|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
While not a design or computer expert, I will say as a customer I like the Paizo web site. It could be a bit better, but it functions quite well for my needs.
As for hostility and ridicule from board veterans, please keep in mind from their point of view: someone who has been here a few minutes comes in and puts out a variation of "this place sucks and I know better than you".
It doesn't exactly make people sing your praises or look upon you in a good way, even if you may be correct.
I'd be interested in seeing more on this.
Moreover, even if you are using Golarion as a game world you are not required or obligated to use everything as stands.
To the original question: there are no flavor requirements, per say, for the classes. That said, someone may remove a class for mechanical reasons and/or enforce a regional requirement for certain classes, be they base class or archetypes as well as prestige classes.
As always, the GM should give ample warning and information and be ready to discuss it with the players.
The 117 might be a reference to the individual chapter files for some of the books. I have not downloaded the books in that manner, so it is just speculation.
@Dave Talbert: While you might not be planning on hosting or pirating, that doesn't mean that everyone else is on the up and up. Paizo has been putting up a fight against digital pirates for years -- and from what I understand giving some of them fits -- so it is in their best interest not to release the books without watermarks. Sure, there are probably cleaned copies out there, but turning off the watermarks on however many thousand copies of the books is just asking for trouble.
They are working on it. There should be red text at the top of the message board page with information and links about the problem. In short, new hardware is going in and corrections are being made for the massive amount of traffic they've gotten.
Chris Lambertz wrote:
For people who haven't read the whole thread and/or missed it, this is what the team has been up to. Staff has been working and posting here throughout the night.
The best way to be patient is to, in fact, be patient. Find something to do that isn't downloading the items in question while the tech team works on the issue.
Side note: I'm always amazed at the tech experts that arrive to nod knowingly at the problem and how they could fix it better, cheaper, and with results that outstrip the industry. The internet never ceases to amaze.
At most there are frustrated people. The interest is still there, given that people are here talking about how they cannot get the merchandise. Paizo didn't expect the huge response that they received on this promotion, and were not geared for that sort of demand on their servers in combination with their monthly release schedule.
It's 2016, let's show some patience. It's a great thing that there are this many people interested in the game.
Milo v3 wrote:
Perhaps so. But why isn't Inner Sea Gods full of mandates for the Good clerics to run around lighting up the cities and healing everyone? What is the Grand Plan for the good deities? Did any such plan die out with Aroden?
Milo v3 wrote:
There are people in real life that think asking their deity to answer prayers is demeaning or otherwise questioning the Grand Plan.
Humanity and the other races have been around a very long time. No one thought about this until the player characters show up? Why haven't the forces of Good done something about this before, or more? Why don't the gods interact more? Why haven't they solved all of the problems out there?
Some may consider it demeaning to the celestial being in question. One might also wonder if it were that easy to do, why hasn't anyone done it before? It isn't like the devs aren't aware of these capabilities as well.
For that matter, what are the ramifications of doing this? There are always reactions to everything.
These are the sorts of things that you have to work out when you go off the normal realm of the game and wander into grey and/or new areas.
I believe that the counter argument will be that you can train to be a new class in virtually no time -- by the rules -- and so therefore our peasants will thus be able to train without incurring the starting age rules.
I don't personally like that and have made adjustments to my own game to cut that off at the knees, but as I recall this came up a few pages ago.
You say, "That is a very interesting idea, Player, but that isn't the sort of game that I and/or the other players are interested in."
If the GM has already dealt with this sort of thing, refer them to the world document (that they should have read) and move on with game play.
If they haven't, be prepared to think on your feet as a GM or be willing to either let them do it (and deal with the consequences that comes with it for your game) or say no (and deal with the consequences of possible hurt feelings).
Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Therein lies the problem. There is no the solution. The books aren't covering this; we've seen was to bend what exists to maybe-sort of cover some parts of this, but nothing that delves into the subject.
What you're going to come to is that the GM and usually the players -- but not always, because there are players that don't want to be involved in world building and GMs that don't want players involved -- but they are going to decide if this is the sort of world that they want. Do you want a world that mirrors what people believe a fantasy realm would look like? Do you want steam punk? Do you want magic to emulate technology, as someone mentioned above with the simulated cell phones?
These questions are ones that people work out during the world building stages, usually, if they deal with it at all. Maybe the Gods don't want you to have ray guns. The world was built on an ancient burial ground that prevents technology from being developed. The magical geegaw has put the universe in a stasis loop and nothing advances.
This sort of thing is something that can be handled with a few lines in your world building document. If players want to play scientist instead of adventurer and that is something the rest of the table is willing to indulge then you get the joy of dealing with something outside the rules. If you are lucky, you've thought about this ahead of time, or are quick on your feet.
Now, for me I've worked this out on various worlds I've run. Moreover, I'm not really interested in watching someone play Mr. Wizard, nor are most of the players I've dealt with over the years. They'd deal with it for a bit and then would frankly tell Player A "Hey. Are we going to play or should we leave you and the GM to map out the physics of our imaginary game world?"
Don't get me wrong, there are those that find this sort of thing utterly fascinating. In my experience, that number falls off once it starts eating up valuable game time and interferes with actually playing the game.
The answer is going to be some version of GM judgement call. There isn't a clear cut rule that covers this sort of thing, and while I can only speak for myself, if/when people try to rules lawyer some form of "RAW says this so it MUST happen" the game tends to grind to a halt as we have a polite or even not so polite conversation about it.
The rules guide. They do not control, they do not command, they are not a set of chains. If they don't make sense, you move into an area that some people dislike, that of Rule 0/Gm Judgement calls/house rules. Those are part of the game too.
From my experience, the GM and the other players work together to teach new players how to play the game.
If you just hand someone the Core and Strategy Guide, I wouldn't expect a totally functioning character in a week; there is a lot of information to cover. Now, if they are an experienced player of other games they may have an advantage there and be ready and able with what many on the boards would consider a "good" character.
As far as players that still cannot calculate Power Attack and other things, I've seen players that are 10 year vets that basically don't care enough to learn parts of the game. They are focused on other aspects of the game, perhaps, or just forgetful, or don't care, or any other reason, but they simply don't retain the information.
In any of this, I wouldn't consider teaching a burden. Everyone has a personal responsibility to learn, but if the GM or other players don't feel any special need to help then they don't have much right to complain as well if the player isn't on the level they'd like.
You simply cannot follow the current rules and avoid some form of magitech explosion at some point. The power of unlimited casting in multiple venues is simply too world-changing. High level characters can make big, major changes, sure, but it's the broad, low magic that changes the world and society.
Really? I've yet to have a magitech explosion in some near forty years of gaming. It's a really easy thing to avoid, even following the rules.
Please show me where the rules that require a magitech explosion. Not a thought experiment, not a "if/then" exercise. Show me the page number where it says X number of sessions your game will have an industrial revolution, no saving throw. If I am following the rules, at what level of play does it occur. What is the title header for that section in the book?
While I recognize that I'll be branded as a defender of the company, does this current line of commentary really need to exist? Does measuring "how much love" someone has for the game -- as if we could ever do so -- mean anything?
Isn't it mildly possible to not like something in the book or even disagree with it without succumbing to the Internet's incessant need to be overly critical and melodramatic about the tiniest thing? Do we need to make personal comments about the people who work here?
It's unnecessary and, to paraphrase what I often see Chris and Liz and others comment on threads, doesn't make this a happy community. In fact, it makes me just sad and disgusted.
We've acknowledged what the book said and moved past it. What you are seeing as being mad at the rules but taking it out on you might be because you continue to hammer on the same topic over and over again with a shrug and "It's RAW, what can you do?"
We know RAW. Thank you for reiterating it. The discussion has gotten sidetracked with debating with you about why we're moving on instead of saying "Oh poo, those darn rules!"
Why are we slavishly trying to hang onto what RAW says when this is clearly a house rule situation? Did I miss the section in the book where they talk about technological explosions?
Shrugging helplessly and saying "Well, this is RAW" isn't helpful. It doesn't do anything for the conversation.
The rules are a tool box and nothing more. They are hammers, saws, screwdrivers and so on. Just because the rule exists doesn't mean that a GM or table needs to use it. You CAN hammer with a screwdriver and you CAN hammer in a screw; neither works very well.
Nothing in the OP requires that this discussion only use the RAW and not take into account GM preferences, design, or the dreaded house rule. RAW does not cover what we are talking about. We're moving past that now and into world design, which often requires changing and modifying rules.
Cort Odekirk wrote:
Even if it wasn't, losing the special characters for PbPs would be a small price if it cut a lot of this garbage off the site.
Milo v3 wrote:
Yes, I makes perfect sense.
That said, for my money, it does answer the question posed by the OP, of which the last line reads "Now, suppose you wanted to keep the tech level stable, AND have wizards. For that, you would need some counterbalance to magic, something that would slow down the progress of society back to normal levels. What do you think that might be?"
The rules exist in a vacuum and don't take this sort of thing into account because the devs aren't taking this into account. I firmly believe that they're leaving that grey area thought exercise to individual GMs and players. There isn't going to be one answer that is going to make everyone happy. There are those that will argue that the rules CLEARLY show that you can do something, and those that will say that the rules are very muddy on the topic.
No, I'm not ignoring the question. I'm answering it in a way that you dislike. You are pointing out that the rules exist and that, in theory, one could do this. That's great, but once the rules reach the table it stops becoming theory.
We've gone around and around on this on other threads as well. The rules require interpretation AND someone to sign off on them. The GM and the other players do not have their hands tied because the book says something. This is why there is someone to interpret the rules rather than a computer program that simply reads the text and rules flatly.
Milo v3 wrote:
For you rule zero doesn't answer the question. For other people it settles the matter quite well. Your mileage may vary, expect table variation.
As far as rudeness goes, as an aside, implying that something is a cheat is also rude. If you felt strawmanned I apologize.
Milo v3 wrote:
Ugh, rule zero isn't an answer. It's a cheat code.
It is as much, or as little, a "cheat code" as using "but the rules say X!" as an excuse or argument to get your way.
Both methods tend to avoid a troublesome aspect of gaming: dealing with other people. GMs tend to dislike having the boat rocked when someone gets "creative" with the rules, and players tend to dislike the word No.
Communication long before it gets to that point is really the only solution. If your GM and/or the rest of the table isn't down with your plan, whatever it may be, no one is going to have fun. No matter what the book says or you believe it says, no matter what James Jacobs said on his thread, no matter if the Great Holy Cow comes down and tells you that yes, moo, you are totally right and everyone else is a meanie.
One person's fun isn't always everyone's fun.
Except Rule 0 is the answer to a lot of the problems, especially the ones on this thread. "Hey Mr. GM, I want to train the world's population to be wizards."
"Why? No, wait, I don't want to know. No."
This entire bit of "well, the rules say blah" is, at best, a joke. The rules are not designed for this little experiment. The rules are designed for people to play adventurers and do adventuring things. There isn't much of an economy, there isn't much on world building and the ramifications of a magitech society, and there isn't much on "Hey, let's train everyone to be wizards for lols."
Bludgeoning people with your interpretation of the rules -- and that is what it is -- is no better than saying "No via GM Fiat."
It's really, really simple. Does your table want this? Then go forth and have fun. Does your table not want this? Better luck next time.
Well, you could keep multiple copies on hand, in case of molasses accidents?
From what I understand, many conventions have access to printers. Not only that, many hotels have access for their guests to printers. Kinkos, UPS stores, various office stores, coffee shops, internet cafes and more have printers. As far as I know most events aren't being held in the middle of nowhere. There are ways to correct the problem.
Print 20 copies in your spare time and keep them in a folder if you have problems with spills. Keep a device to power up your machine, or have a second or third device. There are ways to protect yourself and take responsibility. Then there isn't a concern whether or not it is fair; you're golden.
John Francis wrote:
Well, I imagine there are swaths of time that you don't need to stare at it and can save power on your device by closing the screen down. I'm not sure I'm following the counter-argument being presented here?
If you are concerned about power, get an extra supply or print out the sheet or both. If the counter is you absolutely must have the device on at all times for the entirety of the time that you are at an event, I suggest that paper might be a better choice for your needs then. For people without that restriction, there are ways to conserve and sustain your device.
For that matter, tablets that you could use just for displaying your sheet and not worrying that someone will drop and utterly destroy are pretty cheap. I'm not talking about some $700 dollar multi-function machine, but a cheap tablet for RPG gaming purposes can be had for $50 or less and work fairly well. A back up copy of your sheet on your phone and you have two devices that I'd hope could survive long enough to be recharged. :)
John Francis wrote:
Perhaps not. But we're not talking about running a laptop at full power for 8 hours, we're speaking of making sure that you're character sheet is available whenever you are asked for it. A small tablet or a cell phone can perform this operation without much problem and can be recharged multiple times if need be. If you aren't playing Candy Crush or surfing the net or whatever and only using it to check your sheet and prove it to the GM, then you shouldn't have issues.
It's a matter of being prepared in case, for whatever reason, you've run down your device that you are counting on to show your sheet and you don't want to/won't bring a physical copy, there are relatively inexpensive ways to fix the problem. Or more expensive ones if you need more power. But the options are there, and saying "I guess my device is out of power so I can't show this to you" shouldn't be an excuse in 2016 if you plan to go the electronic route.
I will note that there are backup batteries that you can purchase for less than 5$ that don't have much juice, but enough to charge you a bit. For $20 you can get a portable charger/battery that can completely recharge your device, some more than once.
It pays to be prepared. If you use an electronic device, carry some back up power to get you through the time you are out, and charge things up when you don't need them. There is no excuse.
Ok, this caught my eye as I was getting caught up on the thread, and highlights what, for me anywhay, is some of the disconnect in the Caster-Martial argument as well as plot agency.
Now, the fighter CAN do some of these things -- perhaps not as well as the other classes, but they aren't impossible for them -- and are certainly things I'd like to see increased for them without stepping on other's toes. So sure, sneaking in, talking to guards, investigating, or even raising armies sound grand. Some class features, more skill points, and I think this would be golden.
Raising the dead or "telling the laws of physics to sit down and shut up" -- I assume arcane casting here -- aren't things that I'm looking for in my martials, or the fighter in specific. Increased abilities? Enhanced movement? All but supernatural rallying, bravery, and intimidation? Sure.
Fireballs and gravity manipulation and reviving the dead and so on? That doesn't scream "fighter" in my ear, nor really martial.
There's a point where we have to acknowledge that "plot agency" shouldn't mean "one man band". And yes, I'm in the camp that the martials should be raised up and the casters should be taken down a notch or six. I'm of a mind that, as has been noted before, that this is and should be a team sport. You should need the other classes and while there may be overlap, it shouldn't be to the detriment of another class. There should be things that you need another class's assistance with in some way.
It likely isn't a popular school of thought, but it's one I'm happy with.
I don't equate banning (or some might call it "fixing") anything to make you a good or bad GM. It's something GMs and players do; that in and of itself doesn't make you good or bad, it makes you a gamer.
To swing back by what I said earlier, I will note that while I have some older campaigns, not all of them are old enough to vote. But I'd been asked by players in the past for a world where they didn't have to concern themselves with accidentally burning down a town and having that impact things on their other characters, which is where Generica was born from.
Ah, no, not at all. Generica -- it doesn't actually have a name -- is basically a world that I don't care about, that I've invested little if any time creating backstory for and so on.
In contrast, some of my homebrew worlds have existed for going on thirty years, with ongoing stories and plots and the like, fleshed out NPCs and family trees and all that jazz.
Generica, for lack of a better name, includes none of that. I might use Greyhawk, or Golarion, or another created and published system but more often than not it would be a very generic fantasy setting world with little work put into it. The sort where the map might be drawn on a napkin with a scale that varies depending on the day.
I don't use Generica much because most of my players are looking to continue the threads they've started or heard about in the other worlds. I use Generica when people just want to bash things without worrying overly much about story, cannot agree what they want to do (half want pirates, two others want noble intrigue, and another wants to punt goblins), or for one or two off sessions where people want to create characters they don't have to care about, or introduce new people to the mechanics and general idea of the game without endangering ongoing quests or interfering in "the real world" of the game.
My take on this is rather simple: I lay out what I am willing to GM on X world in the player documentation. If the mood strikes us and I'm feeling really masochistic, I'll run an anything goes game in Generica, the land of I Don't Care and people can run what they want.
If a player and I are just deadlocked because they want something and it's one of the few things that I don't allow for whatever reason, then we come down to the following choices:
1) You save it for next time.
It IS a matter of fun, as you've said Redbeard. If one person is just dead set on holding out because the game isn't allowing them to play StarBright the rainbow pony mage, then it is up to that person to decide what they want to do. Everyone else already made their choices.
This, incidentally, is why I give the players world documentation far in advance. That way I'm not dealing with an argument the day of the game.
Redbeard the Scruffy wrote:
There's going to be people that won't play if you are Core only, if you are NOT Core only, if you like green dice, if you allow ninjas, if you don't. If a GM or game doesn't want to use some product then you have to either play a game that you don't like or look for another.
It sucks, but it sucks more to play under a GM or table that is begrudgingly letting you do something and then taking it out on you in game. At least you were warned ahead of time if they give a list of denied topics.
That may be true, but no one is forced to buy any of the material, nor buy it when it comes out. You can pick and choose what options you want in your games. You can sort through them and see how they connect and conflict with each other; it gives people things to do between posts on the forums.
Unless there is a gun to your head, no one has to buy anything. Nope, not even if you want to play PFS. You can with just the Core book, you can slowly build up your library at a pace that you and yours want. You can buy zero, one, or all of the books if you want to. The "break neck rate of release" is in no way an indication that you have to get them at that rate.