|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Jacob Saltband wrote:
It's not necessarily "Feel good super special snowflake", nor is it "never fails at anything they attempt", however without house rules limiting the game pretty drastically, it definitely is high-power superhero action.
Hmmmm. Looks like you're going with the approach where the characters are already special before finding the Stair, rather than the one where time on the Stair/becoming a Warden boosts your abilities beyond the normal for your world.
Ok. That probably helps with my earlier question and cuts off one concept I had in mind.
Another might still be possible, but it looks like we need to have a mysterious past to tie into, which kind of kills my genetically engineered hacker/thief.
I'll start thinking more about the technomancer.
I suspect it's a "money grab" in the sense that they expect Tor to be able to help them sell more books, even at the higher price.
It's also quite likely that with higher costs for the trade paperbacks and Tor's cut, they won't actually be making more money per book.
Obviously, if you don't want the trade paper or even the hard copy at all, that doesn't help you, but it still doesn't make it a money grab.
I think the larger question is whether some stats have any effect at all outside of the skill bonuses (or spells or other specific effects). Ability checks are a common thing in some editions. Do the existing skills cover all uses? Or are there gaps where the raw stat matters?
I'm running Linux. And Win7 at work.I might be able to get it to run under wine, but I probably won't bother just to check it out.
When it would have been cheaper and easier to make it in some ebook format that anything can work with.
I'm definitely interested. Amber was an old favorite and this looks like an worthy setting for a successor.
I've got a couple of character ideas and am trying to put something together.
I'm a little curious about where you see the game going though. You seem to want a lot on homeworlds and things going on there. Do you expect a lot of focus on the Gossamer worlds we come from or more of an exploring the Stair kind of game?
Particularly in the case of rivals and threats, for characters who start out as relatively mundane, such things are likely to be pretty inconsequential once you're awakened to Warden of the Grand Stair. If you're already coming from a high fantasy world, then local things can still remain threats, but if it's more like the modern world, for example, that doesn't work so well.
Let's skip that argument here please. Especially if we're starting with "mentally retarded".
It's quite reasonable, even in Golarion, to believe that while such entities exist and can be interacted with as you suggest, they're really no different than other powerful entities not normally called gods, certainly not worthy of worship. That's the standard use of atheist in Golarion & Pathfinder.
Not that you're innocent of first degree murder, but that charging you with it after the first trial would be double jeopardy and thus not allowed.
Ceaser Slaad wrote:
One comment. I understand that the police officers in the Gray case have been charged with homicide. It should be noted that a perverse way for the prosecutor to attempt to protect the officers is to overcharge them so that when the case goes to trial an acquittal results because the evidence doesn't support the charge. Given that I don't have all the information I would like I can't say for sure that is what is happening here. But it is possible that could be happening here.
The murder charge is "“second-degree depraved heart murder", which is my new favorite legal phrase.
Means that officer wasn't necessarily trying to kill him, but was acting with malice and a reckless indifference to whether he died or not. Beyond criminal negligence, since there was intent involved, but not normal second degree murder since the intent wasn't necessarily to kill.
I don't think she overcharged in this case. It's still going to have to go through a grand jury, which should be a formality if the prosecutor actually wants charges, but is often where charges against officers go to die.
It's also possible to undercharge. Recently a judge cleared Chicago police officer Dante Servin on manslaughter charges, ruling that he should have been charged with murder.
Yes. We should obviously judge everything based on broad simple rules ignoring any real world complexity.
No s*!# the place was already set to blow. The cops had been abusing and killing people for decades. Where's all your outrage about that? They started the violence. They're the enemy because they've made themselves the enemy. That's why, finally, after much provocation and at least a week of non-violent protests, they finally got their riots.
It started based on a b~&&%+#~ internet rumor and the cops in full gear trapping and cornering bunches of high school kids.Like I said above, non-violence it hard. It takes training and dedication and work to stay non-violent in the face of provocation when you're already angry. And these were high school kids, not usually known for calm tempers and good judgment.
Except the bard requirement specifically says 15 Dex. I suppose that could be just to cover the chance your dex had been lowered since you qualified to dual-class to thief, but it's not how I took it.
More likely, the bard rules were written up without really considering how they fit with the rest of the rules. I suspect the half-elf bit is the same, since the entire class description requires you to dual class to get to bard and there isn't any hint that multiclassing qualifies, except that half-elves are allowed and half-elves can't dual class.
The requirements don't say "Must be between 5th level and 8th level fighter and 5th and 9th level thief", but "Bards begin play as fighters and they must remain exclusively fighters until they have achieved at least the 5th level of experience. <snip> they must change their class to that of thieves." Half-elves can't do that.
It's a hack job on an earlier version, probably someone's houserules, that never quite got refitted to work with the actual rules.
Except they don't seem to have been targeting everyone. If you listen to the interview he did after getting out, IIRC he talks about being with one group of protesters and talking to a white shirt cop about how to get over to a group in another area. He was on his way when he got grabbed. Now, it's certainly possible it was just opportunistic - "lone guy, we can get one more off the street with no trouble", but they weren't just arresting everyone.
He doesn't suggest he was specifically targeted, but the first thought that came to my mind listening to it was "Set up".
And Dex is the physical stat that's come up a few times in this thread with suggested extra penalties. Clumsy, tripping on things etc.
That's a generous interpretation.
A less generous one is that he was targeted precisely because he was a non-violent leader.
I think the focus is mostly on the mental stats (and really mostly on intelligence and charisma), because the physical ones come with significant mechanical penalties. Con is obvious. Str is mostly carrying capacity, though there are ways to alleviate that after low levels.
Can you be strong, even though you have a low Strength?
Jacob Saltband wrote:
No, but you can use diplomacy to make requests of a friendly barmaid. Those requests could be job related (free drinks!), but they don't have to be. They could be for something related to an actual game plot (Gather Information or help sneak us into the back where mob bosses are meeting) or they could be seduction.Of course, the GM sets the DCs for those, they're not straight 15s.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
My preference has become: Have everyone roll stats using some standard method, probably 4d6 drop one. Then everyone uses whichever set of stats they like. Somewhat higher that 4d6, but it gets rid of the outlying high and low stat characters. And it's adaptable. You could use 3d6 for a lower powered game or your d12+6 or whatever you wanted.
I like the randomness of the dice rolls in the sense of having to adapt somewhat to the rolls rather than fiddling with point values to get just right, but I don't like the disparity you usually get in power level.
Fake Healer wrote:
Sadly that's probably not true. Practically speaking, peaceful protests get ignored. There was no real media attention until the violence started. That doesn't mean violence is justified, but the attitude that peaceful, legal protests will fix things is naive.Also, breaking the curfew might be illegal, but it's still not violent. Joseph Kent was a well known and respected voice for non-violence in the movement. Keeping the non-violent leaders off the streets is not how you avoid violence.
Perhaps more importantly, non-violent protest is hard. Not so much if you've got a dozen people holding signs in front of the capitol while a couple bored cops look on, but when you've got thousands of angry people in the streets facing a wall of cops looking to discredit them. There's a reason long-term movements train their people how to stay non-violent, even when tensions are high and they're being provoked.
And then there's Ta-nehisi Coates' take on this. Linked before, but he's always worth reading.
When nonviolence is preached as an attempt to evade the repercussions of political brutality, it betrays itself. When nonviolence begins halfway through the war with the aggressor calling time out, it exposes itself as a ruse. When nonviolence is preached by the representatives of the state, while the state doles out heaps of violence to its citizens, it reveals itself to be a con. And none of this can mean that rioting or violence is "correct" or "wise," any more than a forest fire can be "correct" or "wise."
Simply put, the "rioters" didn't start the violence. The police did. Having the police here talk about non-violence is like the little kid saying "He started it. He hit me back first".
I'd forgotten, or never noticed that. With a 15 Dex, you could dual-class from fighter to thief if you were planning on going to bard, but you couldn't otherwise without a 17. Weirdness.
Actually, it might not really be easier, since you needed a bunch of stats - 15 Str,15 Dex, 10 Con, 12 Int, 15 Wis, 15 Cha
So the PC version will be a Windows 10 specific application? Why? There are plenty of generic ereader type formats.
And, at least for the moment, only on the Iphone (or other I devices)
I can't comment on it because I can't read it.
You're giving it away for free. Put it up on the web where I can get at it.
I wonder how much this gets to the root of the difference here: As Morzadian says, in Pathfinder, you either know a language or you don't. It's binary. There are no degrees of comprehension or ease of use.
More, you can go from not understanding a word of a language one day to that complete understanding the next, by going up a level and putting a point in Linguistics.
Personally, I see this as so completely unlike the way people actually learn languages or how they use them for that matter, that it's obviously an abstraction, simplified to make game play easier. We assume the character's actually been practicing in off screen. Maybe we roleplay out a few comical misunderstandings or sloppy, simple speech just to show that before we get back to the real business of that.
Others see the mechanics as the way game world really works. In PF worlds, people really do either speak languages or not, with no middle ground. And learn them completely overnight with no need for justification.
I wonder if that maps at all to the differences we have over what stats mean.
As he should have been, to be honest.
"Should have been" is strong. Yes, he was in violation, but given how such things are selectively enforced...
Especially when you realize he was a strong and respected voice for non-violence in the community. Keeping those off the streets is kind of counter productive.
There was certainly no need for the kind of tactics used to pick him up. If he'd been in a crowd, sure, but he was alone with a wall of officers. You hardly need to cut him off with a Hummvee and 5 or 6 officers. Who are you cutting him off from, anyway?
Didn't assume gear, perhaps, but even if you don't assume a particular level of gear, whatever you have still affected how touch the fight was. In AD&D you had monsters immune to non-magical weapons of various bonuses. Fighting those gets much harder if you don't have them.It's just that there were no guidelines for what you should have. Characters might just as well have been massively overequipped as not equipped at all. Monty Haul was a thing.
Also, without magical gear, things tend to shift even more in favor of casters - buffs can replace some gear, save boosters aren't available, etc. There's a drop in power for all classes, but it's not even.
There's also the fact that by the time the Guardians movie came out "Marvel movie" was itself a brand name with a really good track record. People may well have given it a chance based on that.
The Hulk being the only real exception to that track record.
I've got to think it's got less draw per person who played it though. It's not like there's anything to it that makes you think "story".
As I said, it would be hard to pull off. You could start by not starting with the most stereotypically awful way to approach it.
I'm not saying "accurately follow the rules" or "will revitalize the gaming hobby" or anything like that.
I just think in order to profitably license the thing Hasbro needs more than just the name. They need something to sell. The D&D brand isn't strong enough to convince a studio that slapping it on an otherwise generic fantasy movie will bring in enough more viewers to justify paying Hasbro big bucks for it.
Which is why I suggested they'd be better off pitching Dragonlance or D'rzzt or some kind of actual content.
Though most of those advantages would come to any dual classed character. (Was bard the only way to get to three? I can't remember.)
Using a popular novel might well work better. No argument there. And there's no reason you couldn't use big name stars in a D&D movie, so that's a moot point.
And I did suggest the best approach would be working with one of their book properties.
I do suspect most of us here would be drawn, even those who don't play anymore or never did. It is the root of the hobby, even if we've moved on. Some, who have particularly strong negative reactions to WotC, would probably be turned off by it. I also think a lot of former players, dating back to the glory days, would be interested, if only for nostalgia reasons.
D&D really does have a pretty big name, far beyond active players. And as I said above, since we're talking Hasbro, it's what they have to sell - they can't sell the rights to "generic fantasy movie".
Then there's no point in using the property.
"I think they should just make a good fantasy movie" is good advice for a movie studio, but it doesn't leave Hasbro with a product to sell.
That's not true. There's not a big enough built in audience that will see a D&D movie just because it's a D&D movie, but that doesn't mean a good fantasy movie drawing on the D&D property won't find an audience.Fantasy has been hot and it hasn't just been those who were already fans of the property it was based on.
The 8th Dwarf wrote:
You can make it that way if you want to. But it's only really necessary if you want to think that because there are lots of gamers playing adventurers in the fantasy world, there must be enough adventures going on everywhere to keep all their characters busy.
It's also possible to set your campaign in a particularly dangerous area - a frontier maybe - and assume that much of the rest of the world is more settled and civilized. That's why the adventure is here. There aren't adventures to be had in most of the land. Or if there's a major threat plotline to your campaign, it's the only one. Not just one of many threatening the world at once.
Not every little farming village needs adventure hooks and dangerous dungeons around every corner. Just the one your party is in.
The problem with a D&D movie is simple: there's no story or even characters to adapt. Therefore, for it to be recognizably a D&D movie, it's got to use the tropes attached to D&D, which are adapted to a game, participatory style, not a narrative one. And generally don't work all that well when turned into narrative form.
Probably best to base it on one of the existing narrative properties - Dragonlance could work and I'd really prefer it. D'rizzt might be more likely.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
<Looks back at my post.> <Looks at my second post>
Good. I didn't say anything remotely like that.
It could be done well. I'm thinking of the framing sequence for Princess Bride.
But it would hard as hell to pull off. Much harder than just doing a good straight fantasy movie.
James Jacob often did say to not quote him and use him as ammo for arguments on forums. Which something everybody just keep on doing, as it is only his own opinion, not written in stone anywhere.
There's a difference between "It's his opinion, not a formal ruling" and "The developers play the game really badly."
That's really sad and disappointing to hear coming from a dev at Paizo. I guess I kind've hold them to higher standards given how close they are to the game, but that's really bad.
I love when people accuse the game's developers of playing wrong for not playing the way you think they should.
Insain Dragoon wrote:
How were you "forced" to do so? Plenty of people player characters without dump stats. If your GM has ramped the difficulty up so high that it's the only way you can survive, maybe you should talk to him about backing off a notch. Unless you enjoy that kind of game, in which case you're hardly being forced.
Orville Redenbacher wrote:
lol, how did this get to "8 int/wis/cha" is retarded?
Somewhere just past the claim that there isn't anything in between "can't call them stupid" and animal intelligence - literally, that there is no reason to play a 3 Int character as any more stupid than anyone else and the next step down is animal. There's no room for stupid characters.
Ceaser Slaad wrote:
I hope we can at least agree that, regardless of our feelings on property rights, that we do have the right not to be abused or even killed by the police - whether that's by being having your spine broken in custody under mysterious circumstances, being choked, being shot or just generally beaten up.
I'd hope further that we could agree, though I suspect we won't, that black people, young black men in particular, haven't had this right for most of US history and to a large extend still don't have it now. They certainly didn't when they were part of someone else's property rights. They certainly didn't for the following hundred years when the laws were openly stacked against them. Since then, while they theoretically have such rights, they have far too often been violated with little to no consequence to the abusers. Which means they still don't really have them.
I really don't think "dead-tree" comes out of global warming or even the environmental movement in general. As far as I can tell it comes out of hacker/computer geek jargon. Dates back to the 80s at least.
It's derogatory, not because of environmental concerns, but because suits always wanted the hardcopy, while the geeks were happier with digital.
I could say the same things. We're coming at this from different angles.
Though I will say, as I think I did in the first post, if you neglect the skills you said you wanted him to be good in and focused on putting those 2 skill points into knowledge skills, that would reflect him learning what you'd expect a sheltered ignorant person coming out into the world to pickup over time. This is however the first time you've suggested that. Before you'd first said that his lack of knowledge skills and int penalty were his ignorance and sheltered upbringing, but that he could learn and make that ignorance go away without actually changing his int or knowledge skills - so that the same scores would mean something else.