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

hogarth's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 13,087 posts (18,971 including aliases). 5 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 5 Pathfinder Society characters. 37 aliases.


1 to 50 of 311 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
Drogon wrote:

Like so many who started playing D&D in the 80s... a halfling thief was my first character. ...

So, I have a soft spot for players of true thieves.
I can't help chuckling at this. :)

I thought it was interesting that Drogon, a real-life shopkeeper, seems to have a soft spot for people who steal from shopkeepers. ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Galnörag wrote:
So, to quit my rambling, is asking players to "colour inside the line" GM hubris, or a reasonable request? and corollary is it ever okay for a GM, or a gaming group by mutual accent to install an electric fence on a few of those lines to enforce compliance? And how can it be done without hard feelings.

I think it's good to get all the players and the GM on the same page when it comes to the tone of the campaign, and this seems to be the purpose of that.

In the past when I've run adventure paths, I usually prefaced it with a comment like: "This is an adventure path, so it runs primarily in one direction. So it's up to you folks to create characters who want to move in that one direction as a cooperating party, and I'll work with you to make that as smooth as possible. If you think that's too restrictive, then this may not be the right game for you."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CRobledo wrote:
Instead, how about you take the problem player aside and explain to him that it is bad gaming sportsmanship to overpower encounters to the point that other players do not feel they are having fun.

I highly recommend that the other players should talk to Player A, not the GM. Why? Because the other players are much better judges over whether they're actually having fun or not than the GM is!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My suggestions:

If you're unhappy when Player A pulls his grappling trick against lone casters, let someone else GM the scenarios which feature lone casters.

If other players are unhappy when Player A pulls his trick, they should tell him so.

If nobody is unhappy when Player A pulls his trick (which is quite possibly the case), nothing needs to be done.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Mogyorodi wrote:
You can't call a horse or a pony a lion, for previously stated reasons.

I would amend this to say "You can't call a horse or a pony a lion out loud". What you call your horse and/or pony in your own mind is up to you; there aren't any PFS Thought Police to worry about. :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord Foul II wrote:
then why is making undead evil in a way that leaves: craft construct, inflict spells, and raise dead NOT evil?

(a) Because desecrating the dead is icky.

(b) Because you're messing with someone's soul against their will (e.g. an undead creature can't be brought back to life with Raise Dead, so there must be some kind of soul shenanigans going on).

I'm just glad you didn't ask "why are vibrators legal, but necrophilia isn't?"


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think 99% of homebrewed campaigns suck, and if you don't think that applies to you, it probably applies double.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't give your bad guys Color Spray and Sleep unless you want people to get knocked unconscious or asleep.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I have no desire to go back to AD&D. I think the vast majority of changes with 3E/Pathfinder were for the better.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Hadesblade wrote:
Really miss the 80's when game content wasn't about making political statements or "inclusion".

And we used to eat deviled eggs and drive around like speed demons -- excuse me, I mean baatezued eggs and speed tanar'ris.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In 1980, my dad went on a business trip and brought us back a copy of the D&D Basic box set. I was 6 and my brother was 8. Best present ever!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

In my experience, "roll initiative" is not synonymous with "there's no point in talking, kill everyone".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Was my role playing too much?

Not at all, since you politely put it in an email so you wouldn't be monopolizing game time. And there was nothing wrong with the other players' reactions either; they're not morally obligated to be interested in the stuff that you find interesting about the game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Helaman wrote:

My fav was

Mission "Recover this egg - be careful not to break it".
Me on finding egg "I use mage hand"
GM "Nope - has to be disable device or sleight of hand"
Me "Levitation then pack it? Unseen Servant?"
GM "No, has to do with one of those skills... I suppose its as much as packing the egg etc as picking it up... I think... Anyways thats what the book says".

Or another favourite

Mission "Bring back a drawing of the cage used"
Me "No need. I'll bring back the whole actual cage. Its right here after all and I have a boat to put it on and everything"
GM "That doesn't work - need Knowledge: Engineering to sketch it or you fail"

Good news! Even if faction missions are going away, we can still use those valuable techniques with the main or secondary scenario mission. ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Lemure pornography aficionados


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't like the term "casual player". I prefer to categorize players as "hardcore" and "not hardcore".

What's my definition of a hardcore PFS player? Anyone who has ever complain-o-bragged more than once about how easy PFS scenarios are is a hardcore player in my book.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The oddest table I've been in was three bards and two wizards, I think.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
karkon wrote:
TL;DR: Depending on the organization of the dungeon and the relationships between the different factions resting in the dungeon can be easy or not.

Again, it's obviously campaign dependent, but that's usually the kind of information that's obvious to the GM, but not necessarily obvious to the PCs (at least at first) unless the GM is having pity on them.

Now I can certainly believe that there are some parties out there who do all kinds of scouting and picking up rumours and who know everything about the lay of the land before they even start their dungeon delving, but that never came up in any of my campaigns. If we ever slept a dungeon, we just hoped that the GM would take it easy on us.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't know. To me "bestial qualities such as dragon scales, fish scales, fur, manes, or talons" sounds more on the Sara Jessica Parker end of the horsiness scale than My Little Pony.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Philip Dhollander wrote:
In our case, it was about the game and the fact that it was too much (two days basically), the fact that she did not have a real hobby and was stuck at home and the fact that she finds it a 'silly hobby'.

That's basically my wife's attitude: why should I want to waste so much time out of the house when I could be at home, entertaining her? We've settled on one night every two weeks being a happy medium, however. (Although there was that one time when she was griping that my one game every two weeks was interfering with her going to the gym every night! Gimme a break...)

Slaunyeh wrote:
But it's a waste of time! You could be mowing the lawn or fix the door to the basement instead. You know, be a real man rather than playing some stupid game once every few weeks.

Ha! My wife occasionally comments: "Why don't you get a hobby that MAKES money? Like, instead of playing games, you could write games!"

And yet she never finds it funny when I suggest: "Why don't you learn to make shoes instead of going shopping for shoes?" Odd how that works...

;-) (If you're reading this, I love you, honey!)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neongelion wrote:
I'm going to run a Pathfinder adventure path very soon (Reign of Winter) for these same people, ie players that prefer detail-oriented, "realistic" kinds of games. I'm fairly well read on the rules but I certainly don't have them mastered, so I want to ask you folks: can Pathfinder handle games that aren't very mechanically crunchy?

I think I'm missing something here. It almost sounds like your players like a mechanically crunchy game, so you're trying to trick them into a game that's not mechanically crunchy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You put your down down. You thrust your pelvis -- UNGH! You thrust your pelvis -- UNGH! You thrust your pelvis -- UNGH!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you don't mind 3.5E, I'd also vote for Age of Worms or Savage Tide.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
Hey, the wealth rules don't work in a 3.x variant. That's unbelievable! I mean, it's been true for 13 years, but still! Unbelievable!

I actually don't have many problems with money in 3E/Pathfinder. Most "complaints" I see run along the lines of:

  • If you spend 8 hours a day doing something, people will pay you for it and you can make money FOREVER!!! (In modern terms, we call that "having a job".)
  • Some things in D&D are incredibly expensive and poor people would never be able to afford them!!! (I feel the same way when I pass a Bentley or Lamborghini dealership...)
    However, I agree with the original poster that prices for land and buildings have always been on the high side in D&D. I imagine that's supposed to make it challenging for adventurers to buy real estate, but that makes no sense when you consider that by level 5 (or whatever), most adventurers are the equivalent of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett.


  • 4 people marked this as a favorite.

    PC 1: "I'm doing this for Taldor!"

    PC 2: "...what the *&#$?"


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    I Hate Nickelback wrote:
    Though I somewhat disagree about the oracle/cleric list. Animate dead with no material component as a 2nd level word? Yes please!

    The superstar spell that I like is Alignment Shield. Rerolling saves against any kind of "spell or effect" as long as it's not from a neutral creature? That's comparable to an improved version of Break Enchantment, but it's a first level spell!


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    Also, the number of expendables you can buy and how much time you can spend pre-buffing makes a huge difference (e.g. a PC pre-buffed with a potion or scroll of Invisibility has a huge advantage over someone who's not).

    P.S. Can I spend my 500 gp on 20 guard dogs? ;-)


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    This is essentially cheating! Okay, you could state a long list of 'what ifs' before you roll any attacks, but at that point it would be quicker to roll them one at a time.

    I agree that "over-rollers" can be as annoying as "under-rollers".

    Recently, we had this type of situation:

    GM: Roll two Fort saves...
    Player: I got a 14 and a 2!
    GM: ...um, one was supposed to be for paralysis and one for disease. Okay, I'll roll a d6 -- 1-3 means the 14 is the paralysis save, 4-6 means it's the disease save.

    (Note how rolling two dice super-quickly turned out to add an extraneous roll after the fact, slowing things down anyways.)


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Scale mail costs 50 gp.

    Kikko armor costs 30 gp, and it has a better max Dex bonus, a better armor check penalty, a better arcane spell failure chance, and it's lighter. On the other hand...there is no other hand. Kikko armor is just better.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    People get really severe cases of metagamophobia and will make the most asinine rulings in order to avoid any appearance of it -- to the extend of declaring mass mental blockages and selective blindness on all of the characters in the game world.

    My personal pet peeve is skeletons. In the real world, most people would be smart enough to use a hammer to smash up a pile of bones instead of an icepick, but in D&D-land players and GMs are suddenly scared to let PCs use an ounce of sense.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    If I thought the DC was enough to succeed with a "take 10" (as several people have suggested), I would probably be peeved if the GM only told me afterwards that my calculation was incorrect and that I couldn't take back my action. But I'm not sure if that's exactly what's going on in this case.

    When I'm GMing, I try to help the players (not necessarily the PCs) in every way possible.


    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    Bears go to ten. Owlbears go to eleven.


    7 people marked this as a favorite.

    I wouldn't gripe at having that PC at my Pathfinder Society table, personally.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    My player is a jerk. How do I fix this?
    Would you play with a GM who did this?
    Why are players so (fill in blank) nowadays?
    Why does (fill in blank) publish books with so many errors in them?


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

    "Some of the options listed below involve retraining features of your character that are essentially permanent parts of your heritage, such as a sorcerer's bloodline. The cost of retraining these things presumably includes magical or alchemical alterations to your body. The GM might rule that these changes are unavailable in the campaign, are only available under rare circumstances, take longer, are temporary, require some sort of quest, or are more expensive than the listed cost."

    Ultimate Combat page 188, paragraph 7

    Oh, sure. It's easy to answer these kinds of questions if you cheat and look in the book. Newb.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    As an aside, the blink dog is a poor addition to the Summon Monster list since summoned monsters are incapable of planar travel like blinking.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Shadowborn wrote:
    Been there, done that. I usually end up getting hosed. As a player, I always say I'll never do it in a game again, but then I keep playing characters that would take the chance in a heartbeat.

    My problem is that I see the other PCs getting good stuff and I think "One draw can't hurt..."

    Yes. Yes, it can.


    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    Step 1: Cast Grease on his +5 greatsword.
    Step 2: When he drops it, grab it and run like hell!
    Step 3: Profit.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    casiel wrote:
    In summary, I feel that Angel Wings is a raw deal compared to what other classes receive. How do you all feel about this?

    I feel that it's at least ten times better than Angelic Blood, at any rate.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    secher_nbiw wrote:

    I like what Steve Geddes and the others are saying. Rather than taking offense (which I understand), keep it in-game. Instead of moving the monk 40 and arguing, move him 40 feet and describe how every step is perfectly placed, how he strides forward with practised economy of motion.

    As a player, I'd then be paying more attention to what you're telling me about this guy than counting the steps he's taking.

    I agree: I think there's a gap between what you're describing and what the players are seeing. If you describe a guy moving forward in "a blur of speed", for instance, then the players won't be surprised if the guy is moving faster than a regular human. And if you describe a wraith's "eyes glimmering with malevolent intelligence", then they'll realise that some undead are smart. Etc., etc.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I would probably attack unconscious PCs only if it made no sense to do otherwise (e.g. in Sammy T's example, it wouldn't make sense for the bad guy to disadvantage himself in order to avoid hitting unconscious PCs with area attacks).


    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    Robertson is apparently confusing D&D with WoW -- the latter is a video game, and there are examples of people doing stuff like not sleeping or going to work or feeding their kids, because they got too into it.

    I think he's talking about the Intellivision game. ;-)


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    I dream of a day when faction points are gone completely, and all factions can live in peace and harmony.

    Imagine there's no factions
    I wonder if you can
    No freeing slaves or macguffins
    A brotherhood of man
    Imagine all pathfinders, sharing all the loot...


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Azaelas Fayth wrote:
    Tamago wrote:
    I think my favourite bit is Merisiel's reaction to the treasure horde. Wheeeeeeee! :-D
    Mine would be Seltyiel getting pulled back.

    Friggin' caryatid columns...


    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    I have to admit that I'm not a big fan of the philosophy "it's okay if X is better than Y because only bad guys will take X". Ugh.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Jusomagna wrote:
    upon reflection, I suppose it's not really his crafting so much as he's really REALLY good at exploiting the rules, especially with magic.

    That's what I suspected. Taking Craft Wondrous Item is a symptom of him being a power-gamer (or whatever your preferred term is), not the cause.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Mark Hoover wrote:

    Does anyone else have any SUCCESS stories so we can make the first-ever positive rant thread?

    I have several success stories about joining a group that wasn't a good fit, bowing out gracefully, and then later finding a group that's just about perfect for me.

    I don't have any success stories about joining a group that wasn't a good fit and trying to change it from within, however.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Andrew Christian wrote:
    I believe the Blog that informed the FAQ indicated the extra tricks per higher intelligence.

    Not in the blog itself, but in the comments to the blog.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    CRobledo wrote:
    I'd think a non-combat trained dog would rather flee that defend itself if attacked.

    Would it make a difference if it was a wolf instead of a dog? If not, can I tell that to the GM every time our party gets attacked by wild animals? "Sorry, they don't have Combat Training so they'd rather run away."

    ;-)


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Rycaut wrote:
    How does sharing a language factor into Handle Animal checks? (less common of a factor for Animal Companions though a gnome druid or any druid who has cast Speak With Animals could be in combat and speaking with their companion)

    You beat me to it. Speak with Animals says that a friendly animal "may do some favor or service for you". Does that supercede the trick/Handle Animal rules? What about intelligent animals who have taken the Linguistics skill: would they similarly be willing to perform favors or services?

    What about animals acting in self-defense: are they also limited by the type and number of tricks they know? It doesn't seem right that a wolf without the Attack trick would never bite anyone, but on the other hand it doesn't seem right that a wolf without the Flank trick can flank on its own initiative but not when ordered to attack.

    1 to 50 of 311 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 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.