Sharroa DiViri, Hellknight

nighttree's page

2,862 posts. Alias of Marian Reinholtz.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,862 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Akharus wrote:

Thanks, Tri.

Yikes... I have a bazillion books. Horrified to think that they are about to be paperweights :(

Granted... I wont be able to read them much longer anyway, so... eh. Will keep 'em for posterity, though. Gave away some of my D&D 2nd ed stuff and BOY WAS THAT A MISTAKE.

They will only be paperweights if that's your choice. I have enough 1E material that I still haven't used to keep me going for a long time. And I can always go back to developing my own AP's, like we did in the old days.

So no need for me to move too 2E.


Rhedyn wrote:
Hey look at it this way, if 2e flops, they will go back to making 1e material.

Not likely....backwards is not really the directions to go. If 2E flops...they will just do 3e, and it will go even further away from 1E.


Archmage Variel wrote:
So nothing new for the shifter it looks like?

The Shifter was such a flop....I don't really expect them to spend much effort going foreword on it.


David knott 242 wrote:

There is that "Personal Resistance" ability that enables the kineticist to gain the resonant powers of some (and eventually all) of her Ioun Stones as though they were in a high capacity Wayfinder. Anything else I can say would involve more mechanical details than seem proper for me to reveal.

OK, THAT's more what I was looking for :P

If your comfortable answering this....do they "have" to attack with their Ioun stones ? or can they still hurl other objects ?


David knott 242 wrote:

The Ioun Kineticist is basically an aether kineticist who psychically throws Ioun stones at her enemies (and then gets them back). She starts out with three dull gray ones in a "cloud" and can add more as she gains levels. At high levels, an Ioun Kineticist can improve the enhancement bonuses granted by the Ioun stones that normally grant a +2 enhancement bonus to an ability score.

Hm.....well that sounds rather lackluster.....

Can you give us any more ?


I'm really interested in seeing what the Iounkineticist is all about :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.

First dinner and a movie....0.O


Skuttzilla wrote:
That's me and my group, and I already bought enough stuff to play for the next ten years and beyond. We just started in October 2017, and we are having a blast. I have been collecting material for almost five years little by little hoping it would eventually get put to good use. Now it is.

That's more or less what pulled me out of being very upset at the news.

I'm old enough....I have enough unused material to probably get me through the rest of my gaming life ( have bought just about everything that's come out) :P

I originally had plans to still look at 2E, was trying to keep an open mind. But I've seen enough of the material to know I'm not interested in it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Take 10 wrote:

wow... so many classes people have not seen - that I have PCs of.

just ... wow...

That's one reason why I have no interest in 2ndE....I still have plenty of classes I have not even had the opportunity to play yet :P


Captain Zoom wrote:
nighttree wrote:
Zolanoteph wrote:
I say it again. A reboot is not inevitable.

I hate to break it to you, as I share your opinion that "Pathfinder is so critically linked to 3.5 that a reboot would be antithetical to the basic premise of Pathfinder."

However the truth is, it is inevitable.

The reason Pathfinder was based on/critically linked to 3.5, is that it was created as an effort to preserve and develop 3.5....which had many devoted followers (myself among them).

That worked for them for ten + years......however, they have now set their sites elsewhere.

All the wining and complaining in the world is not going to change the fact that they are looking to capture a different target audience than the old 3.5 fans.

Our time is done evidently ;)

You do realize you're responding to a post from 2015?

I find it funny that two people marked this as a "favorite".

Actually at the time I didn't :P


Can't wait to see what the race associated with the boneyard is like....I'm hoping for a revenant style race :P


Paladin....


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Damn......I would buy this just for the cover :P


Interesting....


As soon as the term "universal" comes into play.....I loose all interest. Now keep in mind what I have seen so far is more than enough to make me loose interest....I started out willing to look at the playtest....but the spoilers that have been released so far, move to far from 1stE for me to be interested. I will probably buy splat books dealing with things that have not been covered in 1E (Arcadia and such) and convert it to 1stE....but beyond that I have lost all interest.


The Mad Comrade wrote:
I'm thinking/hoping we'll be doing a series of Strange New Lands to meet Exciting and Interesting People (before getting mowed down by them in a hail of machine gun fire) will be a thing for the first couple of years of the new edition.

Maybe....but I'm not moving to the new edition, so won't do me much good.

I suppose if they come out with Arcadia info...I could buy it and convert to 1E.


I wish it would be an AP about an exploration team to Arcadia....but I'm sure that's too much to hope for :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Zolanoteph wrote:
I say it again. A reboot is not inevitable.

I hate to break it to you, as I share your opinion that "Pathfinder is so critically linked to 3.5 that a reboot would be antithetical to the basic premise of Pathfinder."

However the truth is, it is inevitable.

The reason Pathfinder was based on/critically linked to 3.5, is that it was created as an effort to preserve and develop 3.5....which had many devoted followers (myself among them).

That worked for them for ten + years......however, they have now set their sites elsewhere.

All the wining and complaining in the world is not going to change the fact that they are looking to capture a different target audience than the old 3.5 fans.

Our time is done evidently ;)


So given the shift in focus to 2E....will this still be happening ?
I was REALLY looking foreword to more Caligni info.....


DungeonmasterCal wrote:
I'm not good at evaluating class mechanics. What's wrong with the Shifter? (Please keep it civil).

In it's current incarnation, it doesn't come even close to what people were expecting (a better shape shifter than the Druid).

Additionally, some of the most flavorful/desirable Archetypes....are more or less unplayable (unless your a masochist)

Fixes are actually simple and rather obvious....but given the current focus, I don't imagine they will be taking the time to address them.

House-ruled versions are the best option at this point.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Mechanically I see no improvement over what already exists so far.
But I'm reserving judgement till the play-test is out there.

If it is actually just a nod to identity politics....I'm not horribly interested.


I doubt it at this point.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ched Greyfell wrote:

I'm sure I'm not alone in being on the fence about a hardcover book with all sorts of new stuff... when a new edition is coming out.

Basically, I guess my question is will non-stat, or fluff, info still be useful (canon) across editions. For instance, can I still consider the massive library of campaign setting material as official as ever, just disregarding stats that (will) no longer apply?

Naw....I'm likely not moving to 2E....so I'll take what I can get for 1E ;)


I prefer the 4D6 method. Never liked point buy.
The randomness of rolling is part of what I enjoy.


Serisan wrote:
JohnHawkins wrote:
I don't think 2nd edition will have any impact on the Return of the RUnelords AP , and I would be amazed if we don't get stats for at least some of the runelords. I think Sorshen is almost certain to be one we get stats for, I half expect to get 1 runelord per module with Greed being the one we don't get due to Karzoug's earlier demise
Sloth is also canonically dead through PFS. The Waking Rune has you wake up and kill Krune.

I actually like the idea of them being down a couple of members....creates a vacuum that "up and coming" Runelords could step into :P


J-Bone wrote:
All I know is that it won't involve Tian Xia or Arcadia... I'm sorely disappointed

You had to bring up Arcadia.....I have been waiting years for them to address that.....now it won't happen :(


3 people marked this as a favorite.

That it was still faithful to 3.5, although I liked the "clean up" they did to.....enliven the core classes. The wealth of options at my disposal, allowing me to create just about any concept I can think of, and that I can build any concept a variety of way's.


It's unlikely they will spend any more effort on correcting the Shifter or it's archetypes. If you plan to use them at your table....you may as well just house rule it.


It's rather frustrating that it would take very little to make the Oozemorph playable...yet they apparently don't want to make it playable.

The fixes are simple....
Give it hours per day of Alter self at 1st level, and retain the ability to extend a specific form with a con save.

Allow it to merge equipment.

And I see no reason Psychic spell shouldn't work in Ooze form.

You then have a class/archetype that is worth playing.


Qstor wrote:
What happened to this?

I have never seen anything.....seems to have fallen down the rabbit hole.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
W E Ray wrote:

Still, I just don't see what rulebooks Paizo can publish under Pathfinder.

Honestly.

Do you really want a Bestiary 7?!

Do you really want another book with Classes and spells and feats and archetypes?

Tell me.

What RULEbooks are there left to do?

Or do you just think Paizo should publish campaign setting material and adventures from here on out?

I just don't get the problem.

Yes, that's exactly what I want.

Maybe not much need for a lot more classes....
But there is still plenty of material to cover, and now it appears it won't be.


James Jacobs wrote:
nighttree wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Bunch of Grapes wrote:
Just wondering which iconics will be showing up in this adventure path. The inquisitor showed up on the cover of #3, any idea which others will be used??

The primary heroes of this Adventure Path are the Swashbuckler, the Witch, the Oracle, and the Medium. Some of the following will have cameos: Rogue, Cleric, Fighter, Sorcerer.

(We haven't yet revealed any of the actual final covers for this Adventure Path yet.)

Is WR doing the art for these ?
Nope.

.....that's disappointing :(


James Jacobs wrote:
Bunch of Grapes wrote:
Just wondering which iconics will be showing up in this adventure path. The inquisitor showed up on the cover of #3, any idea which others will be used??

The primary heroes of this Adventure Path are the Swashbuckler, the Witch, the Oracle, and the Medium. Some of the following will have cameos: Rogue, Cleric, Fighter, Sorcerer.

(We haven't yet revealed any of the actual final covers for this Adventure Path yet.)

Is WR doing the art for these ?


PossibleCabbage wrote:
In honesty, I would prefer the game rules for torture were "It doesn't work, the subject will just say whatever they think you want them to say". Since that seems the most realistic model for it.

But still a viable tool to make your point :P Which is why it has such a strong historical usage :P


Sara Marie wrote:
Removed some posts.

I'm guessing I missed something amusing :P


Oh no....way to many posts to wade through......

My vote, replace Paladin with Warpriest.....problem solved :P

I don't know of anyone I have gamed with that's ever played a Paladin anyway ;)


graystone wrote:
nighttree wrote:
If subjects are "taboo" on the forums, then it's because there are to many juveniles making a fuss.

Nope, it was a fairly civil debate be seemingly mature posters.

Wander over to the paladin poll thread to see the exact issue.

Thanks for the bread crumbs :P

Now to see if I can stomach following them ;)


Filthy Lucre wrote:
GM Nitemare wrote:

Misery loves company, right. I'd like to know how many people on these boards I'd have to game with if I wanted to play 1E in a year or two.

Once 2e is released I will stop all 1e gaming.

That's pretty confidant of you....

I have not seen 2E yet, so I'm not willing to write it off yet....willing to give it a go, even though I'm not liking what I'm hearing so far....

I'm probably a little more cautious than you :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have no idea what your talking about.....0.O

If subjects are "taboo" on the forums, then it's because there are to many juveniles making a fuss. Adults should be able to handle an adult discussion about anything.

God's above their is nothing I hate more than political correctness :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mine will be how far does it deviate from 1E. I'f it's more than a few changes....then naw.....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
nighttree wrote:

That's just business.....it's the exact same decision WofC made when they did the 4E thing.

And when they did the 5E thing, which is running circles around Pathfinder as it stands.

Exactly.

People like to paint this as "Family" or "Community".....the reality is for them it's a business.....and if they think their business is best served by ignoring the desires of a cross section of the community....to gain the following of a larger cross section of the community....that's exactly what they will do.

Stop wasting your time whining and appealing to community ;)


Hythlodeus wrote:
I think I mentioned it before, but HC editions of 3.5 APs and PF APs might not be completely off the table if Paizo sees that there's still a market and money to be made, but I dont think chance are high, to be honest

Honestly, based on past experience....I don't see that happening.

when a company decides to go in a direction....it goes in that direction.

They don't do this "off the cuff" or without months of forethought....and I'm sure Paizo gave this due consideration.

They made the decision they did because they felt like the community members they would loose....were smaller than the community members they would gain.

That's just business.....it's the exact same decision WofC made when they did the 4E thing.

At least Paizo hasn't pulled the shenanigans WoTC did with allied contributors.....so respect there....

But when all is said and done, I'm likely not interested in moving to 2E, and they are not likely to be interested in supporting 1E.....so relationship over ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ShinHakkaider wrote:

I'm still trying to understand why Paizo owes us conversion templates/documents to convert PF2 stuff to PF 1 stuff. There's literally almost 10 years of PF1 stuff and that's not enough?

I don't want to begrudge other people getting and having their new shiny thing fully supported. Much like I got Pathfinder 1 shiny and fully supported all those years ago.

And the idea that PF should devote resources from producing PF2 stuff to keep producing PF1 stuff is...well "delusional" isnt a word I like to throw around as it comes across as insulting so I'll just say maybe...not based in any sort of practical reality?

And this is coming from someone who has no intention of moving to PF2. It's not that I don't like the system (haven't SEEN the system yet and will make an informed decision when I get my hands on the playtest) it's just that I literally have a complete system with something like 22 -24 (by the end of the run) AP's and countless other Pathfinder adventures not to mention the 3.5 adventures that were produced INCLUDING AGE OF WORMS and SAVAGE TIDE.

Basically even though I'm not moving to PF2 I'm fine with other people getting what they want because I'm not a selfish entitled twit.

EDIT: and I want to be clear, I'm not calling anyone HERE a selfish entitled twit. I'm saying the behavior can be perceived as such and I'M not that.

Paizo doesn't "Owe" us anything.

That's not what anyone is saying.....(errr....ok it's what only a few are saying).....if Paizo want's to keep getting my money after the switch to 2E.....they are going to however need to come up with something I'm actually willing to spend my money on (which is not likely 2E products).

For the last ten years, buying the base lines and AP's has been automatic for me....

I have only begun to question that the last few releases (UW, etc...)

Now with this announcement (2E) I may actually be able to cut back my spending with Paizo considerably....as I thus far see nothing that makes me want to switch from 1st Edition.

So if Paizo wants to keep getting my money...they are going to need to come up with something outside of 2E to do so ;)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Charabdos, The Tidal King wrote:
nogoodscallywag wrote:
1of1 wrote:

Prefab backgrounds...

That was probably my least favorite part of Starfinder and 5e D&D.
Especially the part where if you opted out with Themeless in Starfinder, it felt like you were intentionally given something worse than the other options.

^^^^THIS.

Going themeless in Starfinder really burned my wick. Why penalize a player for this? Ridiculous. Every GM should houserule this away and allow a themeless player to figure out a fair and balanced way to not be penalized.

I haven't look into Starfinder that much....what I did see turned me off, and I'm really not the least bit interested with the setting.

Creating and defining background is actually one of the most enjoyable aspects of RP to me.

In general, most of the ......"shortcuts" (for lack of a better term) to character creation, are one of the biggest turn off's to me in other systems.

So far, I'm seeing little that would make me interested in 2E.

I'll look at the playtest when it comes out, and if I see anything I like I'll incorporate it into my 1E games....evidently some of the stuff was in unchained....but as we have used very little from unchained.....I'm not holding my breath that I will be overly interested in 2nd E. If the modules for 2nd E are easily backwards compatible.....I may continue to buy them....if not we have a fair amount of material to continue foreword for a good amount of time.

It will be interesting to see how this play's out....


Gorbacz wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:
I do have to question what is wrong with people if you send a poster hateful angry emails because you don't like their opinion :/ Seriously, what the hell guys
*fondly recalls that one gentleman who offered to drive his pickup truck over to his house and solve the problem "like real men do"*

CHESS MATCH !!!!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Samy wrote:
Well, after the initial shock, I realized that I really do have enough 1e material to last me a lifetime, so I can happily keep playing it forever if need be. So once I got secure in that idea, it's easier to take tentative nibbles that maybe I could make use of *some* parts of 2e (like the APs).

I'm in the same boat, I have bought with few exceptions all the main books and AP's....so we have enough material to work with for many years.

Still, It would be nice of the 2E AP's coming out are easily usable in 1E play.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shadow Kosh wrote:
nighttree wrote:
If all of my existing books are usable with little to no adjustment I will gladly adapt to PF2.....if not......I'm not interested.
If they maintain compatibility at that level, why bother buying Pathfinder 2.0 at all? Just use pathfinder 1.0 rulebooks to run Pathfinder 2.0 adventures.

Nicely made point ;)

And exactly what I will do :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

What bugs me isn't the new edition in and of itself, but rather that 2nd P seems to be retreading the path 5E is taking in many areas when Paizo could instead have gone in the opposite direction and given us something unique.

Basically they're competing with the beast rather than outmaneuvering it.

Ryan Freire wrote:
Again, nothing they've listed makes it seem like it will play or feel THAT different from 3.x

It’s hard to know without seeing the playtest.

For what it’s worth, Vic Wertz made a post recently explicitly stating that PF2 trying to compete with 5E would be a terrible idea.

I think part of the confusion in the community is because words like “streamlined” can be implemented in a myriad of ways. Likewise, 5E and PF2 both had a design goal “make it easy for new players to get into the game”. That doesn’t imply that PF2 will meet that brief in the same way 5E did (by significantly limiting character building choices to a few, key moments in that PC’s progression).

It’s worth remembering that the people building PF2 enjoy tinkering with character builds and making meaningful choices while doing that. It would be surprising if they decided to take this opportunity and churn out a game where you couldn’t do that.

Correct.

Until the playtest is released....we are just guessing at how extreme the differences will be, and if they are acceptable to each of our individual tables. I know I am not interested in any major changes. I like the system as is (and no that's not open to debate so don't bother).

That said I'm not anxious for the changes....but will look at them when they appear.....and proceed accordingly.....


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ryan Freire wrote:
Again, nothing they've listed makes it seem like it will play or feel THAT different from 3.x

Not sure I can agree there....as everything that's been said so far is verbatim what WoTC said at 4E....

So ya....I'm skeptical.

If all of my existing books are usable with little to no adjustment I will gladly adapt to PF2.....if not......I'm not interested.


And why is it we have the option to "favorite" a post.....and not the opportunity to "thumbs down" a post ?

1 to 50 of 2,862 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>