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

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Skull & Shackles Player's Guide


Skull & Shackles

1 to 50 of 119 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Andoran

I can't find the Player's Guide for Skull & Shackles. Is it out yet?

Paizo Employee Paizo Glitterati Robot

Moving thread to the AP forums.

This product isn't live yet.


are we there yet?
How much longer?
Pleaasee...

Yeah, just like a kid on a 1500 mile drive across the country..

Cheliax

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

According to THIS blog post, the player's guide for Skull & Shackles will be released this week. Whether that's a vague "sometime this week" or a specific "Thursday this week" (since the blog post was posted on Thursday, which generally seems to be a Golarion-focused day for the blog), I don't know.


It's out :)

Andoran

Thank you!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Ryan. Costello wrote:
Thank you!

Where is it? I don't see it in my downloads.


PJ wrote:
Ryan. Costello wrote:
Thank you!

Where is it? I don't see it in my downloads.

Try adding it manually?

Founder, Legendary Games & Publisher, Necromancer Games, RPG Superstar Judge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I love seeing our old book Dead Man's Chest referenced in the OGL section of the Player's Guide. Yet another Necromancer Games product that carries on with Pathfinder.


You said Thursday! It's Thursday! Is it out, yet?

Andoran

Wrag wrote:
You said Thursday! It's Thursday! Is it out, yet?

Uh...it's been out since Tuesday. Check here.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Having just my first read through of the guide I have some mixed feelings about it.

The good: I love the stuff for scars and missing limbs/body parts. The Naval combat chapter is pure gold (no, really guys I cant give it enough praise). The pirate weapons are also really awesome, finally I can have a hook hand and know what it does. All of that is just awesome!

The mediocre: Maybe traits. Some of them are really interesting, others not so much.

The bad: The format for classes/races in the shackles. I feel I need to elaborate on this more. Im not terribly familiar with the shackles and other players may not be (and yet other players will be intimately familiar with the region). So at first glance I have some issues figuring how say an aqautic druid would fit into the setting. It pretty much says yeah they can be there and they'll be useful for the game but it doesnt explain how druidic characters (or really any class) fits into the setting. The same goes for races, I mean would say a half orc be common in the area and if so would they be an immigrant or born there? Would they be welcomed or have the same racial tensions as every where else?

I guess I just liked the previous formats like Carrion crown and Serpent's skull better because I felt like I could make any character and be pretty confident about why they would be there or how they would act in the area. I dont feel as comfortable with this format due to the lack of setting information

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Windcaler wrote:

The bad: The format for classes/races in the shackles. I feel I need to elaborate on this more. Im not terribly familiar with the shackles and other players may not be (and yet other players will be intimately familiar with the region). So at first glance I have some issues figuring how say an aqautic druid would fit into the setting. It pretty much says yeah they can be there and they'll be useful for the game but it doesnt explain how druidic characters (or really any class) fits into the setting. The same goes for races, I mean would say a half orc be common in the area and if so would they be an immigrant or born there? Would they be welcomed or have the same racial tensions as every where else?

I guess I just liked the previous formats like Carrion crown and Serpent's skull better because I felt like I could make any character and be pretty confident about why they would be there or how they would act in the area. I dont feel as comfortable with this format due to the lack of setting information

I kinda agree, it would have been nice, but they had to make a lot of room for that other stuff. They had to cut somewhere.

I think you can maybe just assume that the Shackles, being a freewheeling kind of place, is going to have all types of folks hanging around, and nobody is going to care much. So class/race specific hooks aren't as important as they were in, say, superstitious ol' Ustalav.

Maybe you can take as an example the crew of the Pequod from Moby Dick. They had all kinds of folks from all over the world, and it wasn't a big deal.


I think it would be fun to roleplay out the bar room brawl scene (if someone took the brawler trait) in the Formidably Maid just to see what the players come up with as a reason to start a bar room brawl.

Paizo Employee Senior Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jabborwacky wrote:
I think it would be fun to roleplay out the bar room brawl scene (if someone took the brawler trait) in the Formidably Maid just to see what the players come up with as a reason to start a bar room brawl.

There will be chances for barroom brawls in the AP, rest assured. :)

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am starting my subscription with this ap. The first adventure will I need the Isle of the shackles book?I will be getting it but I would like to get the adventure started right away.Will they both be released at the same time?


fasthd97 wrote:
I am starting my subscription with this ap. The first adventure will I need the Isle of the shackles book?I will be getting it but I would like to get the adventure started right away.Will they both be released at the same time?

yes they are, the same day in fact, good bye discretionary money, i didn't want you anyway:).

Paizo Employee Senior Developer

fasthd97 wrote:
I am starting my subscription with this ap. The first adventure will I need the Isle of the shackles book?I will be getting it but I would like to get the adventure started right away.Will they both be released at the same time?

The first adventure mostly takes place on the outer fringes of the Shackles, so Isles of the Shackles is not really needed to get started. Starting with the second adventure, however, the action moves into the Shackles proper and pretty much stays there.

Grand Lodge

Fantastic.I will buy it with issue #2

Grand Lodge

Is it just me, or does anybody else have problems printing it?
My Acrobat Reader tells can show it to me but when I try to print it tells me there are no pages to print.
I downloaded it again but that didn't help.
Help?


Check HERE for Adobe X printing issues.


I do have to say after reading the Players Guide you got my group really interested in playing. We are a little burned on pirate themed adventure because we just played a Freeport campaign a few years back. I read a bunch of different Naval combat rules for the Freeport group but nothing really worked for us, but these Naval rules do look pretty damn good.

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

I just noticed something. Ship Modifications look suspiciously like Castle Variations that JBE introduced in the Book of the River Nations: Complete Player's Reference for Kingdom Building. Just Saying.

Paizo Employee Senior Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
I just noticed something. Ship Modifications look suspiciously like Castle Variations that JBE introduced in the Book of the River Nations: Complete Player's Reference for Kingdom Building. Just Saying.

Even more suspiciously, they look almost exactly like the ship modifications in Necromancer Games' Dead Man's Chest. They're even cited in the Player's Guide's OGL. Just sayin'. :)

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Rob McCreary wrote:
Even more suspiciously, they look almost exactly like the ship modifications in Necromancer Games' Dead Man's Chest. They're even cited in the Player's Guide's OGL. Just sayin'. :)

Oh...

Now I know.

G.I.Joe wrote:
And knowing is half the battle.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Rob McCreary wrote:
Even more suspiciously, they look almost exactly like the ship modifications in Necromancer Games' Dead Man's Chest. They're even cited in the Player's Guide's OGL. Just sayin'. :)

Oh...

Now I know.

G.I.Joe wrote:
And knowing is half the battle.

Geeeee Eyeeeeee ARRRRRRGH!

Andoran

Agree with Windcaler. I understand they needed to include naval combat rules yet that imo should have been in one of the modules. Either the first or second one. Not much imo in the way for players. It's almost all taken up by the naval combat rules. Hopefully they add more in the modules.

Sczarni

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
memorax wrote:
Agree with Windcaler. I understand they needed to include naval combat rules yet that imo should have been in one of the modules. Either the first or second one. Not much imo in the way for players. It's almost all taken up by the naval combat rules. Hopefully they add more in the modules.

I think the players are supposed to be experienced deckhands hfairly early. Therefore they would know how to move a ship, and threrfore it is fair for them to know the rules

Andoran

Cpt_kirstov wrote:


I think the players are supposed to be experienced deckhands hfairly early. Therefore they would know how to move a ship, and threrfore it is fair for them to know the rules

I'm not saying they should have not been included. Just in the back of the first module. We have very little player information as the naval rules tae up about 80% of the entire book.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The benefit of having them in the Player's Guide, is that they won't be as unaccessible as e.g. the kingdom building rules in Kingmaker.

I'd rather have my players read and understand the rules themselves instead of me telling how it works, or having to provide copies.

Paizo Employee Developer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Leonal wrote:

The benefit of having them in the Player's Guide, is that they won't be as unaccessible as e.g. the kingdom building rules in Kingmaker.

I'd rather have my players read and understand the rules themselves instead of me telling how it works, or having to provide copies.

This.

So much of this AP assumes the PCs are pirates. (That also assumes the GM told the player's what kind of campaign they're getting themselves into.) I'd hate to think a GM would spring this Adventure Path on a group without them being able to create characters that would fit the theme, and with this theme, there's going to be a fair amount of ship-to-ship battles and it would be best if the players have those rules so the GM doesn't have to dole them out. Someone should have a good Profession (sailor) skill. Just sayin'. Your ship will be important, and later in the AP your fleet will be important. The information in the free Player's Guide is stuff the PCs will use and the players will be better off having in a free and easy download.

Also, while the Player's Guide doesn't provide race/class suggestions like some of the other Player's Guides did, one could check out what the Pathfinder Wiki has to say about the Shackles or even check out the Pirates of the Inner Sea or the Inner Sea World Guide or the Isles of the Shackles books.

Spoiler Alert:
Pirates don't care about race. They care about infamy and how much you own/steal. Pretty much any race in the core book is fine as long as they're willing to take what they can and have the means to keep it. The Shackles is pretty equal opportunity in the most cut-throat kinda way.

Andoran

As I said I'm not saying that it will not be beneficial to the AP overall. Yet I don't blame my players for being a little unhappy when they have to check not one not two but three different things to find out more information on building characters. It's not going to make me not want to run the AP or my players want to play in it yet it is annoying imo.

Agreed and secnded about the information in your spoiler AD. Still imo not a AP for anyone imo wanting to play a Paladin. At the very least a LG Paladin.


Adam Daigle wrote:
Leonal wrote:

The benefit of having them in the Player's Guide, is that they won't be as unaccessible as e.g. the kingdom building rules in Kingmaker.

I'd rather have my players read and understand the rules themselves instead of me telling how it works, or having to provide copies.

This.

So much of this AP assumes the PCs are pirates. (That also assumes the GM told the player's what kind of campaign they're getting themselves into.) I'd hate to think a GM would spring this Adventure Path on a group without them being able to create characters that would fit the theme, and with this theme, there's going to be a fair amount of ship-to-ship battles and it would be best if the players have those rules so the GM doesn't have to dole them out. Someone should have a good Profession (sailor) skill. Just sayin'. Your ship will be important, and later in the AP your fleet will be important. The information in the free Player's Guide is stuff the PCs will use and the players will be better off having in a free and easy download.

Also, while the Player's Guide doesn't provide race/class suggestions like some of the other Player's Guides did, one could check out what the Pathfinder Wiki has to say about the Shackles or even check out the Pirates of the Inner Sea or the Inner Sea World Guide or the Isles of the Shackles books.

** spoiler omitted **...

Still don't fully help with classes.

Andoran

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There are two things about this everyone should think about:

1. According to the folks at Paizo, this is the last AP for a while with a lot of subsystems.

2. People (myself included) clearly really like those Class/Race breakdowns, and find their absence upsetting.

So, I think it's likely we'll get those back next AP. Which admittedly doesn't help much with this AP, and doesn't mean we shouldn't speak up (heck, if we didn't maybe we wouldn't get them back), but it's still a comforting fact to me at least.


Rob McCreary wrote:
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
I just noticed something. Ship Modifications look suspiciously like Castle Variations that JBE introduced in the Book of the River Nations: Complete Player's Reference for Kingdom Building. Just Saying.
Even more suspiciously, they look almost exactly like the ship modifications in Necromancer Games' Dead Man's Chest. They're even cited in the Player's Guide's OGL. Just sayin'. :)

Huh. Good thing I found DeadMan's Chest in the bargain bin for $4 today.

HUZZZZAH!!!

YOHOHOANNABOTTLEABRASSMONKEY!!!

Taldor

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Tales Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:

There are two things about this everyone should think about:

1. According to the folks at Paizo, this is the last AP for a while with a lot of subsystems.

2. People (myself included) clearly really like those Class/Race breakdowns, and find their absence upsetting.

So, I think it's likely we'll get those back next AP. Which admittedly doesn't help much with this AP, and doesn't mean we shouldn't speak up (heck, if we didn't maybe we wouldn't get them back), but it's still a comforting fact to me at least.

Big fan of the class/race breakdowns.

Best subsytem is the Harrow Deck, worst is the one in Haunting of Harrowstone.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for the feedback everyone...

One thing that surprises me, to be honest, is how much folks miss the class/race breakdowns. After doing a dozen or so of these, we started feeling like that information was repetitive and took up far too much space, and in an attempt to start diverting the player's guides away from being giant walls of text (something that ramping back on the subsystems will have a MUCH larger impact on starting with Shattered Star) and thus less intimidating for players to navigate, we decided to consolidate all the race and class info. Further, launching an Adventure Path is VERY difficult. You may have noticed that our Adventure Path line is often falling behind schedule, and it's currently more behind than it's ever been before. By making as many elements of an AP simpler for us to produce... we hope to get better at doing these things on time. And shortening the player's guides (both in reducing the subsystems and in this earlier step of consolidating and reducing the somewhat repetitive class/race breakdowns... which are actually quite a bit more difficult to generate than they might seem for a few reasons)

Going back to the full class/race breakdowns is certainly an option... but if folks just miss them because they liked the format or the way it looked... that's not a good enough reason. We can give out the same information in a page what it took multiple pages to do in previous Player's Guides... so it's gotta be a pretty compelling reason to make me want to switch back.

SO!

If you miss the class/race breakdowns... let us know WHAT you miss from them that the new format doesn't do for you.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:


If you miss the class/race breakdowns... let us know WHAT you miss from them that the new format doesn't do for you.

It helps the rookies/casual/occasional players and GMs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Daigle wrote:
...the Player's Guide doesn't provide race/class suggestions...

This was a really good call in my estimation. I never found the race/class suggestions to be very useful or inspiring to me. Personally I am much happier knowing a mechanic that will have a large impact on the game so I can plan a character that either does or intentionally does not make use of it.

Good change IMO.

For those who miss it, specifically for this adventure path, I would challenge you to help make this messageboard that much better a resource for this campaign by starting and/or participating in two threads:

1) Skull & Shackles Race/Class suggestions
2) Expanded Skull & Shackles Traits (They all pretty much have one thing in common so it should be easy to stay on that theme)

Sean


James Jacobs wrote:
One thing that surprises me, to be honest, is how much folks miss the class/race breakdowns.

Keep in mind that the people happy (or just fine) with a change are much less likely to say anything about it. After all, they are getting what they want.

Certainly don't ignore the feedback from those who missed it, but take it with a grain of salt. I wouldn't call it a ground swell at this point.

Sean Mahoney


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm with Sean. There's what? 21 base classes now? That's a lot of space required for a paragraph each. Then add in archetypes and bloodlines that can seriously change a class and it gets pretty boggling.

I'd rather the space be taken up with new rules like this, and not in the module. Since it's for the players, they can easily access it, and it doesn't take away precious real estate from the module itself.

I get that new/casual GMs/players might find it helpful, but ... well, is a paragraph really going to be all that helpful beyond: fighters hit things, clerics heal/turn things, wizards blow things up, sorcerers blow things up, alchemists ... uh ... blow things up, gunslingers blow themselves up*, etc. Even my newest player who'd never seen a dice other than a d6 didn't bother reading the class section of the Player's Guide. But then YMMV.

*As one of my players has discovered, if your d20 has nineteen 1s on it, do not play a gunslinger.

Andoran

5 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:

SO!

If you miss the class/race breakdowns... let us know WHAT you miss from them that the new format doesn't do for you.

Particular archetypes and such are not a big deal, but useful little notes like the fact that Illusionists and Enchanters often go to Brevoy and the River Kingdoms to study the First World, or that Brevoy has no major racial prejudice against Half-Orcs, or that there are small communities of Dwarves throughout the River Kingdoms (all found in the Kingmaker PG), or that the swampfolk of Graidmere make a good origin for Barbarians of Ustalav, or that a Magus in Ustalav is likely either a noble or an agent of one of the factions, or the degree of prejudice against Half-Elves present in Ustalav (all found in the Carrion Crown PG), all serve to both inspire character ideas and (perhaps more importantly) to make the settings feel real and alive in a way that's personal. That says something about how individual members of that Class in the area of the AP live, and perhaps which Classes and Races are most appropriate to be natives, and which foreigners, which commonplace and which unusual.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I read them to get a description of the kind of people I'm likely to be playing. Of who lives and works in the area. Of the people involved.

I think, even among those of us who miss the descriptions, that something like that in Skull and Shackles plus some other format than the per-class/race breakdown for describing the people you're likely to be playing might be more than satisfactory.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Sean Mahoney wrote:

Keep in mind that the people happy (or just fine) with a change are much less likely to say anything about it. After all, they are getting what they want.

Certainly don't ignore the feedback from those who missed it, but take it with a grain of salt. I wouldn't call it a ground swell at this point.

Sean Mahoney

Oh... I'm certainly keeping that in mind. Which is why I mentioned it's gonna take a lot more than a few complaints to get us to change back... well reasoned observations and arguments are what I'm looking for, not just "I liked it better before" comments.

And since this new way is part of "Operation Manageable Workload," it'll take a LOT of well reasoned observations and arguments to get me to change back.


Smaller/less arts, more writing?

Also mention both what fit well and what "doesn't fit at all"

I agree that this AP PG can get away without the races part, but the classes might be a bit of a problem.

Taldor

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Tales Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

SO!

If you miss the class/race breakdowns... let us know WHAT you miss from them that the new format doesn't do for you.

Particular archetypes and such are not a big deal, but useful little notes like the fact that Illusionists and Enchanters often go to Brevoy and the River Kingdoms to study the First World, or that Brevoy has no major racial prejudice against Half-Orcs, or that there are small communities of Dwarves throughout the River Kingdoms (all found in the Kingmaker PG), or that the swampfolk of Graidmere make a good origin for Barbarians of Ustalav, or that a Magus in Ustalav is likely either a noble or an agent of one of the factions, or the degree of prejudice against Half-Elves present in Ustalav (all found in the Carrion Crown PG), all serve to both inspire character ideas and (perhaps more importantly) to make the settings feel real and alive in a way that's personal. That says something about how individual members of that Class in the area of the AP live, and perhaps which Classes and Races are most appropriate to be natives, and which foreigners, which commonplace and which unusual.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I read them to get a description of the kind of people I'm likely to be playing. Of who lives and works in the area. Of the people involved.

I think, even among those of us who miss the descriptions, that something like that in Skull and Shackles plus some other format than the per-class/race breakdown for describing the people you're likely to be playing might be more than satisfactory.

This is pretty much what I was going to say, and very eloquent.

Although things like favoured enemy suggestions are helpful, it is the flavoursome, inspirational qualities that help to bring the setting alive which I really dig.


James Jacobs wrote:
If you miss the class/race breakdowns... let us know WHAT you miss from them that the new format doesn't do for you.

It's mostly just the information. Ask yourself how many people would be charged to play half-orcs in Carrion Crown if the Guide didn't put out the half-orc paragraph describing how they're wildly reviled? Probably not too many. That information is never even covered in the actual AP at all.

There's a lot of cool stuff in the class/race breakdowns that helps the PCs get a grasp on the setting and also helps them begin or refine character generation. Deadmanwalking covers it, but then you see info that references the University of Lepidstadt, Quatrfax Archives... for fighters and scholars. A fighter wants to be a duelist at the UoL, and the DM knows information about that, like the dueling scars they get, and can suggest that as a quirk for the PC that they have this scar across their eye or something, and then later on it can be brought up in character and it's cool.

In regards to cutting it down? I thought that the way the archetypes and information was presented in the S&S Player's Guide was fine. It's honestly a waste to write out "Knowledge (religion)" for every single class that has Knowledge (religion) or to write out "see bard knowledges" even if you leave it out.

The one thing about the S&S guide not having player information that really bummed me out? Halflings are ridiculously commonplace to the point that Port Peril is listed as a Halfling settlement, and so are Tengu, who have districts in most major cities. But since Halflings are uncommon, Tengu are uncommon, and Halfling pirates sound silly without the setting backing it up, S&S isn't going to be the AP of tiny people with big dreams. Halflings always get the short end of the stick that way.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Belle Mythix wrote:

Smaller/less arts, more writing?

Also mention both what fit well and what "doesn't fit at all"

I agree that this AP PG can get away without the races part, but the classes might be a bit of a problem.

More writing actually makes it more difficult for us to generate, actually. Art is easy. Words are not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
Belle Mythix wrote:
I agree that this AP PG can get away without the races part, but the classes might be a bit of a problem.

I think that having a section that details how a class fits into the assumed norm of the AP is a good thing too. (I personally would like to keep the race section, but can understand why it can be truncated.)

If they're looking to reduce the "text wall," they could just detail the class section in presumed roles (combat-types, magic-types, stealthy-types, etc.) that will be best suited for the AP.

RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16

4 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:

SO!

If you miss the class/race breakdowns... let us know WHAT you miss from them that the new format doesn't do for you.

The problem is that players like to know "is my class OK?" People only want to play classes that have abilities that would be useful to the AP. Quick examples:

Rogue: are there going to be a lot of traps?
Cavalier: are enough fights outdoors so I can use my horse a lot?
Wizard: is there enough downtime for item crafting?
Gunslinger: is there enough firearm loot for me to use?
Cleric: what churches have a presence in the area?
Druid: will I be able to hate cities, or is this an urban campaign?
Paladin: is this a LG-friendly campaign?
Etc, etc.

The previous player's guides soothed those nerves. Now, players don't know if they have a "useful" or "safe" concept, and are skittish and need assurance that they are choosing a good character concept. Sure, that's my role as GM, but unless I've read through several issues of the AP already, that's tricky.

You say "all APs work for all classes/races" but that's not true. Paladins (as commonly played) don't work in most APs. Cavaliers don't work in hardly any APs. Item Crafting only works in half of APs. City-hating only works in half of APs. Dwarven PCs will never meet a Dwarven NPC in half of APs.

I don't think the lengthy writeups we've historially seen are needed. But a quick "this is okay" or "this will be more challenging" call for each class would be quite useful.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

SO!

If you miss the class/race breakdowns... let us know WHAT you miss from them that the new format doesn't do for you.

Particular archetypes and such are not a big deal, but useful little notes like the fact that Illusionists and Enchanters often go to Brevoy and the River Kingdoms to study the First World, or that Brevoy has no major racial prejudice against Half-Orcs, or that there are small communities of Dwarves throughout the River Kingdoms (all found in the Kingmaker PG), or that the swampfolk of Graidmere make a good origin for Barbarians of Ustalav, or that a Magus in Ustalav is likely either a noble or an agent of one of the factions, or the degree of prejudice against Half-Elves present in Ustalav (all found in the Carrion Crown PG), all serve to both inspire character ideas and (perhaps more importantly) to make the settings feel real and alive in a way that's personal. That says something about how individual members of that Class in the area of the AP live, and perhaps which Classes and Races are most appropriate to be natives, and which foreigners, which commonplace and which unusual.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I read them to get a description of the kind of people I'm likely to be playing. Of who lives and works in the area. Of the people involved.

I think, even among those of us who miss the descriptions, that something like that in Skull and Shackles plus some other format than the per-class/race breakdown for describing the people you're likely to be playing might be more than satisfactory.

Agreed. Thank you for expressing exactly what I was feeling.

1 to 50 of 119 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Skull & Shackles / Skull & Shackles Player's Guide All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©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.