for a proper strategy to run them, interacting with the players' characters (this spell first, this attack second, this feat if, try to run away for a quick healing, etc.).

5.1 Look on the Paizo blog and in the PF wiki to find extra images and tidbits of info about geography, religion, lore and so on that are pertaining to the adventure. Like something about the Hellknights when the characters are about to arrive in Magnimar (Rise of the Runelords) or before starting the campaign in Korvosa (Curse of the Crimson Throne) or Westcrown (Council of Thieves).
Add these to the e-mails as background material/extra knowledge for the players (just don't overdo - a short paragraph is enough). When you'll make a reference during the game they'll know the implications, reacting "more in character".

Simple answer: too many "sacred cow" spells to deal with.

Real answer: the problems stand between the chairs and the character sheets, not in the rules. Deal with them. With fire, pointy things and a maniacal laughter.

While I stated to myself "you need no more hardcovers dealing with rules, options and stuff", I'd actually fall for a Ultimate Subsystems book. Please add to the list an investigation, a library use/information retrieval, and a social/political debate subsystem.
An hardcover that also includes the Crafting/Stealth and Rituals parts, obviously.

Stefan Hill wrote:

I personally, as GM, like the limit.

That's all the answer you need. Besides, if only 2 out of 5 are complaining then they're outvoted.

Besides, +2 weapons at level 4 are just silly. you shouldn't even be thinking about +2 until level 6.

Agreed.

Complaining could be acceptable on a 25% basis. 3 out of 4 sounds quite good.

Nope. In my run of SC, with a group of less-than-optimized characters, the real threat has been the random encounters table during the trek into that certain Abyss layer, spamming an endless horde of babau demons which slowly but steadily eroded any player's resource.

Aushanna, while a dangerous opponent, never made into the "legendary enemy/TPK machine" level.

Gorbacz wrote:

But then again, there's always Xanesha :)

Very soon now the older fans can tell the newer fans, "back in my day Xanesha was a TPK machine, you kids have it soooo easy ...."

I know I will. ;D

Yes, some (most) PF APs are harsh on the players - and that's the way it should be.
You're playing an adventurer, someone who risks his own life and soul, not just an occasional scratch, bruise or easily (magically) healed cut. Death should be a constant - even if not too frequent - threat.

I've come to be really annoyed by the modern concept of "I'm a hero, I should survive" in gaming.

Cheliax has some very Italian-sounding individual names (even if some are downright silly), has a Roman empire-like vibe - shared with the byzantinian Taldor - and Castruccio Irovetti does indeed sound like a late-medieval name (like those from the signorie period). Moreover a number of smaller city-states/places in River Kingdoms scream for a Renaissance Italy theme.

However a "full blown" Italy-like nation is not in Golarion. Which is good, IMHO (I find such direct and complete translations somewhat disappointing).

Scott Betts wrote:

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 agree. A way too fast turnover that does not catch as many new players as planned and grates on the established fanbase.

... and pretty much spot on!

golem101 wrote:

Do something dramatic, spectacular, and bold.

Be brave and say "we don't want to appease everyone or that other game crowd, we want to have our game working properly".

Unfortunately this IMHO was exactly what they did with 4e. I agree they need something bold, but they also need to make sure it does appease a great majority of current and lapsed players, and is also delivered in an apporpriate manner - PDFs as well as books, DDI for those who need it, organised play, good marketing etc.

Nope. 4E was built upon the perceived "new standards" of the younger generation of gamers, trying to translate and duplicate the most appeasing elements of other gaming media.

Without discussing the results, this is one of the great culprits of the "fractured base" (along the most failing PR campaign I've ever seen): losing sight of what is making the difference and building upon its strenghts and advantages, and instead working only to fill the gaps, with an impossible goal.

Dramatic, spectacular, not really bold, and doomed.
Thanks (again) but no thanks (again).

I'm gonna be a bit harsh, but bluntly sincere.

Buzzwords. That's what I think of the stated intentions.

Until I see hard data of what 5E is gonna be, I'm going to keep a healthy distance. I've been burned once or twice by hype (in good and bad ways), and I've learned the lesson.

I will look into this new edition with an open mind and some hopes. No bad feelings, emotional luggage or unburied axe looming around - despite my strong dislike of 4E and less than pleasant experience with WotC PR strategies.

However, at the first hint of 5E not being the best next thing since sliced bread, I'll be heading towards other shores.
I feel too old and with too much "previous stuff" options still left unused to scrap everything, wipe my mental blackboard once again and start off learning yet another rule system just because one marginal element has been polished, or a little of everything has been marginally touched to fine tune the overall feeling of the game.

Do something dramatic, spectacular, and bold.
Be brave and say "we don't want to appease everyone or that other game crowd, we want to have our game working properly".
Anything less, and it will be just another rulebook, without any strong, long-lasting grip on the "fractured base" so much referred to.

golem101 wrote:

Fuzion works mighty fine.

I love you so much right now, and I don't even know you.

I have the VOTOMs RPG and the Artesia RPG books, both based on the Fuzion system (the latter heavily customized), and I love them dearly.

Fuzion works mighty fine.

The church of Asmodeus, worshiping a supremely Lawful entity, would be anti-Dark Tapestry for sure.
So, the Cheliax government would be a primary sponsor of any such organization.

As I pre-order both the Razor Coast and The Anarchist Gamemaster Cookbook, these are really good news. Well, maybe just promising rumors.
But good to hear them nonetheless.

Undead are powered by magic. Which means you could also have a blight/pox infused with negative energy, and zombies raising from the corpses left behind by the spreading disease - but again, they're animated by the magic element, not the viral one - which is just the vessel for the undead curse.
Sort of the ghoul fever, or mummy rot.

Werewolves suffer from a curse that twists genetics with powerful magicks. Deal with it.

Male, about to turn 37. Never served. Started with the Basic Red Box (Mentzer) in 1987, went through a bunch of different games/systems, 90% of the time played as the DM.

Get rid of AC as a single value that includes dodge, parry, block, and armor resistance.
Get rid of HPs as a single value that includes phisical wounds, fatigue, will to fight, and cool-headedness.

I once DMed a scene just like that. As the player was inclined to gain a numerical bonus rather than roleplaying it - and it was OK, instead of just going into graphical detail - I had him roll alternate Str and Cha checks against Con and Wis checks by the victim.
Each success gave him a +2 bonus to the final Intimidate roll (breaking the subject resolve), while each failure by at least 5 points a -2.

Even if I was winging it, the system seemed to work fine.

The expressions of anguish (while farting rainbows) and relief (when finishing the rainbow-blasting) are priceless.

I mean, what do you say to this?

"Go find another table/group/game, thank you."

No you are not wrong, at all.

Incidentally, it's the same thing I'd say to a DM that routinely abuses rule 0.

golem101 wrote:

The shadow gal featuress nice art, but I won't be using it/allowing it as a playable race.

Cool... because neither does Bestiary 3. She's a CR 4 creature with racial Hit Dice.

Good thing.

Condolences, mdt.

I'll do my best to fit a NPC named Q'Oshea in my next game.

I like 3.x. I like Pathfinder a lot. But the buffs are wearing me down a bit, guys. The buffs are wearing me down.

Thoughts?

First thing, I completely agree with your point of view. Buffs have grown in variety, versatility and options available, but when they pile up they also become such a burden for the game they actually grind away from balance and ease of play.

I apply a house rule derived from the healing optional rules presented in Monte Cook's Book of Experimental Might: magic users might cast whatever kind of buff they like, in any number, but the recipient (target) might be loaded with only so many of them (level + Int/Wis/Cha mod, chosen by the player).
A character with 4 available "buff slots" might have two long-term effects going on, and keep the other two available for short duration and/or situational buffs.

You have an ability score enhancing item (or an item constantly enhancing some other kind of bonus)? Good for you, but though luck with the buffs: it eats away a buffing slot.
This has the added effect of A) not destroying abilities such as the bard inspire courage one, or the short duration spell and B) it also limits the xmas tree effect on the players side, as he has to choose whether to keep a minor item and give up a buffing option or not.

Yes, I'm harsh. But I find the game too much high-powered, and as a result too much hassle to manage.

Regarding tactics, from level 6 onwards I also use pre-buffed baddies. They've grown up to that level not by chance, but using tactics as smart as the character's - if not even better - so it wouldn't be strange for them to be already prepared for the chance to fight/be ambushed.
Estote parati.

Nice look on the linnorm, great to see the demodands are back (fond memories of them in Cauldron, yes, DMs can feel affection), good looking big spider critter.
The shadow gal featuress nice art, but I won't be using it/allowing it as a playable race. FR has burned me out on really overdone shadow stuff.

I DM. Last night my players hit level 4 in the middle of a dungeon. They bashed down a bunch of skeletons, but they lost a ton of hitpoints in the process.

I told them they had leveled, and they said that in their previous games whenever they had leveled they had instantly gotten all their hit points back.

Now, to me this doesn't make much sense. After all, they hadn't been healed in any way. And leveling up, to me, isn't some magical event with glowing sparklies that happens in-world, it's just a point at which the characters improve their skills and abilities.

So I said no, you don't get any hitpoints. Then I compromised and said they'd regain a number of current hit points equal to what they roll for their new level's hit die (so they'd still be missing the same amount from their new maximum).

I'm curious: how do other DMs usually handle this? Is it a common practice to give injured PCs some HP back when they level?

In the few and far between situations in which PCs level up in the middle of a dungeon/combat situation, they just get the new HPs as a new "max value", but they heal none. So, if you are at 26 HPs over a max value of 50 before level up and gain 6 new HPs (dice roll!), you are now at 26 HPs out of a max value of 56.

Yeah, I'm harsh.

However usually I give out XPs at the end of specific part of the adventure, and leveling requires at least a day of rest/light activity, so it's really strange to be in such a situation.

In the Revised Creature Collection the Firewrack dragon has a burrow speed but no fly speed, and it seems to themathically fit - it's a creature made of embers and smoldering flesh, so it should move in the burning ruins it makes along its path.
As the wrack dragons as a whole are "simulacra" of the real dragons made out of corrupted elemental stuff, the wings could be there for cosmetic reasons, but have no real function.