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

memorax's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 2,368 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,368 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I like 2E even though it has it flaws and merits. Though I really dislike how demi-humans have level limits and humans can go to any level. Started my dislike of too many rpg settings where humans even when surronded by more stronger, better races. Always seem on top of the food chain in a variety of rpgs.

While I am not optimizer I don't like building a less effective character because everyone else has. I just don't have fun at the table. And yes I understand it's a group activity. But if I don't put decent points into str, con at the very least. My fighter is simply not going to be able to move or take a hit. Which defeats the purpose imo.

Gamers who are naive or act naive about the hobby. While Paizo main focus is more than just a profit. You can beleive they started the company both to continue a edition they liked and to make money. Gamers who think rpgs companies espcially those they like are some kind of non-profit. While those they dislike are greedy just don't know how the really world works as far as I'm concerned.

I wish the Paizo devs would find the proper middle ground for new material. Either a option is good perhaps too good. Or full of flavor and simply not worth taking and/or too situational.

Gamers who refuse to shower regularly or even semi-regularly will not be allowed at my tables. I don't care which obscure study found on the internet that tells you underarm deodrant gives you cancer. Or if I was a "true" friend I would ignore the fetid disgusting stench. Either shower next game or don't expect a invite back.

Liberty's Edge

I don't find the Clerics class features boring at all. Some do become of limited use after a certain point. Like Channel Energy which should scale better. The core domains on the other hand are sometimes very underwhelming. Great my bonus domain spell for both domains is Obscuring Mist. With some of the domain abilites just not worth it imo.

Liberty's Edge

Trekkie90909 wrote:


I will amend this to: "I hate GMs with the double standard 'guns don't belong in fantasy so you can't have them, but all the enemies you ever face are gunslingers and NO you can't pick the feat up to use their loot.' "

Luckily I have never come across this type of DM and hope never to do so. I would either quit the game. Or buy a weapon like a mace and proceed to smash each and every gun a npc would leave behind. When a opportunity presented itself. Would it be petty on my part as a player possibly. No less petty then a DM disallowing guns for pcs yet allowing npcs and only npcs to use them. Something tells me that your also not allowed to sell the guns for loot either because of "reasons".

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Not sure if this has been said yet.

What I call the double standard. As a DM they disallow all kind of options. Often giving long and unwanted dissertations on why they ban it. Suddenly as a player the options they ban they want to take. For example telling me that "guns don't belong in fantasy, a their tables etc". Then as a player they not only want to play a Gunslinger. They deny hating guns. Sorry no guns for you pick another class.

Liberty's Edge

Simon Legrande wrote:


Here's the thing about that, one person's unqualified generalizations are another person's gospel truth.

Their is a difference imo. Two plus two equals four. No matter how some deny or it insist it's five and they can prove it.

Gamers complain about the math in the Hero System to be hard. It requires a degree in physics etc. Those are generalizations. The math for hero is simply addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. Now I can understand that some don't want to have to deal with that kind of math at a gaming table. I still does not mean it's hard math. That means that one cannot play Pathfinder or any rpg that involves addition or subtraction then because its "too hard". It's simply not true. I find the math in Pathfinder while not hard. Annoying to remember as bonus of similar types don't stack not difficult by any means.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tequila Sunrise wrote:


These are probably the same people who insist that 4e sucks, because "Everybody says so."

While 4E is not longer my D&D of choice. It does have it's positive and negatives like any edition of D&D and most rpgs. I tend to ignore edition warriors. Waking away from them in mid-sentence works.

Tequila Sunrise wrote:


Sometimes the phenomenon is excusable, in the case of new players who don't know any better. But ugh, yes, people really ought to at least read something before passing judgment on it.

In some cases for example like Divine Protection. While i'm good with the feat. I can see it being a problem at certain tables. More often than not it seems to be secondhand information.

Tequila Sunrise wrote:


(The guy also told my friend that 5e is great because humans are good. To which I told my friend, "Ah, humans have been awesome since 3e. This guy is clearly an edition warrior.")

Humans have been good since 2E. The ability to go up any level in any class. While not that big of a thing in 3E and higher. Was a big advantage in 2E. Their are differences in some in the hobby who prefer certain editions and edition warriors. Unless one has time to waste it's annoying to listen to edition trolling whether it be friend or stranger.

Liberty's Edge

kyrt-ryder wrote:


We had this problem DURING 3.5 as well.
See Psionics and Martial Initiators.

Most definately. I just wish those who ban 3.5. material actually read it. Instead of taking second hand information as gospel truth. Then again it's the same thing with 3PP PF compitable material as well.

BigDTBone wrote:


What really bugged me about this (and still does) is when you take time to scour the books for novel and interesting rules interactions and then you tell someone about it and before you even finish they are like, "yep, sounds about right for WOTC, some broken ass splat book garbage."

Fortunately that has happened to me twice so far. I just give them the same treatment when they try to use a 3.5. or 3pp PF supplement. If your going to cut me off without even hearing me out. I'm just going to do the same in return.

BigDTBone wrote:


And you can't say anything either, because now you carry the mark of the optimizer.

One is seen as a optimizer simply because one wants to make say a effective fighter for example. Just by taking what I call the regular core bread and butter options. As apparently one cannot be effective and roleplay at the table.

Liberty's Edge

I dislike certain players habits of what I call the jekyll and Hyde syndrome. Very rude and refuse to listen to any advice at the table. Yet suddenly very reasonable through email. Why does telling them in person make them react worse than through email.

The auto-immune response to 3.5. material in the hobby. Everything is overpowered or broken in 3.5. While I agree sometimes their are better options and vice-versa. It's one thing if they actually read the material. More often than not they heard from a guy that it's broken. So it's broken. If that same guy told you it's okay to burn down your house would you still listen to him.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:


And yet despite there not being guns to people's heads and despite all the talk about how such behavior is bad and unnecessary, people keep behaving according to human nature, both online and in real life. Doesn't excuse it. Doesn't mean it's ok. Just means it's going to keep happening.

Just because it will happen. Does not excuse it. The way some in the hobby act sometime it's like some kind of necessiity. I see your point though

I'm tired of hearing how Paizo is a bad company because they keep releasing new material. Don't want new material no one is forcing anyone to buy it. And no that's not a cop-out. Prove to me how your being forced to buy let alone use new material. Until then it's gamers who either can't say no to their players. Or like buying books yet instead admitting they are the problem blame Paizo instead. I have begun to lose patience with players who react rudely when given advice. No one is saying that one has to follow any advice given by players and/or DMs. Yet if your character is performing badly at the table on a consistent and constant basis well it might be time to listen to what your dm and fellow players have to say. Players who behave like hypocrites at the table. Make the same mistakes, don't listen to advice and tactics. Yet point out other players mistakes. You know first fix the errors you keep making before pointing out my flaws thank you very much.

Liberty's Edge

I dislike internet bad behavior apologists. Making it seem like Edition wars are something that somehow are inevitable because of Human nature. Which I call BS on. No one is forced to act a certain way. Not unless one has a gun at their head.

I don't like echo chamber validation style posts or threads. Posters XYZ asks if he was doing something wrong at the table. Or advice on his or her character. When told yes they were behaving badly. Or their character happens to be poorly designed. They end up getting angry and offeneded. Really wanting to be told that they were not behaving badly at the the table and wanting a verbal pat on the pat. Or that their character was designed properly and needs no changes. Also getting another verbal pat on the back.

Poster who assume that every other posters thinks like they do. Then when presented with the opposite. Act all shock and dismayed. It's like they want to have a discussion with themselves and no one else with a difference of opinion.

Liberty's Edge

In 2E having low rolled or used dumps could really hurt characters. Low Con good luck coming back from the dead. Low Dex made it easier for ranged weapons to hit. In third edition and later while annoying their not too much a hinderence imo. I dislike rolling for hit points. Rolling for stats can be fun. for some people who have run of luck it can make for good characters. One player always rolled high no matter the amount of times he changed dice. He was that damn lucky. I prefer point buy as well. So either or for me.

Liberty's Edge

My vote then for the OP is M&M. As he seems to be leaning toward it.

I'm not surprised Hero Games is in such financial trouble. Unlike Pathfinder which is very popular. Both the devs and hardcore fans of the system vastly overestimated the popularity of the system. While good production values help. It's never really been about that. The complexity and sheer size of the rules when more rules lite and smaller RPGs can do the exact same thing IMO. I get they wanted to keep the fans happy. Yet with 6th edition they pretty much ignored any feedback thst involved any major change.

Already some fans were not sure if buying 5E because of its size. They made it two books and twice as expensive. With very minor changes simply not worth the upgrade IMO. Even Gurps 4E feels similar to me at least. Then again SJG has extra money from munchkin also coming in.

Liberty's Edge

Marc Radle wrote:


Having a PDF is fine, but for a great many folks (myself included) there is simply nothing like having the real thing.

I like print myself. Except unless one significant other is both very forgiving and accepting. I doubt he or she wants to be told that 300+$ in some cases was spent on gaming. When their are bills to be paid and children to be fed. Now if one is single that's another story.

Liberty's Edge

Good to know as I'm just beginning to read the second module. Maybe getting some use between modules.

Liberty's Edge

I'm wondering once the PC have cleared out Harrowstone. I'm thinking of having the town council possibly gifting the prison to the PCs. It seems like a waste for such a place to be left abandoned.

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:


Probably selling as collectibles at this point.

Good point. Still just seems like a waste imo.

Liberty's Edge

Tinkergoth wrote:


Memorax: Regarding books going for $1000 on Amazon, that's usually a result of auto pricing algorithms going mental over something being out of print and in short supply. Often a bit of searching will find more reasonably priced copies (though still expensive).

That explains and thanks. Still even outside Amazon sellers are insane as well. Yes it's out of print. Yet in this day and age where PDF is a common format and a alternative to print. Selling something for more expensive when a PDF is cheaper. Is imo dumb. The classic Marvel TSR set sells for almost 80$. When one can go online and find all the rules at classicmarvelforever.com.

Tinkergoth wrote:


Been a long time since I've read Brave New World books, but I seem to recall despite the vagueness and secret nature of it, everything was pretty much explained to the GM in the guides section of each book. Not to mention the fact that a lot of the secrets that were left untold in the books were left that way because the line got cancelled partway through, and the primary dev/author actually revealed a bunch of the remaining mysteries on his site in 2004, probably because he realised it wasn't going to be picked up again. Most of the important secrets are now on the wikipedia page

It was not just BNW. It was common with Deadlands classic as well. Giving some small setting information but never all of it. It was only and I mean only with the Savage Worlds version did we get all the information. Even then not a fan of the character creation system. I get that it was meant to reduce the time needed to make a character. I just found that it was too limited to what other superhero rpgs offered imo. One could be a blaster and do nothing but blast stuff. One could be a brick character and nothing but. Even Heroes Unlimited offered more and that's saying something,

Liberty's Edge

To the OP it's really strange that you lost all the stuff you purchased. At the very least if I ran the company you would have gotten a refund. At most some kind of credit. If you were able to prove that product was bought from the store. It's bad enough that the company has fallen on hard times. Now their handling of fans leaves much to be desired. It's not helped that their core is out of print. With copies of volume 1 going for 1000$ or more on Amazon.

My picks would be M&M 3E. The latest version. Followed by the classic Marvel rpg from TSR. Third would be Heroes Unlimited though the Palladium system may not be everyone cup of tea.

I don't recommend Brave New World. A very restrictive character creation process IMO. Coupled with Pinnacles annoying habit of the time of keeping important setting information even from GMs.

Liberty's Edge

Not to mention the original movies have been out for quite some time. The first one was released in 1979. Mel Gibson looked like he had just graduated from school. At this point any hardcore fan of the movies has had enough time to learn much lore on the movies IMO.

I enjoyed the movie as well.

Liberty's Edge

Good suggestion Anyzr. Not sure if the Paladin in the group would be ok with the arctype. As well it seems more suitable to a villain and not a PC IMO. Still with the right group and DM it would be interesting to play.

Liberty's Edge

Having started a new Carrion Crown Ap. One of the player has a Witch. Being the DM the player wonders if Hexes work on the undead. As many of them are mind-affecting effects. With undead being mostly immune. Or am I wrong?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DinosaursOnIce wrote:


No I do not believe he is, and while I disagree with him on the matter I totally understand what he's saying.

I think Light/dancing Lights can be annoying much in the same sense that create water can be annoying, they all completely destroy certain plot hooks and types of encounters. Non-magical darkness is barely an issue with their existence.

Considering what other more powerful spells their are in the core. Being bothered by Dancing Light and Light just seems strange imo. I can respect it I truly can't understand it. Might as well ban easy access to torches then. As one can buy many of them with a gold piece.

Liberty's Edge

Is the op joking about light and dancing lights. Of all the spells in the book does IMO really don't need to be nerfed.

Liberty's Edge

One thing that I think needs to be fixed. Or come up with a better system. Is the CR system. I recently had to reboot the AP I was running. I'm running Carrion Crown and I added in a encounter with a Wight. One of my own not in the first module of the AP. I group with minimal optimizers. Even with increased AC and Hp as well as small increase in to hit and damage. A group of six first level players took down a CR 3 monster. Too easily imo.

I'm not a fan of the APS. I use them because they reduce time. Yet the npc design is mediocre at best imo. Even with a group of non-optimizers a group of four adventurers can go through most of the npcs. Even the BBEGs. Put one in a locked room yet giving them no area control spells. Poor equipment. Some good awful feat choices.

Liberty's Edge

In the end it all depends on what the devs want to do with the game. If they want to remain the alternative to 3.5. The they should be the best alternative. Even though I think they need a new background. Tired of Golarian. Here background xyz. Why at the same time making very clear that fhey are committed to continuing and developing the PF rules.

If they want to take it in another direction. They need to be committed to that as well. A new edition. A .5 edition whatever. With a proper playtest. Not one where a very vocal minority chased away anyone who asked for major changes. That type if BS if it were to happen in a second playtest should result in permaban IMO.

In the end your not going to make everyone happy. While offering more than just a rehash with better production values.

Liberty's Edge

Steve Geddes wrote:


Because one values new art and organisation.

If you only want to buy books with new material, it stands to reason you won't want a substantially unchanged system. The people who want minimal change are obviously not in that camp.

I like better art and organization like the next guy. I'm not willing to buy a unchanged edition of a rpg to get the art. It's why I could no longer buy the 40K RPGs after awhile. I don't need the same rehashed description of Bolters, Melta Guns and Psyikers for the fourth time. I can't really justify another 120$+ on a rehashed core and bestiary.

The only exception is when a core book breaks. The PF core really needs to be split into two books IMO. Or in the case of 7E COC or 5E where the changes were for the better. I just can't see the fanbase or at least a large amount reinvesting in more of the same. A new edition is not a guarantee of success either. Yet neither will be a easy sake to the fanbase

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The thing is to those saying don't change anything. Then why even bother buying it again. Seriously if all were going to get is 80-90% rehash with new art and organization and 10-20% if that of new material. I simply can't see the reason for purchasing it again. I play PF flaws and all. I don't need to buy the same flaws and all again. If there was no SRD sure. With 5E, 13th Age and 4E I simply need more than just the same. I'm probably not the only guy that feels this way.

I get that people want to keep using their books. I think gamers need to look further than their own bookshelves. I don't think a unchanged edition is going to sell as well. Not when 5E actually fixed some of the problems that 3E has. Gamers have more choices with D&D and more discriminating.

Skeld wrote:


People will rage quit over the most minor of things. An edition change is not a minor thing.

-Skeld

That's never going to stop imo. No matter what Paizo does. When 3E came out the same happened with those who played 2E. Too much change and no one buys. Too little and no one buys either. At least with the first you get new material. The second is simply a rehash.

Liberty's Edge

From what I hear self contained. Though I would watch them again as I consider them classics. Even the third one.

Liberty's Edge

I really hope their not going to rehash the anti-mutant racism in a world where everyone is different angle. Part of me thinks I'm overreacting. Yet after reading the Newsrama article I'm not so sure. If their going to at least brand mutants to make them stand out. Put the Human torch, Toro and Firestar in the same room. How does the general public know which is a mutant. If anything given how Firestar looks human when she uses her powers she should be more accepeted imo.

Really Spider-man as a example of a character suffering racism. Beyond JJJ he hardly suffered anything remotely close to what mutants have suffered imo.

Fantastic Four maybe at first. Yet somehow the giant talking 8-10 ft tall talking orange rock. The walking, flying fireball throwing flame covered guy are less inhuman than the average mutant. Sorry I'm not seeing it and again compare to what mutants have suffered.

Tony Stark maybe a little. He never cared and all he had to do is throw a few million to get people like that to go away. He never had to worry too much except any and all governments wanting to steal his tech.

Even Sentinels seems not to bother the average person in the Marvel Universe. Considering the outcry over the use of drones. Yet Giant anti-mutant killer robots and no one blinks a eye. That causally rip open homes to get mutants.

I have been reading comics off and on for about 20-25 years. I have yet to see anything that makes non-mutants as discrminated or hunted down like mutants

Liberty's Edge

The splitting of the fanbase began with 2E and will continue. One can't make everybody happy. I was interested in getting 4E earthdawn. Yet beyond a few changes the system is pretty much the same. I enjoy 3E ED I don't need more of the same. I'm not sure much can be done to stop it or slow it down the splitting if the fanbase. Hell some people still only play 3.5.

Liberty's Edge

MMCJawa wrote:


Well you might be in luck then...Rumor has it that after the 616 Universe ends and we get a "new" Marvel Universe, X-men/mutants in general are going to get there own "setting", and will no longer interact with the rest of the Marvel universe. I don't know if that really means "Mutants are no longer part of the main Marvel timeline/universe" or if it's just wanting to make sure their stories don't cross over into any other properties (which muddles the rights)

I know but thanks.

I hope it's a actual seperate universe. The type of world where humans are the norm and mutants very much the exception. I'm in no mood to see them stay in the 616 universe and have them hide in a corner and go "humans treat us differently and are racist. Yet we hide in dark corners doing nothing to change that" type of routine they had going up until ten years ago. In a world like the current Marvel universe where being different is the norm. Where a significant amount of people have powers. Both mutant and non-mutant. With no way for the average person to recognize non-mutants among mutants. The whole mutant racism angle just made no sense. racism should have been against both parties not just mutants. how are mutants both heroes and villians hiding off in a corner. not interacting with the world at large. Going to help mutants as a whole.

Liberty's Edge

I keep forgetting the univeres in the show and the comics are different. The whole mutant problem in comics has been done to death and IMO just unrealistic with a world filled of superhumans. The show and movies are still relatively empty if netahumans at least at this time. I hope that Skye mom personality change is not a attempt to make the character in a female version of Magneto. That character as well forgot that despite mutants being powerful they are outnumbered. So I agree with Sharoth that peace or at least a cold war style of peace is the only viable option. If Shield does not nuke them. Then it's Hydra, Kree or other world governments IMO. Magneto colony of zgenosha only lasted as long as it did because it was protected by writers grace in the comics.

@ Krensky

I get your point about the average person and mutant racism. I still maintain that in comics it makes no sense for mutants and only mutants to be singled out IMO. The Thing a giant tall talking orange rock gets a free pass on racism because he received his powers from cosmic radiation. Yet Cyclops is to be feared because he received his from nuclear fallout. While looking human to boot. If mutants had a tattoo or some kind of mark that made them stand out. They don't. Put Firestar, hlHumzn Torch and Toro in the same room and no one really knows the difference. Now if they had racism and bigotry against any and all mutants and non- mutants it would make more sense. At this point Marvel is forcing the mutant issue,

Liberty's Edge

As for Skye mom personality transformation it fits the character. Yet at the same time I wonder if they are trying to rehash a female version of Magneto. Which has been done to death imo. It should be interesting to see if she can really start a war and/or if all her people will truly follow her. I'm also expecting Skye to be a version of Scarlet witch who was a supporter then fought against Magneto.

I do like Aberzombie theory about Sky mom. It would make for a better reason for the sudden personality shift. Or it could have been Gordon who fed her the vials as well. At one point in the show he walks in on the character and walks toward her. Loke he had a purpose in mind. Or it simply could have been Hal trying to stir the pot to cause trouble.

Liberty's Edge

Krensky wrote:


Except the MCU doesn't have the Fantastic Four, and the early Fantastic Four stories often were about being different and feared.

Which Marvel stopped doing then began focusing on how different mutants were. In a world where 50% or more of the population is different. It would make sense if it was a world where 89-90% of the population were normal and the remaining 10-20% were mutants and non-mutants. In a world where some of the most human looking villains accomplish some of the worst crimes. With no way for the average person to know who is a mutant and non-mutant. It makes no sense for mutants/Inhumans to be singled out and non-mutants given a free pass.

Krensky wrote:


The most outré poison known to the general public in the MCU is probably Emil Blonsky/the Abomination, with the Hulk or Red Skull being a close second.

I kind of agree at this point though in the MCU the public knows there some good mutants as well as bad mutants. Good non-mutants and bad ones. It's just Marvel clumsy and heavy handed way of pushing the racism angle in a world that's been different from day one. If anything given what happened with Civil War. Their should have been a backlash against anyone and everyone that had a super ability of any sort. Mutant and non-mutant imo.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I kind of was a little dissapointed with tonights episode. Too much passing around of the idiot ball. First Skye father is portrayed to be unstable and psychotic. Then Skye mom is asking him for advice on dealing with Shield. Suddenly he is a stable and font of stable and sane wisdom. He's the best and most unbiased person to be asking for advice. That no one expected Ward to pull a fast one. Except maybe Coulson. That's like inviting Mystique into your team and not expecting her to stab you in the back. Maybe it's me but I hate it when writers both in and out comics make the good guys act completely dumb. With the villains always seeming able to pull a fast one without the heroes noticing. Or if they do it's too little to late imo.

Though it would be nice to see Gonzales come back somehow. As well was not expecting Skye mom to do what she did. Then again it makes sense. After what Whitehall did to her why would she trust let alone get along with Shield or humanity at large. Which I'm not too keen on as it smacks too much of the same rehashed mutant vs human trope that Marvel been done to death. With all due respect in a world where we have the Thing, The Human Torch and other non-mutant/Inhuman characters that in some cases look more different and freakish looking. Why would the average person single out mutants/Inhumans. Hell how would the average person even know the difference.

Liberty's Edge

I have to disagree about the martial/Caster disparity being as old as the game. Having played every edition it truly stands out with 3E. In 2E Fighter had the best saves, could get a army by 9th level. More importantly where the only ones who could really specialize in weapons. Casters were still powerful yet also more fragile as well as one hit and your spells failed to go off.

I do agree about the way some of the rules were written in 2E. Then again I don't see how anyone can say that D&D is rules heavy. Even PF at most were talking rules medium. Sometimes one can't always play rules light rpgs and actually need to break a sweat and learn some rules.

Liberty's Edge

Chengar Qordath wrote:


Exactly this. Anyone who's ever worked in retail/customer service will tell you that one of the first rules of it is to be unfailingly polite even when you're dealing with the customer from hell. You don't have to like them to take their money.

of course your going to be told that. Who going to say "I can't stand dealing with rude people. I wish they were banned!" When my job is customer service. Now I can because I found a new job. Before then I was all smiles and cheer despite how rude a customer was because I had to be. On the inside I despised and still despise such people. Only people without a social filter or those who truly hate their job are going to openly criticize rude customers. The smart ones remain professional and take the money. Know that they can't stand you. No matter how much money you spend. Spending money at a certain place even on a regular basis does not entitle one to be a douchebag.

Let me tell you a secret. Of course they are going to take your money. Only a truly stupid person would not. Be warned though that after a certain point no matter how much money you spend at a certain place it's not worth putting up with a constant amount of abuse. Not unless your spending at least a 100$+ on a regular basis. The obnoxious guy that goes to a Dunkin Donuts an buys a small coffee every day but annoys the staff will get banned.

Liberty's Edge

wraithstrike wrote:


The money is the reason why I said before that a business owner would still be reasonably nice to the annoying customers.

It all depends if the customer is a regular he or she maybe given more of a free pass even with bad BO. Espcially if they keep to themselves and cause no trouble. A random person who comes in and starts being rude and abusive. Most store owners refuse to help them. If they are going to spend some money at the establishment they too maybe given a free pass. Rude and they don't buy anything are shown the door. A lgs in my area has a strict no edition war policy. None allowed even if you buy stuff. Your given one maybe two warning after that permabanned from the store. No matter how much money you spent or were planning to spend.

wraithstrike wrote:


As for charisma, in the game it is about how striking your appearance is, not necessarily how good you look. You can be striking beautiful or strikingly ugly.

Still imo the one that is beautiful will be the ones most people tend to want to get to know or gravitate towards. The ugly usually are not given the time of day. Maybe it's a sad start o affairs with humanity I don't know. When I grew up. Between the ages of 10-20 people focused more on appearaance. It never changed between 20-30 and now that I'm turning 41 I see precious little dfference. Hollywood and the entertainment industry tries to pretend that the opposite in moves and TV shows the reality is totally opposite imo.

Even then it depends on a the type of character concept. If your playing the lonely solitary person who lives on the fringes of society. Never interacting with anyone for whatever reason no amount of skill points at least at the start should make you the equal of a person who plays a more sociable character imo. Maybe second or third level. If your character is so secretive even the town or city that the campaign begins in does not know of your existence. Why would anyone in the area trust you at least at the beginning. The barmaid at the nearest tavern would at least at the start be rightly suspicious at least at the start.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I used to penalize players more for having low stats. I later realized I was being unfair. Yet at the same time I do expect players to roleplay a low stat. I'm not saying that with a Cha of 5 one has to roleplay the world most unsociable character. Far from it. Neither do I want to see someone expect to be treated the same as a someone else with a cha of say 16 or more.

My houserule without exception is no stat higher then a 16 with a dump stat. Take a low cha boost it wit skill points then your limited to a 16 Str. Meaning your character was before he starts the game was going out and about trying to talk to people an involve himself on a more social level. Less time to develop his strength. Characters don't exist in a vacuum.

I stick to the standard penalties given in the book. Usually though the character with the better Cha wins in social situations for having the better score and better bonus. I also expect players who take low Cha who give me a reason to overcome low cha. To actively roleplay in social encounters at the table. Failure to do so probably means less XP.

Someone in the thread said that even people with low Cha get served at stores, bars etc. Well having worked in customer service for 12+ years in a bookstore. The truth of the matter is myself and others. We put up with low cha customers because we had too and they had money. Other than that we hated having to deal with such people. If it was not the guy who had such bad BO he smelled worse than a corpse and roadkill combined. To the customers who can't be bothered to do their own research for a book simply show up and go "I don't remember the title or the author of a book. I think the cover was green does that help". Then get mad when we start asking for more information expecting us to know where each and every book was. To customers who simply behave badly in public. Yelling, screaming if they don't their way.

So yeah they may have had money we helped them to the best of our ability. We hoped they never came by again even if they had money. Nor was I being paid enough to have to stomach people with bad BO. Nor was I paid enough to deal with man/womanchildren who were adults and quite frankly should know better. One thing I notice in these threads how some ignore that appearence matters. Deny it all you like but it does imo. One can be the world best public speaker but people for better or worse will still gravitate to better looking people. It's how the world works imo. Nor do I see that changing anytime soon.

Liberty's Edge

Again some here are saying "don't change anything" as they want to keep using their books. Which I respect. Yet beyond that no one is really telling me why I should reinvest in a edition that changes nothing. It's the elephant in the room no one wants to talk about or even acknowledge. Unless a rehashed edition offers significant new material. I'm probably not going to spend money on it. First I can get it off the SRD for free. Second I have the current edition that I can use. With all the options and material released their enough for a lifetime of gaming.

The 3.5./PF 1E diehards will be happy with the new edition. The middle of the road gamers like myself probably not as much. Those who dislike 3.5. forget about. The fanbase at large with 3.5, 4E and 5E as options can and will ask what the new edition will offer that the current edition can already do.

As for 4E I played I enjoyed it when I did. It simply was not the game for me after awhile. I don't dislike it. Or hold any grudge at Wotc. Unlike some in this hobby I have vastly more important things to do with my life.

Liberty's Edge

Which i understand. But at the same time if the edition offers me nothing new. Why invest in the same product again. I think Paizo is in a damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Liberty's Edge

With fans being able to play older editions if they want. The previous PF books will not disappear jus because a newer edition is no longer compaitable. Even though Wotc stopped supporting 2E. Fans of that version still play it. I get that some don't want to see their material become obsolete. Yet it was laways a risk. I knew full well that with the changes between 2E and 3E being so different. That their was a risk of it happening again.

Liberty's Edge

While I'm sure 13th Age is not as popular as OF. To simply dismiss it out of hand is a mistake. It offers a mix of both 4E and PF. Which some fans want. While I do wish that their would be more releases for 5E. It fixed some of the issues that PF has. For some that s big thing. Any new edition of PF will be compared to what has come before. I still think that not much can be done at fracturing the fanbase. I'm not saying nothing can be done. Just that it will happen one way or the other whatever they do.

Liberty's Edge

The fracturing of the fanbase will happen. No matter the changes done to the system. Minor or major. Paizo can attempt to minimize the effects. To be honest I think it's a waste and they should focus on developing the rules and playtest. Even with PF being similar in ways to 3.5. their still is some that play that edition and only that one.

Unless their is a significant and large amount of gamers who uses 3.5. material at their table I don't think the next edition has to be backwards compitable. It would help but if only a small portion of the community uses older material it should not be that big of a priority imo.

Paizo is kind of in a difficult position imo. Release a rehashed edition and not sell as much. Release a new edition and that too is a problem. Competition from other rpgs.

Liberty's Edge

MMCJawa wrote:


While perhaps you feel it isn't worth talking about, fracturing the fanbase is a concern that Paizo (and the fanbase!) can't really ignore. Especially in the internet age, which can cause minor disagreements over marketing to massively blow up. Yes, some fracturing occurs with each edition and really isn't avoidable. But the extent of fracturing varies with edition changes, a lot of which is avoidable. One thing of course is timing of edition change over. 3.5 to 4E got a lot of grar because (some) people didn't think the system was ready yet for a revision, not after the 3.0-3.5 update. Paizo needs to find a way to minimize that fracturing. That may involve a massive rules overhaul obsoleting the older books (not something I want, so hopefully no), or it might require some sort of incremental change, that will probably not make you happy. Or some sort of third option neither of us considered.

I don't think they can minimize it. Large or small amount of fanbase fracturing it's inevitable imo. Why waste resources on something that at most they can do little stop imo. The only third option I can see is series of Pathfinder Unchained. Though I do find the 3.5./PF fanbase fracturing really strange. It's not like PF is that different from 3.5. With Paizo giving away the rules on their SRD seems strange to not want to convert imo.

MMCJawa wrote:


As far as Pathfinder is concerned, I agree here, but that is only because I see no evidence that Pathfinder 2.0 would NOT have an OGL. Really OGL discussions mostly show up regarding 5E, not Pathfinder.

I do think OGL helps Pathfinder, by providing a proving ground for new talent. Several current Paizo folks got their start in OGL, and a good chunk of the freelancers are heavily involved with it.

It also means that people with different interests and design ideas get to play with the ruleset, which as a consumer means I can port in systems, classes, etc that might take years to get from Paizo, if at all. It really helps if you are interested in running any sort of game deviates from standard high fantasy DnD assumptions.

It's all well and good to want to help and encourage others. Does it give the primary owner a guaranteed source of income is all that I'm interested about. Do I want to help artist or up and coming rpg company XYZ. Sure. It better make me richer one way or the other. The OGL was a very good but also somewhat naive endeavor on the part of Wotc. It helped encourage others without guaranteeing any sales for them. As well as creating their own competition. So I can see why their not doing it with 5E.

MMCJawa wrote:


ah, people want what they want. You can't really take people to task about putting there personal preferences first, when that is the same thing you do, only you are arguing from a different position. YOU may only be interested in a new version of Pathfinder, but I personally want a game that doesn't render all my current books "obsolete" (Yes I can still use those books, but for many people including myself finding games is tough, and its even tougher if you are interested in a dead system). Really...I expect Paizo will take the path which ensures the largest fraction of the fanbase is happy, brings in players, and most of all makes them money. This may be completely different from what either of use want.

If their was a large amount of gamers who actually used most of their 3.5. collections at the table. I would agree. Yet from what I'm seeing here and elsewhere and outside of the internet. It seems to be the exception not the norm. Either it's PF and only PF. Even then most 3PP PF stuff is disallowed. I don't see why they should design a edition for the small number of people who use most or all of their 3.5, PF and 3pp. When and I could be wrong. Most either let it gather dust. Or sell it off to buy PF stuff. What you and others are ignoring is that PF also faces competition from other rpgs. If all your going to offer is more the same. Good luck getting those who switched to say 13th Age from returning to the fold. Or 5E which actually fixes some of the flaws of PF.

Liberty's Edge

Chengar Qordath wrote:


Part of the problem is that a fair amount of the 4e bashing seems to come from people who have never actually played a game of 4th edition, if you go by their comments.

There's a big difference between "the at-will/encounter/daily power system felt like it stripped out a lot the unique character of individual classes" and "4e was perfectly balanced, and that's why it sucked!"

Agreed and seconded. I have nothing against disliking 4E. It's when posters make wrong statements about the game. While usually showing that they never played 4E. Like saying that it was targeting to the WOW generation. You know how many things I saw in third edition that I saw in pre-mmo computer games. I'm not accusing Wotc nor Paizo of trying to market to those who like computer games.

The funny thing about 4E FR is that they listened to a very vocal group of gamers and their dislike about FR then implemented changes. Some I liked such as the too large number of redundant gods. Removal of high level npcs. I was not bothered so much by them. Just that after seeing their published stats why the hell does high level npc XYZ really having such trouble defeating the main villain of FR series ABC.

I still maintain that they either stick to publishing the current edition. Or something new. A rehash is simply not going to be as attractive as it once was. Why would a significant majority by the same product twice. Even if they did then some would rip Paizo a new one for releasing a rehash then accuse them of a cash grab imo.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I just can't see how a Wizard blasting stuff with magic is OK in a fantasy setting. Yet somehow a Fighter leaping from building to building in full plate as unrealistic or game breaking. Both tend to break the laws of realism. Both can be seen in certain types of literature. A high level fighter while not splitting a mountain in two. Should be able to break a boulder in two imo. I get certain gamers don't like seeing that. Just admit it. Telling me it's unrealistic but Wizards get a free pass on that because of "magical reasons" is not going to convince me of your side of the argument.

Liberty's Edge

Nathanael Love wrote:


A lot of people didn't like 4th ed for a lot of reasons. Pathfinder started because of all these people who didn't want 3.5 to end.

It's pretty obvious that the PF boards are going to have a lot of people who didn't like 4E for whatever reason.

It still does not excuse the 4E bashing. No one is forced to bash 4E or any other type of rpg. Saying it's the PF boards is simply apologizing for bad behavior imo. I may bash PF and the devs. I'm not proud of it. I don't do it every single time I go on a forum or in public.

Liberty's Edge

I don't mind being told something is cheesy/broke/overpowered. As long as it can factually be proved to be all three. Instead what I see usually happening is some on the hobby disliking say a spell or feat. Then instead of simply just admitting that. They try and push something as broken or cheesy. If I listened to every instance of that. I would never be able to use any of the newer material. I would be a very rich man if I received a dollar every time we had some claim something was broken. I come here check and see what is claimed to be broken. Read up on it. Then see if it's fact or opinion. Usually it ends up as being opinion and nothing more imo. I knew back in 3.5 to take broken claims from the community with a galaxy sized grain of salt. Were talking about the a significant amount that caused weapon focus and greater weapon focus bonuses to be changed from +2,+4 to +1,+2. How is a two point difference that significant. Who knows maybe some people dislike equal numbers.

What bothers me the most is how those claiming stuff being broken come off sometimes as hypocrites. Say high and low how broken Gunslingers or feat XYZ is in a game where they are the DM. Yet as a player take then take the class and feat.

I try to respect and understand the realism argument I see here and out of the forums. To be blunt I simply can't. I have tried over the last two decades. But I can't. I could understand the argument if D&D was grounded in realism and physics. Majority of the game simply breaks the rules of realism. Dragons the size of jumbo jets not only flying easily yet also finding enough food to sustain themselves in areas they claim and terrorize. Wizards and Clerics routinely break the laws of physics. If one does not like some elements of guns just tell me that. Telling me and others it's not realistic. Well expect a few raised eyebrows, a few laughs, and most disagreeing with you imo.

The Hulk can lift a tank easily because he can lift 100 tons. She-Hulk can lift 75 tons. Unless this has changed recently. So some might think and insist it's not realistic. Both have the strength to not only lift a tank. They can do it in their sleep.

Liberty's Edge

I suppose it's because I'm tired of hearing the same 4E bashing. When I played both I was able to roleplay in both. I stopped playing 4E because I found the sourcebooks too expensive for the content. It was never a rules issues.

1 to 50 of 2,368 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.