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

memorax's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 1,880 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,880 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Andoran

I dont mind more rules. Nor more sourcebooks. Its how most if not all rpg companies make their money. I does bother me that because its new people comne across as forcing to use it. No one is bein forced to use anything. My main complaint of the new stuff is lots of interesting fluff but the crunch is severy lacking imo. Or they release badly designed feats or worse classes that are better than what is in th core.

Odraude wrote:
In the product description it mentions a simplified action econom, monster creation, and crafting.

I read that as well. While my interest is high Im nto holding my breath either.

Andoran

With 5E still being new there is no way to know how well it wil do yet imo. Agree about HeroLab it's very helpful dare I say needed to buil;d characters. Nothing slows a session donw more than the player who even after ten sessions of gaming still has not learned what his character can or cannot do.

Andoran

Odraude wrote:
I still don't want a second edition though. Happy with Pathfinder Unchained making the slight upgrades I want. And it does have stuff for simplifying combat and monster creation.

I can respect that. Though without major or at least some changes a new edition of PF will be a difficult sale to gamers imo.

Andoran

What would be the major selling point of a edition that changes nothing or very little.

Backwards compability. We would have PF 1E. So no need to upgrade.

Supporting Paizo. Already did with a purchase of PF 1E. To be blunt it would take myself my gaming group and other like minded players in the hobby something more to upgrade.

Better production values. Again not worth getting the new edition not unless it offers something new. It's going to require more than better organization and new art to get to buy the same material twice.

Agreed and seconded on all points Squirrel_Dude. Sure we can play another rpg. Nothing wrong with trying to improve the current version of PF. It will not suddenly make all current books of Paizo obsolete. I don't get the fear of change from gamers sometimes. Also spare me the 4E fallacy. Not in the mood to hear about it.

Odraude wrote:


I can agree to this. Those arguments do little for the debate at handle, instead just being highly dismissing. These same arguments are used when people ask for psionics or Asian settings or firearms. I bated them then and I hate these arguments now.

Again agreed and seconded.

Andoran

The thing is if your going to get interest in a new edition it had to have something new to offer. Which is something those who want nothing change forget. If you think all it takes is some new cover and interior art with little to no rule changes. All I'm going to say is good luck. Some in the hobby refuse to play it because they think the cite is too similar to 3.5. My gaming group and myself are not going to fish out another 100+ dollars. Even with the online srd we have little interest in rereading the same rules twice. Even Call of Cthulhu with its latest 7E has some major changes from what I hear.

I understand and respect people who have invested and not wanting to either purchase more material or have older material go obsolete. New editions seem to be a standard in the hobby. White Wolf announced a new edition of the World of Darkness at Gencon. Complete with a release of a new core book and rerelease of the core WOD line. From the looks of it chances are good the new edition will not be backwards computable. I would not mind a simplified version of the rules. Not rules light not that I have anything against it. The rules could use some streamlining. I played a Bard on the last game. I needed to write a cheat sheet just to keep track of the bonuses from spells, feats and class abilities.

Andoran

I like what I see with Pummel Fist. My worry is that given enough time it will go the way of the Crane Fist.

Andoran

3 people marked this as a favorite.

At the same time keeping PF unchanged may not sell as well either. Already some in the hobby refuse to buy it because they find it similar to 3.5. Releasing the same rules a second time with little or no changes beyond organization and art means no reason to upgrade from PF 1E. Not unless their is significant changes imo. Myself and my gaming circle will not be buying a PF that offers nothing new. Why buy the same thing twice. It's a catch 22. Damned if thewy do and damned if they don't.

Andoran

Arachnofiend wrote:


I mean... "we made a finesse feat that works with everything except finesse weapons" is a pretty ridiculous mistake. A lot of people must have green lighted Slashing Grace before it went to the printers. Did nobody seriously stop and say "hey wait, you do realize this feat doesn't work with anything we expect the Swashbuckler to use, right?".

For the most part I like what the devs have done. Yet I'm seeing the happen way too often as of late. I know they are human. I know they like what they do and respect the effort they put into their work. Yet to me at least it feels like they just ignore what done of the fanbase are asking for. At this point they should know better as well. A well designed feat with a proper mix if fluff and crunch should be very easy for them to develop test and print. I think it's a very conservative approach to design which is both a good and bad thing. As it goes I have very little hope for PF Unchained. I'm in no mood to get feats that have great fluff. Yet nothing in terms of crunch. And more feat taxes.

Andoran

I don't know the whole lot of you so I'm going to go back to eat my sub.

Andoran

I see your point Chenfor. The devs are much more experienced at this point. Their is a difference between being unable to see the flaws in ones work. Another in seeing the and unwilling to change them. If thus was the first year of development I could understand. Now it's just bad design IMO. I used to be a big fan of palladium books. Yet even after 30+ years of existence the owner still can predict a release schedule correctly.

Andoran

I think the devs at this point are imo experinced enough to have a good idea what is balanced or not. I don't mind feat taxes that much. It's when the feats don't make much sense. Weapon focus should be more for strength build. Not a dex build imo. Improved Critical makes more sense.

Andoran

I never said I was part of the majority. Or when I mentioned some fans the fans that they were. All I asked is that they listen to the feedback and possibly take it into account when designing new things for the game. Or are we no longer allowed to do so.

They don't have to listen to all feedback. Neither should they just simply ignore it either. If a certain feat causes a negative reaction from the fans. I see no reason to repeat it again with other feats. If they insist on repeating the same mistakes they can't really be surprised if the new material gets the same reaction imo. I can't understand why the devs can't seem to find the proper middle ground. Either the feat is too good. or not worth it. Or great fluff yet the crunch barely matches the fluff.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The point is that at this point the devs should be designing feats properly. Instead we keep getting more of the same. I like Pathfinder. I like what the devs have done with the rules for the most part. I do feel like their is a huge disconnect from what some of the fans want. To what they give us. If fans say don't give us a feat similar to Dervish dance. Yet they do just reworded. Why would we be happy. Yes I can houserule it. But I should not have to. They also seem to love feat taxes even when the fans have told them that they don't.

I also agree with Tels. As I said I like the majority of the product. I'm not going to simply keep quiet and ignore rules from them I don't like. If no one says anything nothing will change. Mind you even if we the fans speak up it seems nothing will change either.

Andoran

To feat is okay. Even if I share Lemmys concerns about it. I can understand the need for Dex to be high enough/ Even Weapon Finesse. Why the need for weapon focus. I would have added improved Critical rapier instead. Or all light weapons. I do wish the devs would listen. Fans disliked Dervish dance because of being tied to the Scimitar. Then they plan on doing it again a second time. I also wish the devs would get out of the conservative everything must be balanced thinking inside the box rut they seem to be stuck in. Not everything needs to have a feat tax.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Duncan7291 wrote:
I dont have an axe to grind. With that said and meaning no insult, your analysis of the situation is a bit simplistic. There are more facits to a business decision than just one source of revenue.

It's a good business decision. simple as that. The only us vs them attitude towards rpg publishers is by the fans or poorly run rpg companies.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Paizo is a business. The business needs money. Which genrates profit. Why would they not carry 5E. Its a extra source of revenue. It shows they have no axe to grind with Wotc unlike some in the community.

Andoran

Hama wrote:


Because if they start making 5E material it will impact the amount of Pathfinder material that comes out. And I don't want that happening.

I think your selling the devs short. I doubt it will happen in any case. I just don't see the need to worry. The sky won't fall. Posters claimed that more book with more options would spell the end if the rpg. So far that too has not happened IMO.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

How would it dilute one Pathfinder material?

I have both Pathfinder and 5E starter set sitting side by side on a shelf. I can tell you that physically they are not at all altered on any level. Having both is not causing me to be unable to like, play or run both either. I get not liking 5E. Let's not go into the realm of ridiculous please. I don't think it ill happen. At least until their is a OGL for 5E.

Andoran

All some of us wanted was for the ap to implement the mythic rules properly. Sure we can change it. We should not have to do do much reworking. The devs should have done a better job. If it meant optimizing the encounter than IMO they should have so. I buy aps to reduce my workload not increase it. It's a decent ap IMO. It could have been better.

Andoran

captain yesterday wrote:

that 19 intelligence is for a Ranger without any Archetype that has a wisdom of 11, other then skill ranks what benefit does it give her?

the reason she put the highest stat in intelligence is because she's a smart girl and wants her characters to reflect herself (she is only 10 after all) i'm also sure i said we rolled our stats and use sub-optimal tactics, take it how you will.

I wish I could tell you why. To some not having every stat say 10-12 in is optimizing and min-maxing. Just be glad your not playing with them. I'm being told by a poster here that I cannot effectively roleplay if I want to build a effective (not min-maxed or optimized) character. My asking for Paizo to do a proper write up for npcs in the Wrath AP is a perfect example of my being a optimizer.

Andoran

captain yesterday wrote:
memorax wrote:
I get that the Paizo devs don't expect every party to be optimized so write their regular APs accordingly. A extremely short sighted view imo as I have yet to see a group where minimal optimization does not happen.

Pick me! pick me! pick me! my wife and kids have yet to cast a buff spell, my wife has a witch with a high charisma and 10 dex, 12 con. my daughter has a Flaming Katana but insists on clawing everyone's eyes out (she is a catfolk with claws) in the other campaign she has a straight up Ranger with 11 wisdom and int 19 (she is an elf, we roll, no point buy) for healing i have a Dwarven Oracle (and with the Stargazer Archetype no less!)

so nope, we do not optimize at all

Believe it or not Captain for some here and elsewhere you would be considered optimizing just by having that 19 int. I don't think you do. Apparently it does not take much in the community to be called a optimizer. Being effective at the table us also a sign iof optimization as well IMO.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I get that the Paizo devs don't expect every party to be optimized so write their regular APs accordingly. A extremely short sighted view imo as I have yet to see a group where minimal optimization does not happen. To approach a Mythic AP with the same design perspective and principles was asking for the AP to fail imo.

So while I do think to a certain extent a few dms don't understand how Mythic works. I do agree with you Magnuskn. As you are correct on both points. Why the devs thought that would be a good idea is beyond me. Granted their is to be some customization on the party of dms to make a AP to work. Yet I can see if I run the AP that it will require a lot more work than usual. Can the devs explain to me the fear of optimizing a AP.

Then again it seems if the devs had a fixed idea playtest or no whatever complaints get ignored. First the touch AC issue with Gunslingers now the power level of Mythic players. What's the point then of having playtests if by and large most of the feedback gets ignored.

captain yesterday wrote:

i will say one of the ways that Wrath has failed to me is the sense of being The Underdog.

is there even a party that DOUBTED whether they could accomplish the task at hand?

To be honest it's a issue with all their APs imo. My group is not a party than min-maxes or optimizes that much beyond one person. Until I started altering the npcs to be themselves tougher and optimized they kept going through the enemies. I used tactics and ran the opposition properly. So it's not a issue with me. It's like how Rise of the Runelords is a turkey shot for any Gunslinger. Non-optimzed or optimized. There is a spellcasting BBEG in the AP that has no crowd control spells. Even though the AP is written where the players go from point a to fight the bbeg in point b.

Andoran

So far I'm still not seeing the AP as a failed one. The only negative is that it should have been one of the few times that the npcs were optimized by the Paizo devs. Otherwise everything I hear as a complaint to me is a bonus. I expect the PCs to be do a lot of damage. It's a aP with Mythic levels. Why would anyone not expect the PCs to do more. More I read this section the more I think DMs thought that Mythic play would be the same as levels 1-20. Just that the DCs and math would be a little higher. I'm expecting a cleric in this AP to feed a army of 400+ on his own. After all what sounds worthy of myth and legend. Joe Average the cleric feeding his buddies. Or the lone Cleric say of Desna who feed an army.

I think Dms need to rethink exactly what they want players to do in a AP. If as a DM your still expecting magic and everything else to be like it's in the core than I don't think the AP is for you. If as a Dm your thinking beyond the core than I suggest running the AP.I know I'm being blunt. Yet to be honest I don't think people understand what it means to be a Mythic character imo.

Andoran

Well said LazarX I completely agree.

thejeff wrote:

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

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

Andoran

WizNiz13 wrote:

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

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

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

Andoran

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

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

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

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

Andoran

MMCJawa wrote:


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

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

Andoran

Craig Bonham 141 wrote:


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

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

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

Andoran

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

Andoran

thejeff wrote:


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

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

Andoran

thejeff wrote:


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

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

Andoran

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

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

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

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

Andoran

bugleyman wrote:
I blame Hasbro for the movie Battleship.

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

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

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

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

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

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

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

Andoran

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

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

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

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

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

Andoran

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

Andoran

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

Andoran

From the PF Srd:

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

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

Andoran

Thomas Long 175 wrote:


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

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

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:

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

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

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

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

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

Andoran

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

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

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

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

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

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

Andoran

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

Andoran

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

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

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

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

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

Andoran

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

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

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

Andoran

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

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

Andoran

MMCJawa wrote:

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

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

Agreed completely.

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

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

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

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

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

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

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

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

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

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

1 to 50 of 1,880 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.