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. 2,325 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,325 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
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

2 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.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can I ask two things when posting in similar threads. Saying that a new edition will fracture the fanbase. No matter what they do rehash or new edition it will fracture the fanbase. In a major or minor way. But it happens no what. When 2E came out it was happening with that edition way back then. It did with the 3.0 to 3.5. transition. Same with 3.5. to PF. I know of a store owner who had to ban a persistent group of 3.5 diehards who even with PF and Paizo free Srd kept pestering the owner about when they could get 3.5. No matter how many times he told them they were out of luck. So imo Paizo whatever they do with a 2E of PF really should not care about fracturing their fanbase because short or long term they can't really do anything about it.

Lack of a OGl. While a OGL for any rpg is nice. It's not a requirement. We played through the 1980s until 2000 when Wotc first came out with the OGL. Guess what the hobby survived without one. I get that people like the OGl but to say that any rpg company without one is doomed to fail. Either is a younger gamer to the hobby. Or simply wants a OGL. If they can't get it proclaim doom and gloom for any edition of D&D lacking one and the hobby as a whole. TSR went under because of being run poorly not a lack of a OGL. I'm not a huge fan of a OGL. Maybe it's because of huge clut of poor D20 products under 3.5. Or because I rather charge a fee to use a OGl. If I owned the OGL I want guaranteed 100% sales or at least a decent amount of money coming in. Not "gives us your rules for free and you might get some revenue" of the OGL

I notice that those in threads like these who don't want change. Really can't see any further than their own bookshelves. Again they have to offer something new with a PF 2E. Too much competition from OSR, 4E, 5E, 13th Age. It's not 2008 anymore where it seemed no one but Paizo was going to support 3.5.If all I'm going to get is 80-90% old material and being generous 10-20% new material. Why would I reinvest in the core. Sorry but supporting Paizo and my fellow 3.5 diehards. Is simply not a valid or good enough reason for me to buy more pf the same material. Unlike the current edition. I think the next edition will have to offer more. Fans who play 5E because they dislike the caster/martial issue. Are not going to leave 5E to get more of the same. The only flaw 5E has is a lack of decent support imo.

Whatever they do I will still support them in some way. I still buy Pathfinder Tales. As theirs not much new in terms of novels from Wotc. Quite frankly I'm tired of the ever continuing adventures of Drizzt and friends. I would still buy map packs and other accessories as well. Maybe even more APS if it is a rehashed edition.

Liberty's Edge

for me and my gaming group. Either offer something new or were not interested. If others want to by yet another rehash more power to them. We have the current version of Pathfinder plus the SRD meaning we don't even have to buy a totally new or rehashed PF. Mind you I do this to all new editions of existing rpgs. It's the reason I'm not buying Earthdawn 4E. Either offer me at least 50%+new material. Or don;t expect me or others to reinvest in a core with no to little change.

Looking at it from more than just a perspective of one own bookshelf. They can't offer more of the same and expect the same amount of people to buy it again. Yes I know they did for PF. Yet at the same time no one else at the time looked like they were going to support 3.5. With less competition as well. With 5e, 4E, OSR, 13th Age they need to offer something new. 13th Age from what I heard seems to be a mix of both 4E and 3.5. The only issue I have with 5E is a lack of support. It's not 2008 anymore and fans need to stop acting like the same circumstances that allowed Paizo and PF to thrive will still be there.

@ Glass

Save your breath. Those who dislike 4E always bring up the same BS about 4E. While acting like PF has no flaws.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I still think they need to offer something new. Or more than a simple rehash with better production values. PF is facing more competition now. A newer version will be compared to the current version and other RPGs. With gamers asking "why should I switch or buy the new edition. If the problems with high level okay are not addressed for example. Those who hate how PF handles higher levels. Are not going to reinvest IMO.

While I understand why they did one core book. I prefer a separate phb and dmg. My first of core book fell apart. My second is still intact because I cover hardcover RPGs with a sticky plastic adhesive clear material. Even that is not full proof.

Liberty's Edge

The thing is depending on the class it's not hard to optimize. My first character using PF was a Bard and somehow with the right feat choices and without using a class design guide. I had made a optimized Bard. Just taking the bread and butter feats for a Fighter according to some on this board is making your character optimized. The system as is does kind of reward you for taking certain choices.

Players should be allowed to take low stats. As long as they are willing to accept the consequences of doing so. Take a low Cha for a Bard I don't want to hear that your spells are not as effective as the other player with a higher stat.

Liberty's Edge

Thanks Dabbler. I will still going to get the book. Even in the ACG their some good material. It's just frustrating that after all this time even with all the feedback they still manage to miss the mark imo. AS I said at this point six years into the development cycle of PF I'm expecting more from the devs. If what you said is true about the Unchained Monk. Then either they were not listening to the countless Monk threads. Which they are free to do by the way. Just don't waste the fans time by releasing a book that is marketed as killing off "sacred cows" in the game. Then do a half hearted attempt. I had a feeling they would really not fix enough of the problems. Sad to see I was right imo.

To be honest with 5E and the devs of that edition actually fixing problems. You think that Paizo would do a better job. Imo I'm pretty sure that PU is not going to get fans who play and like 5E back in the fold.

Liberty's Edge

I will probably get this book as it will probably have something useful I can use. But as usually the devs are unable or unwilling to find the proper middle ground when designing something. Either a ability is really good. Or it's not worth taking. Six years after the core was released and I expected a hell of lot better from the devs. Oh well.

Liberty's Edge

I can't see that getting them more sales. I don't want to buy 80-90% rehashed material simply to get 10-20% if it even is that much. Why waste the money when I can simply wait and get it from the SRD. Give me a reason to reinvest in the core book. Or I'm sticking with older version.

One way or the other releasing a core book with mostly new material or rehashed material will split the fanbase imo.

Liberty's Edge

I would not use Palladium Books as a example on how to run a business. Sure the company has been around for 32 years. But their not thriving. Just surviving. Their not moving as much product as before. Nor making as much money. Hell even game stores in the city where the company is located. For the most part don't carry their products anymore.

So one can't even remotely compare Paizo and Palladium equally. While I think PF is mostly a rehash. They at least included so minor new material. Even regular D&D with 3E and after changed the system. Palladium game engine is a house ruled version of AD&D that has not changed in any real significant way in 32 years. The books have the same copy and paste errors. The look of the books look like they are published in the late 1980s. The owner can't give a realistic release schedule to save his own life. I enjoy the system flaws and all. But it's not the company to follow if you want to succeed in the business.

While I don't think that a new edition will arrive anytime soon. If it does it can't be another rehash with a few minor rules changes. With new cover and interior art. I doubt a unchanged version will sell as well as the current version of PF will. Their more competetion. 5E, 4E, 13th Age, PF 1E, earlier editions of D&D. With that much selection gamers will be asking why they should reinvest in another PF. Even Chaosium with Call of Cthluhu with 7E did more than just reissue a rehash with better production values.

Liberty's Edge

Kalindlara wrote:


I'm with you on feats.

As for the APs, I actually really like them for the stories, both for reading material and for eventual running. I'll probably rewrite most of the actual encounters anyway. :)

Also, I think your autocorrect is broken.

Not so much the auto-correct. So much as posting too fast. That's the main issue of APS though for meat least. If I'm going to rewrite the encounters. I might as well not send the money. If they don't save me time in preparing for my game it feels like extra work for little gain. That being said they help if your stuck and can't get inspiration. THe npcs in APS I have come across three that I have not had to rewrite. The rest are so non-optimized even a group of the least unoptimized players will defeat them with relative easy. I have a Alchemist in my group who can throw 3-4 bombs that end up doing 100+ hp. That's half to three quarters hp for most BBEG.

Pan wrote:


Can only speak for myself but I could buy APs forever. While I still do a ton of custom work when running an AP, having them is a big time saver and source of inspiration for me. I dont need rule splats so a PF 2E will never be due. Though clearly I'm not like everyone else.

It's somewhat of a time saver imo. I agree when it comes to setting up the story and places for a AP. The npcs are so poorly optimized that it's not even funny. I know their constrained with what treasure they can include for npcs. To be blunt a CR 14 npc has no business having a +1 ring of protection imo.

Liberty's Edge

Wise words spiral ninja. I don't think a new edition will come out soon. But after a certain point their is a saturation point with the fanbase. I have to ask. Do I really need bestiary 8. I have the first four and was disappointed with the last one. What really is the difference between a ocean troll, a pond troll or a river troll. I used to think I would never get tired of monsters but now I am. i also have the Tome of Horrors complete as well. Another problem is that too often for example a feat is either too good or not worth taking. Plenty of fluff filled descriptions with the crunch elements being so not worth taking. That I would have to be paid a six digit figure minimum before adding it to my character sheet. So many archtypes with offical and 3pp as well.

Even the APS. After a point how many pre-made adventures does one need or want to spend the money on before deciding to make ones won. Even for a novive after running a few APS. One should be able to make ones encounters imo.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can understand NL dislike of new editions. It's the same reason why I passed over getting Earthdawn 4E. Too little changes and not in the mood to reinvest in a new edition without 50% + new material in it. The exceptions are 7E COC because while similar to previous editions the changes enhance the rpg.

Even if Paizo kept the same names of the books. As long as the material was relatively or mostly new people would still buy. If they can make the current rpg engine run better and faster at higher levels that's already a big bonus. A unchanged PF good luck with trying to get the same sales as when the core was first released. Unlike when 4E was released it has some decent competion now.

Please every company including this one wants to make a profit. I'm not calling them greedy. But they have bills to pay. Then again it's the usual "rpg company xYZ that I like is above reproach. The others I don't like are greedy" mentality that persists in the hobby. Eventually if the current edition makes them lose money and they do nothing to stop it. For fear of alienating the fanbase then they deserve to go under. I have no sympathy for any company who purposefully loses money for whatever reason.

Liberty's Edge

Mind you the community is strange though. As I'm seeing more than a few elements of 4E in 5E. Yet somehow with 5E those elements are acceptable to the same community. Then when they were inside the with 4E books. In the end it's all a matter of presentation imo. If they kept the more traditional fantasy jargon and terminalogy maybe 4E may have done better. While I never taught of 4E as a mmo and never will so don't try to convince otherwise. I did see that they borrowed a few terms from mmos to appeal to that portion of the market.

Paizo has to offer something new. Or at least not another rehash. Between 5E, pF 1E, 13th Age and 4E. PF 2.0. will have more competition. Going for the status quo will have members of the community asking what can the newer version of PF offer that the previous four don't already have. If it's nothing then good luck trying to get people to buy it. Maybe some of the PF diehards but not those who have moved on to other systems.

While one does not have to switch over let alne by the new edition. Chances are a person will. When 3E was released in 2000. 2E and earlier edition of D&D gaming dried up in my area overnight. Ads for those editions of the games were left blank. So those DMs adapted to 3E. Kept playing with the same people or not at all.

Liberty's Edge

Rynjin means Nathaenel Love.

The thing is people in the hobby don't look at the big picture. Or assume that everyone will act like them. Down the line with two versions of the same rpg with little changes. Why would people buy a third version. Once Paizo published Pathfinder they gave those who wanted 3.5. to continue what they wanted. While fixing very little of the problems of the system. If I hate the caster vs Fighter power level problem. PF 2.0. does little to fix the problem. Why would I buy it when I can just keep using the current edition. I dislike running high level games because the system slows down at high levels and again no changes. Why waste my money. 5E fixes some of the problems of the system. Is PF 2.0. going to do the same. If no why would I stop playing 5E. They need new material or at least show the overall fanbase. Not just the 3.5. diehards. That their offering something new and fresh. If not chances are good that while a unchanged PF 2.0. will sell well. Nothing like the current version did when it was released. I like the system but the 3.5. engine can use a improvement.

Even Chaosium implemented some different enough changes with Call of Cthulhu 7E. Six edition of rehashes. Competion from both Trail and Savage Cthulhu another rehash simply made no sense. Trail espcially while true to COC does a better job then the core COC imo. Their a decent amount of the fanbase who refuse to buy PF because they feel it adds nothing new.

Liberty's Edge

It all depends on the class and build. For example one can play a Fighter with low Str. Just don't expect to carry heavy Armor and a shield. Or at the very least expect to be encumbered. A bard with a 16-18 Cha has better chance of his spells succeeding then one with a 10-12. Mind you it can be done. Just don't expect to be as effective as characters with higher primary stat.

Liberty's Edge

LoneKnave wrote:
If people are... loyal enough to buy the same game 3 times over, you may as well assume they'll go ahead and do it a 4th time.

Before 5E I would agree. Now I think it would be more of the opposite. Two editions of the same rpg with very little change. Is not going to sell well a third time imo. Given that 5E fixes some of the problems that 3.5./Pathfinder has. Releasing the same rules a third time with little to no changes when their a new edition of the same rpg. That fixes the flaws is a mistake. Making PF 3.5. backwards compatible while a good thing do. Ends up not being that much of a beneficial thing imo. When DMs either insist on PF core and PF sourcebooks. Or some not willing to spend time converting 3.5. material to PF. I don't think the next edition has to be backwards compitable.

To be honest I'm not willing to spend another 100-120$ on another rehash with new cover/inter art. I need at least 50%+ minimum new material to invest in another edition of PF. If it's more of the same I can simply use 3.5. and PF material. They have to offer something new. It's not like it was with 4E which received it's fair share of negative reviews. 5E for the most part seems to have received a more positive review. Will it happen soon no. But it will happen imo.

Liberty's Edge

Entryhazard wrote:
To be honest complaining about Summoner being grossly overpowered and banning it with Wizards, Clerics and Druids around feels weird.

Seconded. If I wanted to be a jerk player. I can have a novice DM in tears with a Bard from the core rule book. With the right feats and spells.

Liberty's Edge

To be fair no one is saying print is dead. To me at least it's dying a slow death. Between PDFs being cheaper. E-readers improving over time. A lack of space to store books. As well as a depreciation in the value of rpg print books. It will slowly become the medium of choice for most people. I'm sure their are people who like and enjoy 8 track tapes. I don't see a sudden renaissance in that format. He'll even VCR recorders are getting harder and harder to find in homes

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The end of the world style bloat threads as soon as a new hardcover is released. Guaranteed to almost happen with PU. That the lastest release will ruin their game. That paizo forces them to buy it etc...

Liberty's Edge

Don't forget it's all piazo fault for making people buy new material. It's all their fault because DMs can't say no to their players. Or that gamers are not responsible with how their money is spent. That somehow new material equals forced to purchase. Option paralysis I'm not to sympathetic. Once or twice I can understand. More than that get over it, grow a pair and pick something already. It's playing a rpg. Not saving the world.

Liberty's Edge

I'm in agreement with Joe Hex. WW was fine after the reboot. Once they got together with CCP. Is when things went downhill. Not to mention the reboot had to happen IMO. They painted themselves into a corner with the whole " all the game lines will end. Nothing the players can do about it" Unless the storyteller either ignores the metaplit. Made worse that later sourcebooks were tied into the metaplot.

For myself I want them to find the proper middle ground between flavour and crunch. Either something like a feat is either too good. Or not worth the paper it's printed on. I prefer print myself but realize PDF/POD is the wY of the future. Whether I like it or not.

Liberty's Edge

It should read triple the hp of certain npcs.

Liberty's Edge

Seconded pretty much what Rynjin has posted. In my experience I have had to double if not triple the go of certain Mocs. At one point the semi-optimized Gunslinger was one shotting the weaker variety of giants in my game.

If your running AOs. Rynjin #5 post is correct to damn correct. The bbegs are sonetimes so poorly designed it's not funny IMO.

As well the CR system for the most part does not work well either. A group of four characters even slightly optimized can defeat most encounters IMO.

Liberty's Edge

It's one rpg. It's not like D&D spawned a horde of fatal clones. So I see no reason to apologize to those parents IMO. I bad rpg does not a hobby ruin IMO.

Liberty's Edge

Fatal and the people who wrote it have no redeeming qualities IMO. Sometimes people write something without realizing how offensive it can be. It's rare but it happens. The people who write the rpg. We're not only unapologetic. They even tried to defend the game.

As to those who decided to ignore my it others warnings about Fatal. You were warned. Ignore that at your peril.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:


No it wasn't anything like that. This was one particular woman who recently married someone with three adult children, and now feels the need to share every single James Dobson (who is just a horrible person) post she finds. Anyways I found out you can still be friends with someone on Facebook and not see anything they do on Facebook. So, Yay, problem solved. Sorry for the derail.

Trust me I feel your pain. i had to unfriend someone on FB because he insisted on writing every detail of his life. Unless it's important. I don't need to know that a 9 am you brushed your teeth.

Liberty's Edge

All I'm saying is to be careful. Sometimes a player will learn from his mistakes. In this case to carry a ranged weapon. Sometimes they don't. Which is a failure on their part and not the DM. One can't force the issue. Yet one cannot cater to someone who will not learn from his mistakes either. If the same player(s) keep forgetting or ignoring to take ranged weapons. I'm not going to stop throwing opponents who can fly at them.

Liberty's Edge

I usually always have a sling at least.

I can see why some players don't use it though.

-it's too expensive at least for bows and crossbows

-require too many feats to be quite good at using it. To get that extra bonus to damage I need to be within 30 feet of the target. It kinds of defeats the purpose of firing from range.

- Have specific build in mind that focuses only on melee weapons

-player preference for roleplaying reasons or simply too stubborn to take a bow.

One way I DON"T suggest DMS force the issue. Is tailoring the game to force the player to use one. Not only do you come across a dick DM. Your putting the player in a uncomfortable situation at the table. It's kind of obvious when the player who has no bow suddenly keeps getting targeted by the nocs. To the extent that they ignore bigger threats. Eventually a player adapts or he/she ends up at a disadvantage against flying opponents. If any DM would pull that kind of BS with me. I would first try to talk to him/her. If that fails leave the game. Or if it's held at my place kick the DM out. People forcing their gaming agendas either as player or DM I don't put with anymore.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Ok, this is actually a complaint about Facebook but I can't post it there because people know me.

I am tired of people without kids posting inspirational parenting advice. This includes people who marry someone with kids that have already moved out before you got there. You are not a real parent. I do not need your "insight."

Sorry for the interruption. I feel slightly better.

To be fair if they don't want to be given advice then they should not be posting on Facebook. Or telling me in person about their troubles with their children. Don't tell me about how little timmy is being a pain at home and school then get mad when someone suggests advice. It works both ways. If one does not want to hear advice on their children. Then don't regal us with your tales of woe about your children.

Liberty's Edge

The sad and frightening part is that despite what is said. Fatal at first was not a parody. It was apparently a serious attempt at a rpg. Those in the hobby insists its a parody because no one wants to believe that it was a serious attempt. Made worse when the developers of the rpg adamantly defended their game. When reviews pretty much tore it apart. Deservedly too IMO.

Before I forget DO NOT READ IT!!!!!

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How about having to deal with the same kind of people who worked in a lgs. I get that they want a rpg to have good writing. I'm not buying rpgs to get a novel. If I want a novel I can read War and Peace.

Liberty's Edge

Aranna wrote:


I wasn't there, so take this with a grain of salt. But I once had a player who just sat there and never seemed to be excited about my game, I did everything I could think of to involve him. But week after week nothing... Eventually I had a long conversation about his participation and I will never forget what he said, he said he didn't want any special attention in the game, he was happy just to be one of the players, he didn't want to be the big hero he want to be with his friends, his goal was to support his buddies. I no longer saw him as uninvolved, I saw him as just what the others needed a helping hand who made everything go smoother. And now I smile when he gets to play. Sometimes we are so caught up in our own perspective that we don't get to understand that other person. We don't ask the right questions or we assume something negative. What's done is done with him but hopefully this story will be on people's minds if they run into difficult players.

It's hard to describe my ex-player. Suffice to say it was like watching a person socially devolve. Never gave a care about anything but himself and his brother. Withdrew too much into mmos and online gaming because life threw him a few curve balls. I admit I did too once. But one can't hide from real life from withdrawing from it.

My player complained that my games lacked roleplaying. Yet had to be forced sometimes to interact with npcs. He lost a love interest because he refused to interact with the npc. Then wondered why another player had the love interest. Barely said anything at the table. Refused to show up to one of my games because he could not get a lift to the game. Thi is a guy who travels alot when it suits him. Refused to do game notes for "reasons" aka too lazy. If it was not a favored rpg refused to learn the rules. Had others make his character for him.

I wish it was your player. At least he had a reason for not engaging in game. My player simply does not give a truck about anything anymore. It's sad because you think that after alienating everyone around them it would be a walk up call to try and help themselves. Nothing. I don't even know if the player or his brother are still alive. It felt like being friends with them was like working a full time job.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The guy I kicked out of my game. While I did not give a hug. Did everything in my power to motivate to get into the game. It went nowhere. Sometimes one has to just walk away from a losing and soul sucking battle. Some people will not change and despite your best efforts and being friends or family the solution is to walk away. Life is too short.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ha I not only get on your lawn. I seed it with pesticide resistant weeds.

LazarX wrote:


Having gamed in those days, I would say that it would be more accurate to say that No one cared. There was not this big set of gaming conventions written in stone (or on the non-existent Internet). It was the NORM that GM's would pretty much do their own thing with different degrees of variance from the ruleset. In all the GMs I played with, not a single one of them held just or used all of the rules in the DMG or Player's Handbook. RAW wasn't even a term in those days.

Seconded

Having gamed with 1E then 2E. RAW was not a term in those days. OR RAI. If it was I never saw it until 3E.

Liberty's Edge

To be honest I never have seen anyone on the Wotc accuse Paizo of being in it for the money. If anything it's someone accusing Wotc of doing the same.

To me criticizing a company for doing what a company should be doing. Which is make a profit and offer most fans what they want. Is dumb imo. i know it's human nature but it does not make it any less dumb. It's like accusing Mcdonalds of making junk food. Unless it's a non-profit which many companies are not. Employees/bills need to be paid. The new books we get in print form are payed by profits that Paizo make. Fans fault them, Wotc or some other rpg company for being greedy or too profit oriented. I sometimes wonder if people are either too naive or have no clue on who business works.

To give a good example at one point the Canadian dollar was strong. Consumers assumed that the price of certain products would change overnight. Working in a bookstore people coming in thinking that suddenly books were the american price. Economics simply does not work that way. Say I buy 100 core PF books at 60$ I'm not going to sell them for 40-45$ no matter how strong the Canadian dollar was. Sorry but the company I worked for was not going to take a major loss in profit no matter how strong the currency was.

I don't see why PF would be considered a threat though. If some in the hobby want to stick with a certain edition of a rpg they can. If it happens that they either have a lack of player or DMs because everyone switiched over to the new edition. That's not the fault of the fans of the new edition or the company. Either adapt by learning the new edition or suffer in silence. I had a player who I kicked out of my current game. Who if I refused to play 2E or any Palladium rpgs was the stereotypical lump player from the GMG. At first I tried to work with him. Encourage him to participate. Eventually with other reasons I asked him to no longer come to the game. As a dM i'm in charge of more than one player. I can't help someone who won't help himself.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

In the ned even if Paizo is more involved in the hobby. They still are a business that wants to make a profit. Maybe not profit oriented as Wotc. Yet I doubt the people working for the company are losing sleep because they are making a profit. If anything their involvement in the hobby is good PR that makes them more money. They of course do it because they like the hobby. They also know how to run a business as well.

Even if wotc was more involved in the hobby. Some would still accuse them of being greedy. Which goes back to the favored rpg and company can do no wrong.

Another sign. Automatically assumes a rpg is garbage unplayable without having played. Let alone read the rules. While hiding behind years of experience in the hobby. I don't care if you have 20,30 or even 50 years of experience in rpgs. If you never read a rpg then you really should not be judging the rules let alone crticizing them. Which happened alot when both 3E and 4E was released. Even more with 4E. Gamers were making opinions based on second or third hand information. As someone who read and played the rules I'm supposed to take your uninformed opinion seriously. Yeah...no.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

What makes someone a Grognard

Going into long unwanted dissertations on how much better things were before rpg xyz came along. I can respect older members of the hobby liking a older version of a rpg. Unless I or others ask I'm in no mood to hear how things were better in the "good old days" .

Considers new younger members to the hobby a threat. Simply because they like to do things differently. Or like other stuff like mmos and newer rpgs. The irony here is that those members were they themselves treated the same way when rpgs threatened to replace board games. This hobby needs more members. A select few expect new members to essential be clones of themeselves. If they are not they are unwelcome.

A good sign. When they start a conversation by going "It's not that I'm against change". Then proceed to show everyone and anyone that yes they really don't like any change.

Their favored rpg is the best. No flaws whatsoever usually. With the company who publishes it above reproach. Rpgs they don't like they see flaws where their usually are none. The companies that publish them the spawn of the devil. A good example is some on this forum accusing Wotc of being greedy and wanting to make money. Last time I checked Paizo is not a non-profit. Who starts a business not wanting to make money.

Liberty's Edge

With all due respect to Palladium apologists. Much if the flak their rpgs and KS is deserved to a certain amount. Having played since the first core book for Rifts was released. Their games are poorly organized. Have copy and paste errors that later printings usually do not fix. With important rules scattered all over the place. As for KS well his habit of sending Cease and Desist letters while his legal right to do so is not going to endear him to anyone. Not to mention the Robotech Kickstarter miniatures fiasco where people at Gencon received their minis before backers again did nothing to endear him to the KS backers. So let's not pretend that Palladium Rpgs and KS are innocent of any wrong doing either imo.

Mind you I still think that 2e Palladium Fantasy to be a decent game. Even if it suffers from "humans at the top of the food chain" simply because the devs have a soft spot for humans like too many fantasy rpgs. At the same time they offer monster races as pcs. Yet most of those races would considering their evil reputations would not be allowed 100ft near any town. village or city. I also like the magic system. So much better than the fire and forget magic system of D&D.

2E D&D is what Pathfinder is to 3.5. Very few minor rule changes but 80%+ is mostly rehash. I enjoyed that edition. But the level limits for demi-humans simply because the 2E devs were pro-human and unwilling to give humans as a race anything better than unlimited class levels was annoying to me at least. I'm getting penalized simply for taking another race other than human.

Myself I consider myself a Enlightened Grognard. While their a few things I hold sacred when it comes to rpgs. I'm also open to new experiences. If it makes me have fun more. Or a new version of a existing rpg easier to run. I get the newer version usually. I also don't find the newer generation of gamers to be such a threat to the hobby as others grognard do. Without new blood the hobby dies like any hobby. It's up to use to teach the newer generation to get interested in the hobby. If need be adapt and change.

Liberty's Edge

Lord Snow wrote:


You sprinkle hints at earlier episodes that Simmons might be inclined to react that way. As it sits, Simmons has been exposed to super powers many times and has even very nearly died from contact with alien tech and she never leaned towards developing mutantophobia even a little bit. That makes it seems a little bit contrived that her stance now changed by events that were not really different in magnitude, but merely in results.

Seconded.

When Simmons tried to kill herself would have been a great opprtunity to show or at least have the character develop mutantphobia. Instead as long as bad stuff happened to strangers. She was good. Once someone who she was close to and had feelings for died. Then the mutantphobia suddenly is part of her character. Mind you in a world where there is people with powers both mutant and non-mutant. Targeting mutants makes little sense imo. Human Torch, Black Panther and Iceman. The first two get a free pass on racism. Iceman gets persecuted. It's not like mutants and non-mutants have a tattoo on their forehead that make them stand out. If Marvel really wanted to show racism properly then the fear would not be towards Inhumans and/or mutants. It would be against everyone and anyone who had superpowers mutant or not.

Liberty's Edge

Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
My roommate tried to let me let him play an artificer EVERY FREAKING TIME I suggest a pathfinder campaign. He staunchly refuses to look at it as anything but an extension of 3e.

To be fair the core is pretty much a extension of 3E. Their nothing really in the core that makes it stand out in a major way from 3E imo.

While their is some unbalanced material in 3.5. There is some that is. Too often as some others have said. It's either a lack of understanding. Or were never that broken. I'm in a game with a good DM. He refuses to allow 3.5. material. I kind of respect but at the same time he has never read any 3.5. material. Someone told him that the 3,.5 material was broken and unbalanced. Which one should never take as the gospel truth imo. I once had a fellow gamer insist that DR/2 was not just broken and unbalanced it was game breaking.

Liberty's Edge

Lord Fyre wrote:


Hypocrisy is a very human emotional reaction to shock.

So, while I am not fond of the direction they are taking the character, her actions are entirely realistic.

It's not a major issue. I'm glad they show how much a hypocrite Simmons is. I just wish their would have been a buildup. While realistic it does feel like they tacked it on simply to push Inhumans.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Not sure if these have been mentioned yet. The "everyone says the class I like sucks and I'm a horrible person and useless roleplayer for taking it" meme. Yes I have seen a occasional poster say that about a class and/or player. By and large it's very rare. Instead it seems their a super secret evil player organization hellbent on telling others that everything is badwrongfun.

The "How dare you criticize Paizo. Your a bad person for doing so. Why are you still playing Pathfinder? Why are you here? Go play other rpgs". Again like above there are some rude posters. Most of the time it's criticism. Not always constructive to be sure. Yet last time I checked this forum and many others are not echo chambers.

As for APs a lack of plot opportunities has never been the problem. It's the design of the NPCs which has and remains a issue at least at my gaming table.

Liberty's Edge

Matthew Pittard wrote:


Im actually liking the new Simmons: there needs to be a character on this show that just challenges the 'oh cool.. superpowered people living amongst us'. They work for an organisation which yeah does work closely with superpowered types, but can never fully trust them. You need to plan for the day the superhero might become a supervillain.

I'm not too fond of how the suddenly have Simmons being so anti-mutant/Inhuman. If there would have been some kind of buildup or a episode where it's revealed that she secretly hates people with superpowers. One bad thing happens and because it's a fellow teammate that dies all of sudden she wants to kill those that are different for their own good. The character also comes across as a hypocrite. If it was a total stranger instead of Skye chances are good that he or she would be dead. Since it's a close friend and teammate it's not the same.

That being said I like the new look for the Inhuman/mutants in the series. Characters that look strange and bizarre. Instead of the usual human looking mutants like Cyclops that are persecuted. Yet a giant 8-10 ft tall orange talking rock (The Thing) gets a free pass. Simply because his powers came from a radiation cloud in space.

Matthew Pittard wrote:


In a way i think Simmons is preparing us for the Registration Act storyline. She is obviously being put in the Registratiob camp which I dont have an issue with.

Seconded. At the very least setting things up for what may come post Secret Wars. Many fans think the event maybe a giant reset button. It remains to be seen.

Matthew Pittard wrote:


Ward has become 120 percent better as a character since he was revealed as a double agent. Better Dialogue and just better scenes. The issue with the show is unless they start portraying him more as a stock villain the sheer amount of characters on the show means his screentime will be forever limited.

I think this will not change imo. A show with too many good characters and not enough screen time. It's both the benefit and curse of a good show imo.

Liberty's Edge

Most combats are actual fights. The way the Rogue class is designed. To use Sneak Attack requires the class to be within melee. Meaning they become targets of opprtunity as unless one is fighting a monster with low int. No intelligent npc or creature is simply going to stand still and allow the rogue to sneak attack with impunity.

I ran into a similar problem in 3.5. with the Ranger class. I houseruled that a Ranger with Two weapon style had access to medium armors. Light armor unless one has a build with a decent Dex is simply to easy to hit. A player refused to want to take Medium armor. Smart npcs are not going to make a straight line for the armored Fighter. Unless the Fighter is either a archtype or disguised by a illusion spell. Enemies are going to bypass them and go for lightly armored targets.

1 to 50 of 2,325 << 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.