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

ralantar's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. 193 posts (340 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.



1 person marked this as a favorite.

Raving Dork,
I don't know what it is about your posts that send the usual suspects into their self righteous foaming at the mouth frenzies, or attempting to belittle your questions with useless sarcasm, but I usually enjoy reading them even if they are esoteric at times.

I think the easiest way to rationalize it for you, and maintain verisimilitude has already been pointed out.
In movies you often see shields being used to block straight on stabbing shots or two handed overhead chops as if they were a wall. The reality is you don't hold the shield and try to brace it against the blow. That's a quick way to wind up with a broken arm. You use it to deflect the blow by keeping it at an angle or twisting it just as the blow comes in so that the blade slides off the side.

The Ac bonus increases as the size of the shield goes up not because the shield is more durable or thicker (thought it usually is to a degree), but because it's covering a wider area and harder to get past.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
strayshift wrote:


I would also point out that being a DM is a massive undertaking even with a purchased adventure (reading, game admin, etc). There is far more work involved than being a player, therefore I think the DM earns the right to define the parameters of his game to a large degree - the DM is the one doing the giving here.
If you expect compensation, even if that compensation is merely a deference to your authority, then what you are doing is not strictly defined as "giving."

Um yes it is.

You mean it isn't gifting.

And maybe it's just me, But I'm not doing all of this work as a gift to my players. And I seriously doubt that the majority of DM's are as altruistic as you are trying to claim.

I do expect certain things in return for my services as a DM. Particularly attendance, appreciation and respect for the time and effort I am putting into crafting the campaign, not playing something that is going to make unwelcome extra work for me, or insisting on playing a class or race that is going to break the verisimilitude of the campaign world. I don't think that's is too much to ask.


25 people marked this as a favorite.

Because the GM is doing all the work. The player just has to show up and enjoy it.

If I bake a cherry pie(adventure) and invite you to have a piece. All you have to do is show up with a spoon(character) to enjoy it.

It is DAMN RUDE to show up and complain that the pie isn't apple, or that you brought a fork and are having a hard time eating said FREE pie.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmm, I suppose this is a pitfall. Most players will not understand or appreciate the amount of work required to be the GM of a game until they try to run a game themselves.
This lack of appreciation can manifest itself in a number of ways:
Poor attendance
Lack of commitment
Deliberate game breaking builds
A misplaced sense of entitlement.
Expecting the DM to know the rules for you.
just to list a few.
These are things a lot of GMs have to deal with. The trick is to not let some of them bother you too much, knowing when and what issues you can talk to the players about, and to know when it's time to pull the plug on a player or group that is causing too much stress.

As for what it takes to make a good GM. There are books written on the subject. It's too complex to answer in just a forum post. It comes down to which style of play you are leaning towards.
Pre-scripted stories or more of an open sandbox style. Each style requires different skills from the DM.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

um. I guess. we just house ruled reroll 1's on healing spells and when rolling for Hp at a new level.
I'm not sure I see the point/necessity of charging a feat for this.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

If you want your vampires to sparkle, have at it. But please stop trying to convince the rest of us, that it should be considered normal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Won't someone please think of the children!!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

You know it's interesting but it's only in the last few years that I've started to see this more and more.
Back in 2nd edition(and i'm not saying edition has anything to do with this. I think it's something else entirely, but that's a whole nother can of worms) this rarely happened at all with my groups.
Players were more willing to adapt their characters to the party and the DM's storyline. Sure you would have inter party conflicts. Actually more so then than now it seems.
But the shift seems to have been directing those conflicts more towards the game world and the Dm's story then the other players.
I think that's where some of the feeling of "entitlement" is coming from.

It's the Dm, sitting there and doing the vast majority of the work, crafting a story, shaping encounters, planning out treasure. etc. and having the players look at the DM and asking "what's my motivation".
And the DM wanting to snap back.. That's your job, you tell me, why are you an adventurer rather then the Innkeeper.

We call it role playing yourself out of the group. You the player have come up with this elaborate back story that really in no way makes sense for your PC to become an adventurer or associate with the other adventurers. He would be more content raising sheep. And somehow it's the DM's fault for not accommodating you.

Or a player asking why his character would want to continue adventuring with the group.

As a DM this is fustrating. You (the player) have come up with this logical reason why your character shouldn't stick around. Rather then expending that energy coming up with a reason why you should.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

You can call it what ever you like, use the flavor of the month term of your choice. But I am a Dungeon Master.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I read everything you wrote.. And essentially you're dumping a lot of extra work on the DM if he wants to maintain verisimilitude.

And let me get this straight.. if another player spends a night drinking with you he basically gets a draw from a walking deck of many things. And if he doesn't like the card he pulled he has to spend 48 hours not adventuring with the rest of the group? You don't see something wrong with that? Or the fact that your character is basically a walking artifact?

Also you refer to a "main character",
is this a 2 person game or are there others at the table? In a group I don't see how your character isn't going to totally monopolize the game play.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wish I could say I see what you are. But I don't
I don't see nearly enough information in the play test to make that kind of call.
The rules look simplistic because you're looking at maybe 10% of them.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jerry Wright 307 wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Mage Armor?
Mage armor helps to obviate the need for a fighter type to protect the mage while he is casting. It encourages wizards and sorcerers to engage in melee combat.

Come on now, this is just silly talk.

If the wizard wants to cast mage armor and start flailing about with his staff then let him.
It's the same as the fighter trying to use Use Magic Device and zap stuff with a wand.
Again this mentality that this class must do this and that class must do that is not what this game is about. That line of thinking comes from computer games, not the historical rules of DnD that fostered your imagination.
DnD is not supposed to be a set of rules that regimented what you had to do, or how you had to play if you wrote down a specific class on your character sheet. THAT mentality is what brought us the obnoxiousness of roles, like striker, controller, tank, etc.

Now the concept of limiting magic items that replicate spell casting (scrolls and wands) isn't that terrible on paper. But I think it is already controlled by the DM well enough, simply by how much treasure you hand out. Scrolls and Wands are very expensive once you start getting into higher level spells. A 9th level character with a wand of fireballs (9th level-9d6) has 1/4 his entire wealth (if you are militant about the WBL tables-which I am not)invested in that wand. And when it's depleted it's gone! For the same price the melee can have a weapon with +3 worth of bonuses and it never runs out.

I don't see the problem here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:


As I recall, roles and complaining about class balance has been part of the game since First Edition. Venting your complaints simply became viral once the Internet became something other than a DARPA experiment sponsored by an eager US Senator.

Yes you have a point. The problem is that, as with most things, those that scream the loudest and most often (no matter how much of a minority) have a tendency to be the ones that get heard. And are the ones developers wind up listening to. And therefor the ones that wind up getting the rules shaped they way they want.

So unfortunately if you don't like something you have to raise your voice and make a fuss, even if it's obvious to the majority that the rules should be written one way. If they just assume it will, the minority crying for change will be the ones that get their way. And then you wake up one day and realize... where did my game go? This isn't what we wanted.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

yeah but if you read it closely, no offense intended, he doesn't care if it does. He's going to do what he thinks is best and those groups are out of luck.
The only good thing he mentions is trying to come up with a way to give wizards something to fall back on other then crossbows and darts once their spells are used up. But his answer is non-scaling cantrips? Even if said cantrips do 1d6 elemental damage (and i can't see them allowing them to do more then that.) you're in the realm of throwing daggers and darts.
Now, that said. I don't have a problem with wizards falling back on sub-par attacks after their spells are used up. As long as those spells were impressive to begin with.
But honestly read that article then read the one he wrote about fighters. It's night and day. Fighters it's all about cool powers and new stuff. The wizard article is 90% nerfs talked about as if they are great!


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Look... this post is a rant. I realize that. You've been warned.

This article here
5th edition wizards pretty much guarantees I will not touch 5th edition.

rant on:

I am sick and tired of these developers telling me that for the past 20 years I have been doing it wrong, not been having fun and that they know better then all of the developers that came before them. That only the players who played wizards at my table had fun in my games and that fighters and rogues cried themselves to sleep at night over the injustice of it all.

I am sick to death of this fighter fan base that was beat up by a wizard in kindergarten and has dedicated their life to getting revenge by nerfing(to use an mmo phrase) wizards into the ground.

It annoys me to no end that this mentality has crept into pathfinder (by the way blasting spells have suffered) to some extent and is proselytized on the boards here almost daily.

I'm tired of it. It's called resource management. Wizards spells are the most powerful in the game and should do more damage then melee attacks because they are limited in resource. Letting your players get away with 15 minute adventuring days so the melee characters never shine means you're doing it wrong as a DM NOT that the system is flawed.
But no one ever looks at it this way, oh no, it's all the big bad wizard's fault. The class must be OP.

But it's this mentality that has led to 4th level archers in pathfinder doing 30+ points of damage per round, every round, all day while a 4th level wizard is lucky if he can pull off a 15 point damage spell 2 or 3 times the entire day.

This entire article is nothing but a massive nerf to wizards.
Scrolls should require a spell slot to use? So lets reduce the 15 minute adventure day to 10 minutes.

Reduced number of spell slots.. spells don't scale with level..BUT hey you can cast cantrips all day!!
This is like saying.. okay Mr. Fighter.. you can have 4 swings of your greatsword per day but then you have to switch to your dagger.

Haste is for fighters.. anyone else with a haste spell shouldn't get as many attacks as an unbuffed fighter... WTH... why does this sounds like SUMMMON FIGHTER I-IX should be the most powerful spell in the game?

The article has more examples of this.. grease to help the rogue. web to entangle the villain's horse but not the villain himself. Heaven forbid the wizard actually do something to win the encounter. That's everyone else's job. You should be happy we let you cast light. Not that it was necessary. The fighter just used a power and can see in the dark now silly wizard.

I grow weary of this. Leave the wizard alone or they aren't going to be worthy of the name for much longer!

/rant


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't get it. Why are you concerned your players are dumping stats, or min maxing?
All that does is give you a weakness to exploit as the DM.
Oh you dumped your str down to a 7 because your a wizard and have your int boosted to a 20. Well say hello to my friend the shadow. Let's see how many rounds you survive.
oh your a warrior and boosted your str to stratospheric numbers, but you ignored your dex? hmmm centipede poison says hi.
It usually only takes one or two encounters for pcs to stop dumping stats and there are a ton of creatures that focus on this sort of thing.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Don't forget the posting poles around town. You can post extra jobs on them for the party to gain trust. As well as Xp if you have a larger party that might need it to maintain levels.
Here's a sample of mine:
1.)Millie the Baker is looking for some day laborers (2sp for the day)Trust +1 as the pcs prove they aren’t vagrants
2.) Taren's pet Bungo the Bunny is missing. Have you seen her? (+1 Trust for catching) DC-15 perception or tracking to find. (-1 trust if harmed by pc)
3.) Estate Sale for Ms Burbager in 3 days
4.) Zokar the Innkeeper is looking for some day laborers (1sp for the day) Trust +1 as the pcs prove they aren’t vagrants
5.) Philberson wedding was a week ago
6.) For Sale: 1 wheelbarrow, 2 spades, 1 pitchfork, Plow with harness, 2 Scythe, misc handtools. Barlow farm
7.) Barn Raising in 4 days (+2 Trust if the pcs help)
8.) Farmer Pendergast needs his hay brought in from the fields. (he hurt his back) (+2 trust, 2 days work, 4 sp)
9.) Farmer Flurgenhurgen - 25 gp reward for the death of the wolf or wolves killing his goats. (+3 trust, there is a pack of 3 wolves)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I do not find the alignment system to be arbitrary or artificial.
What I do find is that the alignment system is defined by morals and ethics so the definitions are colored by the person trying to define the individual alignments.
There are set definitions for each alignment type.
In my experience the trouble arises when a person who in reality is some flavor of neutral tries to define what is good or evil. few people, deep down, like to think of themselves as not good. So a conflict arises, because it can't be that they aren't good, It's that the alignment system is broken. That good is too restrictive. That this act isn't really evil because they would do it in certain situations.

By historical definition Good is the hard path requiring constant vigilance. Evil is the easy path of unfettered self indulgence and damn the consequences. People fail sometimes at staying on the good path, but no one likes to admit it when it happens. So it's not their fault. It must be a fault in the alignment system that's pointing the contradiction out.
my 2 cents anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm sorry this is ridiculous, I'm calling the OP a troll.
You're post reeks of anti-caster agenda.

Quote:


There are three other players in the party that are a tier 3 or tier 4 class (monk, rogue, paladin who plays our healer.) I'm just running circles around everyone,

This statement just proves my point. Claiming that Monks, Rogues and Paladin are somehow lesser classes is bunk.

Either the players of these classes don't know what they are doing or your DM is failing at crafting an appropriate adventure.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The OP voiced his feelings and I have to say I agree with a lot of it.
Personally though I'm going to add I hope 5e is a flaming bomb of epic proportions.
So much so that hasbro liquidates WoTC and sells off all of TSR's old IP. Or at the very least looks to sell WoTC along with the licensing. I would love to see Paizo scoop up Forgotten Realms, Krynn, Greyhawk, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Planescape.. etc on the cheap and give them a home where they will be appreciated and taken care of instead of strictly milked for profit above all else.
Many will think this harsh, but the fact is WotC lied, repeatedly, to our faces. They swore up and down on their forum that they had no intentions of releasing a 4th edition anytime soon. Not 2 weeks after their repeated denials they suddenly announced that 4th ed was coming soon and well into development, and it was)
Couple that with them driving away a good portion of their creative staff, changing worlds not to improve them but for the sole purpose of reselling them, clamping down on their licensing, defaming their existing fans and the previous editions, canceling subscription magazines.. etc etc..
They have shown themselves to be poor and damaging stewards of the DnD brand in my opinion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

They really need a "stinky cheese" warning label on some of these threads.
Or some sort of rating scale.
ooh that thread has four Limburgers, I think i'll pass.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is supposed to be a joke post right?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have found asking what previous characters they have played can be a good tell.
If they bust out with: oh well this one time my half gnome/thri-kreen psionists/bard was stuck in a dungeon looking for his lost orange wig, because you know he totally couldn't (random inappropriate topic to bring up with someone you just met) the BBEG without it. I put them in the not being invited column.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You people need to get out more or find something better to occupy your time with.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LilithsThrall wrote:

Its piss-poor design to have classes that are social classes and other classes that are combat classes.

Players want to feel that they can contribute at any time. To make the players playing fighters feel that its now time to make a taco bell run because the party is doing social stuff now is bad.

Likewise, the players playing bards shouldn't have to feel second class because the party is doing combat.

The fighter needs to have something to contribute in social situations and the bard needs a chance to become alpha in combat.

This is so wrong on so many levels. It is exactly the type of mentality that does not need to be applied to the game. This is a group play game. It's not about me me me.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

They really should slap a label on this hobby. "You Int score must be a 12+ to play this game."


2 people marked this as a favorite.

For me, the main issue with Golarion is how tightly packed together the nations are. There isn't enough wilderness, uncharted land, for a DM to make their own stuff. Or for players to found their own kingdom. If you try to maintain verisimilitude.
I'm not a huge fan of the pantheon either. It's not bad, there are some dieties I like. But as a whole it doesn't thrill me. Someone else mentioned the lack of racial dieties. That has bugged me as well. The world is too human focused for a fantasy based game.
Oh and I want my steampunk gnomes back.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:
1. The concise and clear action types, and the ability to "downgrade" any action for the next, "lesser" type. So clean in play.

and makes combat take 5 times as long as everyone suddenly has multiple actions in a single round. no thanks.

bugleyman wrote:


2. Fixed hit point progression. Just way too important to be random.

No, I've no interest in cookie cutter characters. A Cleric that rolls well will be played differently then one that rolls poor for HP. I see no reason to remove anything that promotes differences from character to character. Homogenization is something 4e embraced. Frankly I find it anathema.

bugleyman wrote:


3. Consistency between spell levels and caster levels. A 4th level wizard should cast 4th level wizard spells.

I don't see the need to change this. It offers no benefit, it's just different then what's been done.

bugleyman wrote:


4. Pared-down list of actions which provoke.

I don't find the current list to be cumbersome. If someone is trying to hit you with a pointy object don't stand there and try to ignore them.

bugleyman wrote:


5. "Warlordish" leader of men in the core.

I could see this as an archetype for Fighter or Paladin

bugleyman wrote:


6. Point-buy as the default stat generation method.

No

bugleyman wrote:


7. Concise yet specific wording (at least in theory).

seriously? Pathfinder is too technical for you? I will say this, I find it frustrating having to look up status effects in the back of the book instead of having them in the spell or monster description. That could definitely use some improvement in pathfinder. But that's a format/layour issue rather then a technical rules set issue.

bugleyman wrote:


8. Some sort of mook or minion rules.

100 time No

bugleyman wrote:


9. Bloodied.

meh, It just bogs things down as written in 4th. To me some sort of penalty, as an optional rule, when your hp drop to a certain % would be more appealing. But not necessary. The idea that you get a special free attack when reduced by a % doesn't sit well. It comes across as rule enforced dramatization instead of role played.

bugleyman wrote:


10. Some way for solitary, powerful enemies to have a greater than normal # of actions. This is just so true to comics, movies, etc., and really enables the "big bad" enemy quite well.

I've no formed opinion on this.


©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.