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

pauljathome's page

FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto. 1,869 posts (3,026 including aliases). 31 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 46 Pathfinder Society characters. 11 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,869 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

There was recently a posting in the rules forum pointing out that if you raise an animal companion you do NOT have to pay for negative levels, instead you have to pay the greatly reduced price to just restore constitution drain

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

While I'd like this added its no huge deal. The cash cost of buying a spell casting service is fairly low anyway.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

As others have stated, I think the biggest problem by far is that there is just way too much material to get through. Maybe it works at Gencon with 5 hour+ slots and, by definition, nearly everybody being very dedicated gamers but at smaller cons with shorter time frames there is just too much happening.

Locally, we often just decide ahead of time what things to cut. But with all the overhead we still go over time :-(.

The other issue at local cons is the extreme variation in player ability one gets. The high tier tables have experienced players, the low tier tables often have complete newbies. Makes coordinating things difficult.

Prep time for the more recent scenarios can get quite extreme. Which is going to translate into significant differences in how prepped the GM actually is at any specific table.

So, my suggestions would boil down to:
Be less ambitious. Make the scenario something that doesn't take too much prep time, that can absolutely be run in 3:45 (possibly with an optional encounter bringing timing to 4:45)

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

BigNorseWolf wrote:
tlotig wrote:


Mesmerist

*headscratch*

A 3/4 caster with access to some of the most devastating spells in the game, near rogue level skills, bonuses to those skills, AND some very useful and unique buffs is a joke because....?

Its significantly overpowered?

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Serisan wrote:
At SkalCon currently, played 2 scenarios today with pregens. One went straight to a "presumed dead" and the other I was willing to risk on a character who had a level before it would be applied. I didn't feel particularly detached, but I did worry strongly about the one I risked.

In retrospect, was that worrying a good thing or a bad thing? Did it enhance your play experience to have that increased stake in the fate of your character?

Silver Crusade

You definitely want Dex to damage via unchained rogue.

Then possibly a dip into one of the barbarian archetypes that allows you to add to dex while raging. Combined with a furious weapon, of course.

Piranha strike.

Or (depending on your concept) switch to swashbuckler insteaad.

Silver Crusade

I've played good characters in PFS for a long time. Sometimes I've had lots of fun roleplaying the conflict with another character who is Evil (I don't care what is on the character sheet, the character IS evi), sometimes it gets aggravating.

In my experience, the best weapon by far is to just say to the player "Look, sorry, I'm tired right now and its probably my fault but could you PLEASE just done down the "I am evil nyah hah hah" stuff for tonight. Thanks"

Sometimes coupled with
"You do realize that COOPERATE is a two way street, right? That you're currently seriously pissing off the person who you're relying on to save your life"

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Rei wrote:


Harsk is part of the pregen party for the original version of Curse of the Crimson Throne. We took a peek at his stats and gear yesterday and were left a little confused as to what his general function is in the party. Giantbane crossbow? Really?

Well, I did say "at low tiers" :-).

We were running a module in Campaign Mode once and somebody was playing L7 Harsk. Given that it was Campaign Mode, we took about 10 seconds to swap his xbow for a composite long bow and change his feats a little.

Way more than doubled his usefulness (the next session, the player insisted on running Harsk with Xbow :-()

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I still think people are overreacting.

Sure, in theory there is a problem.

However, in practice, there is likely somebody at the Core table who knows about Pharasma and tells the player what she is about. The player then decides to go along with it or switch dieties.

If the player has chosen Pharasma and, sometime down the line, finds out that his domain choice is less than ideal then he gets to switch dieties and/or domains. He made an honest mistake due to a lack of information, when that mistake is revealed he gets to fix it as painlessly as possible.

Or maybe it really is a Core group where everybody is Core and nobody knows nothing about nothing. In which case, he happily plays his illegal cleric of Pharasma because nobody realizes there is an issue.

In any of the 3 cases above, its just no biggy

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Jessex wrote:
Auke Teeninga wrote:

You look over the different characters on the table and you discover that the one pregen is a much more solid build than any of the other 5 characters AND that the pregen in question is Harsk.

True story.

I call shenanigans! A blind monkey that doesn't know Pathfinder's rules is still likely to create a more solid build than Harsk. ;)

At low tiers, Harsk isn't actually THAT bad. He maybe shoots his xbow once an encounter and then just uses his axe.

He is only REALLY bad if you insist on using the Xbow :-)

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GM Eazy-Earl wrote:

I'm just trying to understand how a player in the Core Campaign might learn of this restriction and what reference you're citing as evidence that this restriction applies in the Core Campaign.

An experienced player tells him.

Lets be honest, a significant chunk of PFS rules exist in forum posts, private questions, blogs, consensus, players experience, etc. While this is less true in Core it is still true.

It is essentially impossible for a new player to find out all the rules on their own.

Heck, I don't think ANYBODY actually knows ALL the PFS rules

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

8 people marked this as a favorite.

I think BNW is being too restrained in his praise :-).

Thank you very much for this, it is much appreciated. I also think that this is absolutely the right thing to do. It encourages GMs to GM at the local level which is a wonderful thing.

For the computer geeks out there :

for(unsigned int i = 0; i >= 0; i++) printf("ThankYou WellDone YesYesYes ");

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:

Keeping in entirely fantasy is there any character concepts that pathfinder has yet to have the rules and options to create it in other words can you think of a character that is not easily made by what Paizo has put out thus far? maybe something from a book or from history w/e

Aragorn, Gandalf, Sam, Frodo, Gimli, Legolas.

D'artangan, Athos, Porthos

etc etc.

Pathfinder isn't a particularly good game system to replicate most fantasy fiction.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kevin Willis wrote:


Player: "Let's sneak in and free the slaves!"
Me: "You're lawful, right? You get the feeling that doing so would probably make you more chaotic and (checks deity) in your case sever your ties to your deity." (The free "alignment change warning" clause.)

I think that, for PFS, you are far too strictly interpreting Lawful. In a home game the group can come to some form of consensus on what kinds of acts are alignment infractions but in PFS that consensus cannot occur. Which means that I think that an alignment infraction has to be very clearly very egregious to warrant being changed. And this doesn't even come CLOSE to meeting that standard.

Lawful/Chaotic is even worse than Good/Evil in terms of reasonable people disagreeing on what it means in general and in particular cases.

I don't want to start an alignment thread. But my vague metric is something like
"If I started an alignment thread on this I'd expect well over 90% consensus that this act is clearly an alignment infraction" before I'd ding a player for an alignment infraction.

Note, I often pose a question "So, why does your lawful character think freeing legally owned slaves is acceptable?" but if the player has an even vaguely reasonable answer I'd accept it

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MadScientistWorking wrote:


Any boon familiar or animal companion has to be resurrected or the boon gets crossed off so yeah to say there is no mechanical benefit is wrong. On top of that too as someone pointed out Drakes are one and done and that is arguably worst than loosing a boon companion.

I agree that there are occasional mechanical benefits but most of the time the benefit is far more fluff than mechanical (yes, I'm speaking as a player who has raised an animal companion AND a familiar neither of which were anything at all special mechanically. Flutter would love me :-))

Lets keep in mind that there is still the cost for the two restorations so even if the raise companion is very cheap its hardly free.

Silver Crusade

Gorbacz wrote:
Most Romani and related groups find the term insulting. You can argue to your heart's content that "gypsy" invokes colourful wagons full of fun-loving people, but over here, it invokes stereotypes of "unwashed car thieves who refuse to integrate with our glorious Slavic societies and chose to live in ghettos full of grime and crime". And it gets worse in Slovakia and Hungary, trust me.

Thank you for that (sincerely). I hadn't realized that it had that strong a meaning. The Roma aren't very common up here in Canada and, while I certainly knew that there was a lot of prejudice against them in a lot of places I did not know that they saw "gypsy" as an inherently pejorative term.

As an aside, is there any reason to prefer Roma over Romani or vice versa?

How would you suggest I introduce the culture to players new to Golarion? As I said above, in PFS when dealing with new players I find it very convenient and effective to do so with a short pithy real world analogue. Would "The way Hollywood shows Romani" work? I'm not 100% sure that everybody would recognize what I mean by Romani. But I'm an old fart and maybe completely out of touch :-(

Silver Crusade

Gorbacz wrote:


Only the French managed to partially dodge the bullet by calling Roma Bohémiens and later developing the whole bohemian topos of wine, absinthe, dance, poverty, brothels, Moulin Rouge and Nicole Kidman kissing Ewan McGregor. So it's still kind of more about sultry girls dancing alluringly among colourful wagons.

Hmm. Two of my favourite operas are La Boheme and Carmen. Now I know why :-) :-)

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Muser wrote:
e.g mountain fatigue

If you mean altitude sickness then no, a thousand tines no.

One thing that I absolutely loved about this scenario is that they had the PCs intelligently get aclimated to the altitude almost as if they were experienced adventurers or something.

[Aside]one thing that amuses me is that Paizo almost always ignores its own rules for altitude (the rules really are very silly). They almost always just collapse the multiple rolls into a single near guaranteed failure.[/aside]

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

This belongs in the PFS forum (I've flagged it).

In PFS you're not necessarily do gooders but you can be a lot more than mercs just in it for the money. But PFS explicitly is NOT a good vs evil campaign. If that is what you want perhaps PFS is not the appropriate choice

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.

There is immense value in quickly describing a culture, country, etc to a newcomer as a close analogue to the real world.

So, I'll often say "Ulfen, the not-vikings" or "Osiria, not-Egypt".

With Varisians specifically I usually say
"They are very much like gypsies as shown in Hollywood movies". That makes the point clear and specifically distances them from real life Roma. As far as I know nobody has been upset by this.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

I definitely agree with you, it starts at the starting daily value.

There are LOTS of spells that last more than a day that, reasonably, would already be cast or at least have a chance of being cast that, in PFS, are uncast. You can no more start with the reservoir filled than you can start with a Changestaff spell cast or an endure elements cast the night before, etc.

I agree with Ryzoken that one key difference is that stave charges last until used. The other key difference is that the Guide explicitly lists staves as being charged at the beginning of the scenario.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Sounds like a good idea to me too.

Silver Crusade

Ryzoken wrote:

I, for one, would be greatly interested in finally learning how bardic performance interacts with bardic masterpieces.

Given the post above (from somebody talking to John Compton IIRC) makes it clear that the most likely ruling is to make bardic masterpieces even more useless I'm kinda OK with them never answering this FAQ.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Currahee Chris wrote:


DC 15- They know the name of the woods, its history, etc

DC18- You know there is an adult green dragon deep in the woods by the forest (FALSE)

dc22- You Know there is a Red dragon wyrm known to feed on the livestock near the farm by the local river.

One player rolls and gets a 25- I feed him the dc15 and dc22 info on a slip of paper. The other person gets a 20- I give them the DC15 info and the false DC18 info on a slip of paper. They then are at an impasse

I may be just picking up on a flaw in the example, but this seems wrong to me. The player who made the 22 would probably know that there is a FALSE rumour that a green dragon lives deep in the woods. At the very least, he'd know that "almost everybody has heard of the green dragon, but only a few people know about the Red Dragon".

Silver Crusade

Certainly sounds within the power range of a specialized high level spell. Don't forget that wizards can create their own spells.

So, as long as the wizard in question is Way Powerful (using whatever metric your campaign uses for that) then sure, why not? Go for it

Silver Crusade

Ask your GM is STILL the correct answer.

Rightly or wrongly, there are GMs out there who feel that 2 full powered animal companions are just too much (too much power or too much table time) and will disallow it.

For example, PFS has disallowed it. And there are home games which basically play by PFS rules.

Its a sufficiently powerful and, to many, annoying edge case that you can pretty much expect some GMs to decide to house rule against it.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I want to encourage player engagement with the game. So, I'll allow the player to roll a risk free aid to diplomacy as long as he tells me what his character is doing to aid the diplomacy and as long as what he is doing is vaguely rational (doesn't have to be brilliant, just rationale).

Not necessarily realistic (lots of people talking probably hurts) but seems more enjoyable to me.

Silver Crusade

I'll only very occassionally roll for the players. I trust my players to try and not metagame but, being human, they can't do that perfectly. Sometimes it is just better if the player DOES NOT KNOW that he just failed a will save, or a Fort save, or whatever.

What I will sometimes do is say "Roll me a D20 and pass me your character sheet".

Player not rolling gets even stranger when dice rerolling mechanisms come into play

Silver Crusade

I try and do both. I'll come up with some concept. Perhaps it is race (I've got a grippli boon, I want to play a Vigilante)

Then I look for mechanically decent options within that flavour. So, I'll build a class that works well with a grippli (both mechanically and flavourfully)

Silver Crusade

claudekennilol wrote:
Think we'll get anything today?

Magic Eight Ball says "Not only no, but HE?? no"

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jack Brown wrote:


Personally, I don't think that's so bad.

And my main purpose in starting this thread was to let actual experience be heard, as opposed to theorycrafting (on EITHER side of the debate).

Its very possible I'm in the minority. Its very possible you are.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Terry Thambipillai wrote:
I'unclear on the point you are making. You might have cared more if you assigned the credit to character 99 deady mcdead ?

Hilary explained it well, but in a nutshell

Prior to the ruling : Nothing to lose, something to gain. I was well engaged with the character.

After the ruling : Nothing to lose, nothing to gain. I found it much harder to get engaged with the character, especially in terms of caring about the Secondary Success Condition

Silver Crusade

A Champion of Irori is quite effective, far more so than the more recent Iroran Paladin archetype. If you're willing to live with the role playing restrictions of a Paladin it is probably better in straight combat than a Sacred Fist Warpriest too.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I am NOT trying to reopen the discussion as to whether these rules should be changed. We know that the rules stay as they are for at least 6 months.

But the Blog certainly implied that the PTB are interested in feedback. So, I'm starting this thread to give actual feedback from experience, not theory crafting.

I played in The Serpent's Ire yesterday. Having heard that this could be fairly deadly and having seen how questionable my character build was I decided to assign credit to a brand new PC.

I was the only player out of 5 to do so. The other 4 were assigning it to real characters.

The one thing that I really noticed was that I found it very, very hard to care about the secondary prestige for the character. I wanted to complete the mission successfully and I enjoyed the little bit of role playing the character that the scenario allowed.

But I almost completely ignored the "mission letter" and its hints as to what I was supposed to do. I just couldn't bring myself to care when there was NOTHING on the line for me and it seemed like an in character diversion (my character was supposed to put the main mission first).

Knowing that there was NOTHING on the line made character engagement worse. So, for me at least, the attempt to make me care by putting character resources on the line had the exact opposite effect.

Edit: I should explicitly point out that I have experience with other scenarios where I have played pre-gens (eg, Serpent's Rise) and so am comparing actual play experiences before and after this ruling

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

MadScientistWorking wrote:


What scenario was it because if it is what I think it is that wasn't the players fault?

I agree that the primary fault for that particular scenario was the scenario itself. But it is just a particularly egregious example of the basic problem.

Scenario:
Karma Reclaimed

As to people saying "It is a player issue". Of COURSE it is. And OF COURSE one cannot come up with rules to completely solve the problem.

But the problem is significantly exacerbated by the rules system. When the rules allow such a HUGE power discrepancy between two characters that, on the surface, are essentially functionally identical (lets say mid level characters designed to blast their foes into oblivion with area of effect damage) there is a fundamental problem in the rules.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Andrew Christian wrote:


There is a chart in the bestiaries that helps a GM create a CR appropriate monster. Where thier to hits and AC and damage and saves should be to present a good challenge but not be overpowering. This chart could work as a guide for PCs too.

[Total Aside and Rant]I REALLY wish that Paizo would consult that chart more often when assigning CR numbers to monsters. There are SO many outliers where the listed CR is just obviously wrong. In a recent scenario the CR 12 monster was in almost all ways weaker than the CR 10 monster. And they were both monsters of the identical type published in the same bestiary.[/Total Aside and Rant]

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Thomas Hutchins wrote:

Why are GMs only having fun if the players are getting hit by stuff, failing saving throws, or doing less damage than the enemies?

As a GM you're there to run the scenario and bring it to life. Your fun should be in seeing the players win or in telling the scenario. The players are heroes against X difficulty. If they want that difficulty to be easy mode why would that decrease your fun at all?

A few reasons

On the monsters turn is a large part of when you get to do stuff. If you're stun locked, dead, or one shotted you can't do anything.

Because to some degree you have to empathize with the monsters you're playing to play them.

Because you're telling a story, and if that story has an anticlimactic ending you feel the story wasn't told well.

I agree with all the above.

Take the time where the scenario had an absurdly over complicated end boss using all sorts of rules that I don't know well. I spent well over an hour (likely over 2 hours) preparing that encounter.

And it was a complete cakewalk by the players. Other than knowing Initiative and AC all my preparation was irrelevant.

Maybe you enjoy wasting 2 hours of time but I don't

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Christian wrote:
One comment to the OP. It isn't table variation (up to how a GM rules) or a GM being pedantic, for them to follow the rules. That's simply not a fair statement to make. Especially in PFS.

I think its fair to expect table variation. How wild armor applies to shields is VERY badly written, sufficiently badly that I think it quite reasonable for a GM to read it as "obviously, wild armor on a shield preserves the shield bonus. Anything else is ridiculous". I also think a GM is quite within their rights to say "No, it is ridiculously overpriced but a shield only adds the enhancement bonus, despite that being impossible"

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

6 people marked this as a favorite.

One idea that conceivably could help would be to have GUIDELINES stating where approximately characters "Should" be at various levels for various kinds of builds.

Something to at least allow players a chance to self police themselves if they were so inclined.

Not enforced. Just rules of thumb.

At least some of the time the problem is that the player doesn't know whether a +10 to hit at level 7 doing 1d8+6 damage while maintaining an AC of 25 is poor, decent, good, or massively overkill.

Creating any such guidelines would be difficult and filled with disagreements but I suspect the Collective could come up with recommendations. Including suggesting some things that should never be used (dazing fireball would be high on my list, for example :-))

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I completely agree that over optimized builds are a huge problem. They cause lots of scenarios to be ROTFLstomp snooze fests. They have also caused Paizo to raise the difficulty of scenarios so that quite a few low tier adventures are far too difficult for new players (while still being easy for experienced players creating over optimized characters).

I have no clue what the solution is. Core IS a partial solution, I play it quite a bit online and it has made things much more challenging even with experienced players.

But, locally at least, new players don't like Core so it has died. New players want to play with all the toys from their new book. And who can blame them?

But this proposal isn't a solution. Far too many things to police, far too impractical to do so.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Svonar Djaeldsen wrote:
Flutter wrote:
Svonar Djaeldsen wrote:
]I do realize this, but being a hunter, I should try to keep my companion from wearing others to protect herself.
Just make sure he's wearing something! It's dangerous out there.
Oh, no worries there! She has her darkleaf barding to keep her safe!

Oh no. Who will protect the Trees?

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

I think that this may have been addressed but, if so, I couldn't find it.

Serpent's Ire uses specified level 8 pregens. Which leads to two questions. Note, I'm not trying to reopen the whole pregen death issue, I genuinely don't know the answers to these questions. And I may have an opportunity to play Serpents Ire this week.

1) Is it still the case that the character that I apply this to must be L7 or lower? On the one hand, the guide says it must be applied to a lower level character. On the other hand, my 8th level character cannot play this scenario so the usual reason for that restriction doesn't apply.

2) If my character dies and I chose to apply the chronicle to a real character how much is that real character supposed to pay? The guide tells me what to pay for a L7 pregen but this is NOT a level 7 pregen.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jeffrey Reed wrote:
Would level 21 even be a legal character level? Nothing in the normal rules allows that.

Well, you can create a L21 character however you want. Given that any audit as to its legallty will come when you try and PLAY him and that you can't PLAY a L21 character then I think the character is in a perfect Quantum Entangled state and is simultaneously legal and illegal.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm definitely not trying to discourage discussion and I didn't intend my posts to come off that way.

But I guess I strongly prefer discussion that is more than a glib "What is the problem?".

My intent was to get Jeff to give reasons for his opinion, not to dismiss his opinion. I guess I could have gone about that more politely and effectively (:-)) and for that I apologize

Edit: If I come across as even more grumpy than usual I'll point out that I have no air conditioning and the current temperature is 95.4 F ( Humidex of 108) :-(

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Nefreet wrote:
Andrew Torgerud wrote:
technically level 21 is achievable now.

How do you figure?

There's currently only one adventure that can be applied to a 19th level character.

Don't know, but I'm betting that it is related to

Andrew Torgerud wrote:
Only thing its missing is one of the newest gencon boons

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

1 person marked this as a favorite.
claudekennilol wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:


For PFS there's going to have to be a specific ruling to allow it to work that way. That would make the most sense for PFS, but until then, doing it that way is out of line with what the trick actually says.

Completely wrong. The current situation is unclear so the GM HAS to decide.

Please don't reply with a long complicated argument showing that your interpretation is 100% crystal clear. It isn't clear. Reasonable people can disagree.

Have you even ready any of my posts? Please go find a single post of mine where I wrote out a long convoluted response about why something works the way it does. I'm not going to call you names or stomp my feet because you disagree with me. That's just ridiculous. It's obvious we have differing opinions on how it works and that's just fine. I have no problem with there being table variance, just please don't assume that I do.

I apologize. Arguments that seem to hold one readers interpretation of the words up to some holy RAW standard that all players MUST follow get me irked and I thought your post was one such.

I obviously misunderstood you and apologize. I had thought you were saying that one could NOT rule that one could set the targets at the beginning of the session. If you're saying that there will be table variance on whether you can or not then we are in violent agreement.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
Jeff Hazuka wrote:


The new solution seems fine. You play an iconic pregen, if you're afraid of risk, assign it to a level 1. What's the problem?
I take it you didn't bother to read this thread?
All of it. If you're afraid of losing your character, you now have to apply a pregen to a level 1. Why is this an issue?

There are probably literally over a 100 posts (I haven't counted) explaining why people think this is an issue.

Just stating that you don't see a problem without explaining why at least some of those reasons are wrong isn't a positive contribution to this conversation. It comes off as just a dismissive remark, essentially saying that the rest of us are just being silly.

I have no idea if that is your intention, of course.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jeff Hazuka wrote:


The new solution seems fine. You play an iconic pregen, if you're afraid of risk, assign it to a level 1. What's the problem?

I take it you didn't bother to read this thread?

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

4 people marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:
Remember, the forums are not representative of the tens of thousands of PFS players. The campaign staff through the V-O's have much better data on this than we do here. If they say there's abuse, I'm willing to believe it's a problem.

I'm willing to believe that it exists. Less willing to believe its a problem.

I'm sure they've heard some anecdotal evidence. But I think that there is a very real chance that they've blown the problem out of proportion. Without very rigid analysis that is exactly what people tend to do, blow anecdotal evidence out of proportion.

And, of course, many of us think this solution won't fix the problem anyway.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:

I'm not seeing anyone in this thread complaining of the widespread abuse that this is supposed to address.

Where are those people?

There is one person (SinsofAsmodeus, I believe) who said that he has seen abuse.

I'll accept that there IS abuse but it seems clear that it is not common as we now have LOTS of people from LOTS of areas who have never seen any.

1 to 50 of 1,869 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.