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

memorax's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 1,857 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,857 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Andoran

Well said LazarX I completely agree.

thejeff wrote:

Obviously, as I said before, they need to bring in enough to pay the bills, but that's very different than being focused only on the quarterly profit statements.

They are still in it to make a profit. Big or small. Privatly or publically owned. It does not matter. A person or group start a company to make a profit It should at least be one of the goals imo. Bills, staff, printing costs etc it all needs to be paid. No difference between a big or small company imo. Do you honestly think that the staff at Paizo is complains that they are not only in the black yet also make a profit. James Jacobs is not going to come on the forum and apologize for the company regretfully making too much money.

Andoran

WizNiz13 wrote:

I was pretty burned when they ended 4th edition. I loved 4th edition and it would have been nice if it had stuck around for a few more years.

I'm also tired of WotC discontinuing their products shortly after its release-
-Dungeon Command
-Adventure System Board Games (Wrath of Ashardalon, etc)
-Prepainted Miniatures

That is a annoying move on Wotc part imo. I never played any of the above much. Yet some of my players do and they feel the same way.

Andoran

If your willing to give me the exact factual number of fans that did boycott 4E then all you have is opinion. Like I do. So yeah your "evidence" is hardly factual or unbiased.

Store owners unless they work directly with Wotc won't convince me of that. They are not exactly unbaised. One store owner tried to blame Wotc switch to 4E for his 3E/3.5. no longer selling. Yet he ignored any advice to not buy every third edition book under the sun. I tried to stop him a whole bunch of other customers tried. He would not listen. So they are hardly unbiased. Another owner loves 13th Age. He pushes the game whenever he can. Last I spoke to him three months. he sold 10 copies. Between now and then he may have sold 15-20 copies. Which would change the above sales figures. Another lgs owner sells only comics book of all kinds. Some popular card games like magic. A small row of rpgs. Again change the sales figures above. Every store is different imo.

For all we know 4E may have still been profitable. Just not enough for Hasbro. Or it could have been that their is a mandate from the higher ups that a new edition must be released every x number of years.

Mac fans did their best boycott PC. Yet PC was and is still for the most part popular than mac. All because of pc open source vs mac closed source approach. I will never buy a mac because I don't want to lock myself out of all the option that I can get with pc. Macs look so much better than a pc. I don't care about that truly. To me ultilty vs appearence will always be important.

Andoran

MMCJawa wrote:


Hasbro's management of Battleship and Transformers movies make me absolutely terrified on what they might do with a DnD movie.

It's not like the first two movies let alone the Dragonlance animated movies were that good either. Decent movie to watch on a cheap night. Nothing to write home about. I do like the Transformers movies. As i REALLY did not want a carbon copy of the animated tv show.

Andoran

Craig Bonham 141 wrote:


But nothing of the above was an abuse of my 'trust'. I was a customer, not a friend or a boon companion. I gave money, they gave material. I stopped liking the material they gave, so I stopped giving money. No big.

While I bought the 2E reprints I agree that the price for them was expensive. Mind you I have seen lgs sell used copies at 30$ of the original print run.

I do wish more of the fanbase thought like you. In the end unless your a owner or know people in the company personally. We are not their friends or their boon companions. They don't owe me anything. Nor I to them.

Andoran

Here the thing when a company is in the right they don't have to do good PR. They should but they don't. Palladium books sent a lot of cease and desist letters to fan who converted anything with their rules. Were they right to do so. Yes. Did it also create a lot of negative feelings towards them. You better beleive it. They never apologized for doing so. Notr hired a pr person ot generate goodwill.

Andoran

thejeff wrote:


But you're right, I don't have any real expectations of getting them to behave. All I can do is patronize companies that treat me better.

I do the same thing. I used to be a huge fan of Palladium Books .Now if I buy anything it's used. Nor do I push their products like I used to.

Andoran

thejeff wrote:


And when a business screws me over, even if it's in a perfectly legal fashion, I reserve the right to be upset about and not give them my business anymore. That, even more than the letter of the law, is how you get businesses to behave well.

True but good luck trying to get them to behave unless one has the money to do so. Boycotts only work if a majority participate. Not to mention does that mean that because Drivethru made the mistake of selling Wotc pdfs without their permission. That you will no longer give them your money either. Wotc pulled the pdfs yet Drivethru where the ones that started the entire mess in the first place.

Andoran

While I don't agree with Scott on everything. I do think unlike many posters on the boards he tends to be more rational and logical than most. Like it or not he is correct. Legally Wotc were in the right. Drivethru had no business selling the PDFs if they were not allowed. Morally not that much. Except morals don't pay the bills at the end of the day. Nor a accepted form of currency at any bank.

Business is not FAIR. That's why we have the 995 vs the 1%. Do I wish it were different yes. I don't think it's ever going to change. I would have done the same thing with the PDFs. I would have given a week at most three days. Then pulled the pdfs.

I have to say more time passes the more the same members of the community do their best to behave like they don't want to hear anyone disagree with them. It's like they want a validation echo chamber. Then get offended when people disagree with them. While 4E is no longer my D&D of choice I can at least talk about without attacking Wotc nor those who defend it. And really trying to dismiss Scott posts by saying they are hostile in nature. Why for his simple disagreeing and defending 4E. Saying emotions can be volatile is only a defence for so long. Were not animals that react on instinct. We don't have to edition war. No one is forced to do so. Emotions or not. So to me that is a cop-out. Quite simply posters and gamers outside of these forums edition war because they can and want to.

I had two players in my game who wanted to join the forums. Considering what they saw in this thread they won't join if you pay them a million dollars. Your not doing the Paizo community any favors. If it was not for the fact that they are some more level headed and interesting posters to discuss topics with. Even I would be leaving these forums.

Andoran

bugleyman wrote:
I blame Hasbro for the movie Battleship.

Your not the only one. Not the worst movie ever. It could have been a hell of lot better IMO.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I do think Wotc did overeact somewhat. Yet DriveThruRPG should have also made sure they could sell Wotc PDFs. Both are at fault. Posters can keep making it onesided if they like. It wont chanfge what truly happened. While I say the bulk of my stuff on my hard drive. I do save important things on USB keys or spare hard drives. Which people should have been doing in the first place. Relying on just ones hard drive or DriveThruRPG was asking for disaster.

Wotc never lost trust with me. I knew full well that 4E was going to be different. At the time glad for it. I really did not want to be anywhere near 3.5 when 4E was released. There were previews. The 4E devs outright told us it would be different. Why expect it not to be is beyond me. To think they would not release a new edition after they released 3.5 so soon was pretending to be truly naive imo.

To me Wotc and Paizo are companies I owe nothing to. They are not my friends or close family. They have done nothing to me as a favor. And no releasing rpgs is for their benefit mostly not as a favor to me. I would lose trust if a good friend slept with my girlfriend. Switching editions while Im tired of it is not going to go away. Eventually Paizo may have to do the same.

A rehashed rpg with new art and no changes is not going to go over that well outside of these forums. Already some in the hobby avoid PF because rightly or wrongly they dont feel its too different from 3.5. Good luck trying to sell it a second time. Espcially if 5E can pull off being modular enough to allow all previous editions to be used.

As for it being Wotc fault that people edition war. No matter what we would still be doing itt. Using Wotc is just a excuse for bad behavior. Edition warring benefits no one. If one is going to engage in such behavior at least have the courage to admit that its being done because one whats to do it. No one has a gun to your head forcing you to act that way. So spare the Wotc made me do it BS.

Andoran

I'm thinking of possibly adding Hero Points in the next Ap I run. Anyone use them in their games? What have been the results? I know it says not to allow villains to use HP. Yet if the players can why not the bad guys.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One can make a character less optimized and both useful. The system rewards optimization imo. I one had two monks in a 3.5 game one single classed and one multiclassed. I did caution the player that if he wanted to get into combat like the single classed Monk that mulitclassing maybe a mistake. He wanted to multiclass and I tell all my players upfront that I run my enemies smartly and with tactics. Then the multiclass monk complained he was less effective.

It's not so much being less effective. It's ignoring any and all advice related to character building and tactics. End up being less useful then acting like it's someone else fault when one is less useful. If one makes a skill based fighter in a campaign where there is a lot of combat then it's the players fault no the DM imo. Or like Hamas says make a Rogue without Weapon Finesse and ignoring other players and DMs suggestions to take it. Well no one fault if the Rogue can't hit the broadside of a barn.

Does it suck to be told one character is less effective yeah I can see it. Yet as a player and DM I'm willing to help a pc be better at a table. If I get told that no matter what a player wants to play a Paladin in a game with a party of neutral or even evil aligned players well that person has no one to blame but themselves if they are not having fun.

Andoran

I'm all for playing monsters intelligently. If players can plan and use tactics so can the DMs. I have a player who is a Gunslinger who at first one shoted minor enemies until I altered them. He also makes no attempt to hide the fact he has a gun. Nor uses any defensive tactics. Then complains when the enemy targets him or his gun.

Andoran

It would be nice if we could get some errata. It's all good to say it enhances a spell then not say how mechanics wise. The dm I'm playing with and myself will probably houserule that it adds +1 to DC of the save. Makes sense if a image that is supposed to be silent. Suddenly has special effects if you will.

Andoran

From the PF Srd:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/g/ghost-sound

Does it increase the Dc of the spell? Does it simply add sound to a Silent Image? It's a little vague imo.

Andoran

Thomas Long 175 wrote:


I cut back from 4 liters of soda a day after they diagnosed me with an ulcer.

Again as I said the main difference between you and my ex-player. I met him a few months back. He is in real danger of going blind. Yet he ignored everyone attempts to cut back on the sugar. While he does not deserve to go blind. He was kind of asking to and now he may.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:

Where do you find all these people? Compared to what some of you had to endure, I feel like I've been playing with pretty well adjusted people.

I met them in the hobby. I and some of my other friends up with their behavior and never said anything for the longest time. No one wanting to be the bad guy. So we kind of deserved what we got. One by one though I either asked them no to show up. Or hung out with them on a social basis. The last are the two brothers afraid to use email. If they show up at the next game or before with their usual passive agressive BS they are out. As both players and friends. Of course they are never wrong. One can't make this stuff up. I did say they were almost like stereotypes. Now I screen players carefully.

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Heh, sounds like me, manic depressive with asphergers disorder. Keep getting yelled at because I eat too many sweets, not enough food, and drink way too much soda.

There is a big difference imo. You can at least admit to all of the above. The player never took blame or responsability for anything negative he did. If you were diagnosed as being diabetic and risk losing your sight. I'm assuming you would stop eating food with sugar. Not ignore people advice get really sick then try to get people to feel sorry for you once your sight started to fail.

Andoran

My group is not so much old groganrd. Just set in their ways. I'm not a perfect person by any means I admit.

To use the example of the email from my previous post. They spend lots pf time online. They are not being forced to just check email one day. They knew ahead of time that they could not show. So why not do the smart thing and tell the DM in advance. At the very least don't blame the dm for their mistakes. It's not like they have a gun at their heads forcing them to check email one day. They also kept and keep saying they are broke. Yet they would show up at the table with new hard drives, anime and managa.

They guy with a lack of respect kept underplaying his characters refusing to listen to any advice form the dm or players. No matter the rpg. The last game he was in he played a Alchemist. Refused to use extracts or his mutagen. All he did was toss bombs. Refused to even look at the Grenadier archtype. Used a buggy free character creation program which kept listing his bomb damage as 1D6 even at high levels. Until I pointed out he should be doing more. His response was to blame the buggy program. I don't know how about reading the books and using old fashioned pencil and paper. Again never could admit to being wrong.

Another was a maniac depressive had his high and lows. Yet taking his meds and getting professoinal help. Never knew what would set him off. Played fast and loose with the alignment rules. Was bored if he was not the center of attention so started stuff in game. Kept eating sweets even though he was pre-diabetic. Is now severely diabetic and losing his sight.

It's strange. Once I turned thirty. I could no longer deal or want to deal with some of my first group odd behaviors. What was I thinking putting up with these people for at least ten years.

I'm loving my new group. I can talk about various topics gaming and otherwise. They either bring food or are willing to contribute in buying it. Listen to advice most of the type. Are not rude if they don't. Finding new people is hit or miss. Yet if you can get some good ones it's all worth it in the end.

Andoran

I like official rulings because I have enough to do at the table as both a dm and player. If I'm running the game I don't want to waste time figuring out how much damage a character takes from a fall. If it's in the rules so much the better. Same as a player. I want to play the game not lets figure out what rule #20 really means.

Andoran

I gamed with the same group for years. Yet eventually due to some moving away. Having family as well as personality clashes I looked for new players. Don't get me wrong some of my players are good people. Yet some are almost stereotypes when it comes to their behavior.

Two players are luddites and refuse to even check their email on a regular basis. Case in point my last game.We hold it on Saturday afternoons. They both knew that they had to go to a BBQ on Saturday of the game. Knew about it on the Monday of the week. Yet because they check their email once a week told me they could not show late Friday afternoon. Then tried to blame because I told them on the Tuesday of the week. How is it my fault. It's up to the player to tell me they can't show. Not me to hound them for their availability. I'm less than impressed because they spend hours online playing mmos. Yet they can't take 5-10 mins to check email. That and they don't like doing anything outside of rpgs beyond eating junk food. Watching anime and playing mmos. I'm way beyond that phase in my life.

Another I stopped inviting to games because he simply had no respect towards me as a DM and person. While admitting they he had no respect to a good friend of mine in the same game Just try and do the same to him or his girlfriend and you got a earful. He was out as well.

Another hates playing D&D yet wants to play because he reads the game notes of the game. Joins leaves. Then joins again and leaves. Tried to do the same thing a third time and I refused. Were still good friends. Even if he does talk my year off about Savage Worlds sometimes.

To the op I know it's not easy meeting new people for some. Yet my suggestion is to at least try. If not take a break. As sometimes you need new blood and new friends. The group I game with is more sociable. Likes to do other stuff beyond rpgs and are well adjusted as individuals.

Andoran

I agree with TL. I think one should tell a player if a class is inefficent. Diplomatically of course. Not along the lines of "Rogue suck play something else". A melee vanilla Rogue in this game is difficult to play effectively imo. Low hp and ac. Sneak attack unless your doing ranged requires the rogue to be next to the target. Most enemies target of choice as no npc/pc likes being stabbed in the back repeatedly.

I had two players in two different games who ended up not having as much. One a monk who wanted to multiclass with Bard. Yet wanted tro be as effective as a single classed Monk. Another a Rogue. Both ignored constructive suggestion at the table and suffered in gameplay. Both ended up changing their characters. They actually were happy that we game them advice. Some option in the game are imo not that good in game play. Rgw Rogue player still kept playing as a Rogue. Yet reworked the class to be effective in combat. The other liked playing a Bard more so went with a single classes Bard.

I'm all for players what they want. Yet at the same time if they keep complaining about their characters over and over again it's time to give them some constructive advice as well.

Andoran

I have had to rework the all APs I ran. So I assumed WOR was not different. I did expect them perhaps wrongly that being Mythic power they would have optimized the npc and encounters. Apprently not. I get your point SC and agree with it.I'm seeing it in regular APS as well. I have both a Gunslinger and a Alchemist in the group. The gunslinger is optimized. If I don't give even minor npc or creatures double in some case triple hp he one shots most creatures. Including BBEGs. The alchemist is optimized as well yet not as much. Yet he has bombs with status effects. When the enemy is both staggered and nauseated it kind of makes it hard to enjoy running the game.

My advice is to cheat sometimes. The npc makes his save more than once. The enemy has more hp. Tailor the encounters to match the pcs. If some players simply ask them if they just want to breeze through every encounter or a challenge. I'm probably going to do do the same for this AP.

Andoran

MMCJawa wrote:

I think a lot of the issue comes down to having to build an AP which extensively uses a new rule system while the kinks of the rule system are being worked out. I think this led to underestimation of just what the mythic PCs could do, and overestimation of the abilities of Mythic monsters.

I definitely wouldn't judge all APs by this one. And although I own this AP and love the plot elements, I would not want to run it without a whole lot more experience in running adventure paths and GMing in general.

Agreed completely.

That is why I prefer Wotc 3E core for D&D. All levels of play at the start with the core. Yet Dms need to at least anticipate that a Mythic Cleric can feed a army of 400+ as well. I played in a Epic level game. The DM kept nerfing everything. It stopped being Epic. Both sides agreed to stick to levels 1-20.

The trick at least for players is to insist that everyone have a cheat sheet for their characters. Before the last AP I was in ended I played a Bard. I had a sheet pf all the bonuses players and myself recievied from Bardic Performance and spells. It helps speed up play. Another player who was the Cleric just kept looking at the core for his spells. The DM kept skipping his turn as that slows down play. Espcially at higher levels. Herolab was a big help as well.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Having read the Mythic Rules I can't see how this is a failed AP imo

It depends if you want your players do the usual stuff between levels 1-20. Or to do epic things. I keep hearing complaints about the Mythic rules. Yet those that do seem to be missing the point imo. Their called "Mythic" for a reason as in doing things that are wroth of being a myth sung by Bard across the land.

To use a example from this thread. Which do you think will go down in history or sung by Bard across the land. The lone cleric who fed a army of 400+ all on his own. Or the cleric who fed his group and maybe a handful of others. The first cries epic legend. The second is about exciting as watch paint dry.

The players doing powerful things is to be expected in such a AP. Or anything that uses Mythic or epic levels. As a DM I expect my players to be doing more than they usually do with spells, feats, classes and equipment. If I am a 23rd level epic character as a player I sure as hell do not want to be using the same boring vanilla lighting bolts or fireballs. Or as a melee character doing the same damage as I was doing between levels 1-20.

I think people expect Epic then with PF Mythic levels to just be little different than regular levels. The spells DC going up by a point or two. The damage dice a extra die or two. Players to still be using dodge and other low level feats. Again that's not heroic. Nor epic. Or even remotely Mythic. And remember your npcs and monsters can do the same as well.

Now if the npc are not well designed or the encounters too linear I can understand. The devs told us flat out that the power levels would not be the same. It's like a vegan going into a restaurant that only serves meat. Then is shocked, dismayed and complains about a lack of food that has no vegetables.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It depends if you want your players do the usual stuff between levels 1-20. Or to do epic things. I keep hearing complaints about the Mythic rules. Yet those that do seem to be missing the point imo. Their called "Mythic" for a reason as in doing things that are worthy of being a myth sung by Bard across the land.

To use a example from another thread. Which do you think will go down in history or sung by Bard across the land. The lone cleric who fed a army of 400+ all on his own. Or the cleric who fed his group and maybe a handful of others. The first cries epic legend. The second is about exciting as watch paint dry.

The players doing powerful things is to be expected in such a AP. Or anything that uses Mythic or epic levels. As a DM I expect my players to be doing more than they usually do with spells, feats, classes and equipment. If I am a 23rd level epic character as a player I sure as hell do not want to be using the same boring vanilla lighting bolts or fireballs. Or as a melee character doing the same damage as I was doing between levels 1-20.

I think people expect Epic then with PF Mythic levels to just be little different than regular levels. The spells DC going up by a point or two. The damage dice a extra die or two. Players to still be using dodge and other low level feats. Again that's not heroic. Nor epic. Or even remotely Mythic. So OP if your not sure you can or want to handle the power level of Mythic tiers that I suggest not running the AP.

Now if the npc are not well designed or the encounters too linear I can understand. The devs told us flat out that the power levels would not be the same. It's like a vegan going into a restaurant that only serves meat. Then is shocked, dismayed and complains about a lack of food that has no vegetables.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

My fond wish is to see the Book of Fiends updated as well. That book in full cover art would be great as well. Then a update to the Book of Righteous and Avatars handbook. There was a setting on the BOR that I wish they would have made into a full background.

Andoran

Any idea when we will be able to order it?

Andoran

Orthos wrote:
This so much. The Paizo team has time and time and time again stated that this is how they write the APs intentionally. And they expect that GMs with more capable, experienced, or larger groups will be willing and able to scale things up as needed to suit their party.

While I respect the reason given. It also makes it useless than to buy a AP at least for me imo. If i have to rework the npcs I might as well save 120-140$ that a AP cost and just make my own. Still if the majority of the fans like the APS as is then who am I to say that hthey need to change. I do wish they would give npcs at least the main villains better feat and spell selections. Sometimes its like they dont even try to make a decent villain imo.

Andoran

I kind of agree with MagusJanus. The APS feel very linear imo. The npcs need to be reworked as even a minimally optimized party will defeat them easily. A good example is rise of the runelords. Where your fighting Ogres in a fort made for humans without any changes to the fort. Another npc in the same ap who had no crowd control spells yet the pcs were supposed to fight her in a closed area. So no it's not only the players and DMs fault. Two aps I have run and two I played in and both feel just too similar. The latest the last I run. I spent more time reworking and rewriting the npcs and aome of the modules. Which kind of defeats the purpose of the aps in the first place.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hahaha your flames and pitchforks do not harm as my gaming soul is pure.

I used to play only D&D with some Rifts. Now I need to play different rpgs. I'm going to see about 5E. Not sure I may invest as much as I did with 3.5./4E and PF.

Andoran

I don't see why or how the OP is sickened. I swore to only play 4E. My gaming taste changed. I bought PF. Knowing full well it was not a major change on 3.5. I can tell you that my old 4E group was and is not sickened by my playing Pathfinder. Nor giving money to Paizo.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

While I can respect not liking 5E there just does not seem to be anyway to please some in the community. Oh well as they say haters will use any and every reason or excuse to hate something.

Andoran

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Hama, Scott please start a new thread. This is not the one for yet another caster vs martial debate.

Andoran

Logan1138 wrote:
In case anyone is wondering, that was the sound of my jaw hitting the ground in disbelief.

Getsd forklift steruggles to lifts jaw up. Yes I know Pathfinder has rules and crunch. Lately imo more and more options focus more on flavor and fluff and less on rules and crunch. Some options that when you read through them are just not worth taking. Craft Ooze is a good example imo

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's always interesting when gamers accuse Wotc of appealing to the MMO market. But TSR and pre 4E wotc did not such thing. Yeah sorry to disappoint but TSR and Wotc not only tried to appeal to the video game generation. They had video games for 1E, 2E, and 3E. So many video games of the time borrowed or outright stole concepts for D&D. The eight hour rest period. The standard four party group with the names altered so they could not be sued. To me 3E/PF plays like a video game in some respects. Go out adventuring then when one runs out of spells and resources go back to the home base to rest. Or find a secluded spot. Not unlike many old and current video games.

To be fair yes I agree that the Wotc boards can be toxic for those who dislike 4E. So was this one for the longest time. If one even mentioned liking 4E the PFAVengers came down on you like a ton of bricks. It also took Paizo months to do something about it as well. So in this case neither forums were very welcoming. Once they cracked down on the anti-4E BS then it was more welcoming. Otherwise one could start a random thread about anything and then a anti-4E poster would come along just to slag 4E. It was out of control imo. Talk about magic and one would come along and go "thank god pf magic is not like 4E it's a mmo" and other such helpful statements.

In terms of Next. I'm not sure I want to invest in another version of D&D. Just tired of the edition train. As well Next has to knock my socks off. It has to give me something new. Not a rehashed older version of D&D with a few tweaks. I'm also feeling less love for Pathfinder as well. Too many flavorful and fluff options. Not enough rules or crunch. Craft Ooze is a perfect example of a very flavorful feat. Yet the effects for the most part are useless. Yay I get a mindless ooze with no loyalty to the creator. How is that going to be useful to me in the long run. I can use it in combat as it might attack the group. I can't use the ozze to guard the group home base. Not unless it's secluded as it might wander off and kill someone.

Andoran

Xedrek wrote:
Some gamers have fun playing rifts

Fixed that for you.

I had fun playing Rifts. Next to 2E it was my other gateway rpg. Its not the best set of rules. But one can have fun with them. I dislike how PF treats martial characters. Im not going to say no one has ever had fun playing one.

On topic. A DM that refused to allow crticals espcially if it was on his pet npcs. Also had his npcs prepared for everything and anything. Which is possible at higher levels. Not so much at lower levels and versus opponents with low or no int.

Another A DM that threw impossible odds at the party. Make it so that the party was almost TPKed. Then had the high level npc arrive just in time to save the day. To this day the GM cant understand why that bothers players.

Andoran

Stefan Hill wrote:


(1) Bad World design - explain again why every world isn't ruled by 1,000 year old Elven Archmages and perhaps the odd Human Lich? This is clearly pointed out in the 2e DMG as a reason for the level limits.

I consider it a thinly disguised rationalization to make sure everyone plays human. It amounts to "but if demi-humans don't have level who will play human". How about letting me the player decide which race I want to play without screwing me over from the start.

Stefan Hill wrote:


(2) Gygax and pals wrote the game, if they thought Dwarfs should have wings they were well within their right to make it so. Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 1e/2e also don't have spell casting Dwarfs, so? Bad game design?

Which by no means makes then infallible. I respect Gygax and his pals. They were no perfect. Neither is some elements in 2E. Again like others who responded to me I see the point your trying to make. For the most part I disagree with it. Two things that always come up that I hear people dislike about 2E. Thaco which I have no problems with yet drove some in the hobby crazy. Second being level limits which the people I played with implemented at first then threw out the window ASAP.

Stefan Hill wrote:


I'm arguing from a point of RAW here, of course no person will be arrested for modifying any RPG rules as they wish.

No worries we both are passionate about the hobby. We may not always agree. Yet I respect a person for defending their rpg. Then again I have been called weird because I like the complete series of books.

Andoran

Lucien Malgus wrote:


^^This demonstrates that by allowing unlimited advancement for demi-humans, you do not need to reinvent the wheel to add a couple of beneficial abilities. Bad game design? Ok, I'll grant that their reasoning could have been better, but at the end of the day, we all had a good time with the system.

I had fun with 2E. It was my gateway rpg to the hobby. It had it's flaws though. I feel the same way about certain things with 3E and 4E. I just REALLY hated and still hate level limits for demi-humans. I feel it adds nothing to the rpg. Just a way to shoehorn players into taking humans. Since the developers were either unable or unwilling to add something unique to human in 1E and 2E.

Digitalelf wrote:


Do you know what the level limits were in 2nd edition?

Dwarves, Elves, and Half-elves all had level limits in the double-digits; it was only gnomes and halflings that had level limits as low as 8 and 9.

Did you know that the level limit for an elven Mage was 15th level? If that same elven Mage had an INT score of 18, and the optional rules for exceeding level limits was used, his max level would now be 18th level.

Seems kind of silly to me to miss out on the possibility of an awesome gaming experience just because the DM makes use of level limits... I mean, was it really that common for your 2nd edition games to reach 15th level and beyond??

YMMV and all of that.

I knew about the level limits and see your point. Yet again I don't see what it adds to the overall 2E experience. The other problem being if the optional level limits were used. Which was not always the case. It also easier to run the game when everyone is a equal level.

Andoran

Stefan Hill wrote:


they are not an error or bad game design.

I would not say a error. Yet very certainly bad game design imo.

When your pretty much forced to either take human to play a class to it's full potential yeah I think that's bad design.

High level campaigns at least in my experience with 2E and demi-humans usually went one of three ways:

-Play a demi-human and pray to the gaming goods that you found a kind enough DM to allow one to multiclass without penalty. It kind of gets bored getting locked into a certain level or playing the same racial class with no level penalty.

-Play with no level limits while giving humans something more than unlimited levels with classes. A +1 to two attributes . Or two starting weapon or nonweapons proficinces. Or one of each

-Play human simply to not have to worry about the poor game design and level limits in general.

I could understand if the fluff on racial level limits made sense. It was like a who's who of stereotypes imo. Elves are too flighty and suffer from ADD. Dwarves are too stubborn and anti-social and so on. Even Palladium does a better job with the fluff on class limatations. Dwarves in their world want nothing to do with magic as they almost destroyed not only themselves but also the world.

No I refuse to accept what the authors of 1E and 2E wrote on certain aspects of the game in the books. They are very much not the gospel truth or the one true way to play the game. Not to say I dislike 2E it's far from perfect. Neither were the people who worked on it imo.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I completely and utterly disagree about a lack of level for Demi-humans as being a good thing. The explanation given to me always felt like the 2E devs liked playing humans. So to screw over someone wanting to play a Demi-human level limits were imposed. 3E is far from perfect. Good bye and good riddance to leave limits. Nor will anyone convince me otherwise. Any 2E game I'm running while have no level limits. Avoiding any 2E games as a player where level limits are implemented.

Andoran

Teatime42 wrote:


Is anyone against having Paladins with other alignments (NG, LN, etc?)?

I would disallow it if it would not fit into a homebrew setting. Outside of it I see nothing at all wrong with it. In my next game Im allowing playerw who play Paladins to take the alignemnt of their god.

Andoran

I would not allow touch AC. I would allow Rogues to target flat footed AC. It just seems to make more sense. A rogue sneaking up from behind and firing a ranged weapon. Or stabbing with a melee weapon out of nowhere. Or make it a Rogue Talent. While giving the victim a free perception check to notice the rogue trying to attack him.

Andoran

I want to apologize for my comment about rose colored glasses. Yet one or two posters who favor 2E did seem to get on peole cases for not liking 2E. To me it was never about "stop liking things I don't like" I did notice a few "how dare you not like what I like" as well. Cant have it both ways imo.

In any case lets just get back to discussing 2E.

Andoran

Faith & Avatar, Demi-huamn dieites, Powers and Pantheons also brought Clerics into their own in 2E. It's not to say one could not play a Cleric far from out. Yet unlike the other classes really were not that well definied. The Complete priest to me was a disappointment as a source book. I found it lacking compared to others in the series. Once Faith and Avatar was released I saw a lot more Clerics at my table.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:


It's not that they want to punish someone, but they don't want to make the exotic weapon so good that it drops the iconic martial weapons out of the running.

When you think of fantasy heroes, be they Prince Charming, Roland, Aragorn, or Fafhrd, you don't generally think of them using a "rhoka" or a "dorn dergar" (whatever the hell those are). You don't think of Robin Hood or William Tell as using a sling staff or a repeating heavy crossbow.

And you certainly don't visit the Royal Armouries in Leeds to look at their extensive collection of mancatchers and bolas.

I get your point OG. I even see it with some weapons. Yet more often than not it just seems like a dev went "nuh too good of a weapon better make it exotic" imo. A good example a exotic weapon is the monofilament whip from shadowrun. A weapon that does decent damage. Yet woe to the person who rolled low to hit using it. It had a chance to arc back and strike the wielder. Usually with fatal results.

Andoran

JoeJ wrote:


This is bad GMing in any system. If a player wants to do something and you can't find the rule right away, make something up and tell the players that the ruling applies for this session only.

Well sometimes you can or can't depending on what needs to be ruled. It is made easier with clear and concise rules. Out if the two RPGs I found 3E easier to use and houserule than 2E.

Andoran

Not to mention it seems like more and more I see core only and no 3pp allowed at the table in recent games I'm playing in. It's one of those things that people want a OGL just in case yet more often than not don't use 3pp in anyway imo.

Andoran

MrSin wrote:
Nine times out of 10 exotic weapons aren't worth the feat. And that's being generous.

I like most weapons. Yet have to agree. I don't mind say if I can do combat manuevers with a exotic weapon as it makes sense and requires training. Too often it fees like the devs want to punish someone for taking a exotic weapon.

Andoran

Zagnabbit I think your being a little unfair to 3.5.

2E

Player: "Hey can I do this?",

(checks books)

DM: "Let me get back to you next game as it's not in the rules. Or poorly explained or defined. Or in another book".

Player: (disappointed) Let me try something else.

3.5
Player: "I want to do this"...
DM: "Let me check the rules. Yes you can"
Player: "Cool what feat or DC do I need?...."

System Mastery to a certain extent existed in every edition of D&D now an then. It will always exist. Certain gamers like to memorize and learn every rule about a rpg. If you think rules lawyers did not exist in 2E. Guess again. Try playing D&D with one as DM. Which I did. I ended up leaving after a few sessions. Only so much "well it's not in the rules so you can't do it" one can take. At least as a player one can try to work with or ask to leave a group.

Not saying that I did not enjoy 2E. Far from it. It's not without it's flaws either.

1 to 50 of 1,857 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 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.