News from Paizocon 2015?


Paizo General Discussion

51 to 80 of 80 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tirisfal wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Hell's Vengeance is spring ap. You play bad buys. No, I'm not kidding.
Oh, hey, another opportunity to let my subscription lapse for six months. Woopee.
Didn't you publicly decry the good guy ap, too?

For reasons not related at all to the plot (aside from it being pretty "standard", so to speak). I vehemently disagree about the necessity or desirability of an "evil" AP on moral standpoints, the problems with Wrath of the Righteous were overwhelmingly on the mechanical side of things.

Squeakmaan wrote:
Eh, he was down on it before it ever came out. When you run with 6 players using 25 point builds then complain the challenges don't work I have limited sympathy. But hey, an Evil AP is another reason to re-up my AP subscription.

This is utter BS. First off, it was a 20 point buy. Having six players is something I can't really control beyond chucking friends out of my group.

And while the mechanical problems were surely heightened with six player characters, the problems popped up with a lot of other GM's as well, who had different player numbers. Also, I used vastly enhanced encounters (courtesy of Scorpion_mjd), which were supposed to close the power potential gap. It didn't work out, because mythic rules are utterly broken and the AP was written very much as a sequence of extremely underpowered encounters after module two. Basically, Scorpion was trying to improve on a flawed model and even he fell short, because the base model was just adjusted way too low. I don't know if he managed to patch it up later, since his campaign took a hiatus while mine was chugging along, so he had the hindsight of seeing my guys trampling over what he had built up, but I hope for him that his campaign went better. I really haven't looked at the WotR board for months, because I wanted to put that all behind me.

captain yesterday wrote:
He was always skeptical about whether WotR could challenge high level play, of which his issues with have been ongoing for quite some time, which of course is exacerbated by his Strike Team Megaforce party:-)

Eh, as always it's half and half, three players who do play mechanically powerful characters (still way below what you can read in the maximization threads... the habitual casters don't really believe in battlefield control spells, for example) and three players who are sure to bring mechanically not as well thought-out characters.

It's just that mythic makes the overpowered goodies so obvious and even logical to take.

Anyway, let's stop the mythic "nostalgia hour". But I refuse to be mischaracterized by people who obviously haven't been paying attention to what I have been saying some months past and are now trying to badmouth me with false assertions.


i wasn't bad mouthing you, sorry if it came across that way, i was just trying to say that you had feelings of ambivalence of the over powered types mythic creates and whether the current model of averaging out challenges in adventure paths can handle the power over load, i think its safe to say no the current model can't support the Avenger Initiative that is Mythic Adventures:-D


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
i wasn't bad mouthing you, sorry if it came across that way, i was just trying to say that you had feelings of ambivalence of the over powered types mythic creates and whether the current model of averaging out challenges in adventure paths can handle the power over load, i think its safe to say no the current model can't support the Avenger Initiative that is Mythic Adventures:-D

Nonono, I didn't mean you, sorry if I was unclear. I specifically meant Tirisfal and Squeakmaan (especially the latter).


well that makes more sense:-)

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber

Eh, I see the evil path in the same light as kingmaker, reign of winter, iron gods etc. it's experimental and it can work, but it will have a fair share of lovers and haters like the others did. I hope they put out some guidelines to playing evil, I think most people miss the mark and that's what creates the friction in an evil group. Evil doesn't have to equate to fractious. One of my best gaming experiences was with an evil party.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Look, I don't want to harp very much on this, since I already said I am not buying it, which means I'll just get out of the way of the people who enjoy that kind of stuff (contrary to WotR, where I did buy the AP, got most of the tie-in books and actually GM'ed the campaign to its very end, which, IMO, gives me the right to have an opinion on the thing, even if it is an overwhelmingly negative one).

But for me, the problem is not to get my players to play evil "right", but that I can't stand to GM an AP (or even play in one) with an evil party. As soon as they start doing evil stuff, I'd be right on the cusp of throwing out random lightning from the heavens, and I don't want to be that kind of GM. I just can't deal well with this type of AP and so I am just giving my advance notice that I won't be buying it. Heck, even if Brandon were to write all six modules, I wouldn't be buying it.

Shadow Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber

I'm not making any judgements. I'll just be curious to see how this little experiment goes, the comment wasn't actually directed at you magnuskn, it was a general expression of feeling toward the experimental APs.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cat-thulhu wrote:
I'm not making any judgements. I'll just be curious to see how this little experiment goes, the comment wasn't actually directed at you magnuskn, it was a general expression of feeling toward the experimental APs.

It's okay, I wasn't trying to jump down your throat. I mostly was trying to give a little more detailed explanation why I am not interested at all in an evil AP.


There hasn't been a lot news since Saturday, usually they have something else on Sunday that gives more info.

Verdant Wheel

The good side of the evil AP, is to see the official stance of Paizo, to how to conduct the way my players actually play all the other APs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I tend to get everything digitally (so I have no subscriber tag)- we run games to be good guys. I don't even let non-good alignments in the games I run (no neutral, just some variation on good).

So yeah, I'll be skipping that AP.

Ultimate Intrigue looks great. And I love all the Bestiaries.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Has anyone considered a neutral party playing Hell's Vengeance? I could see a need to restore the balance being a compelling hook. Another route which might be fun if it is open is a party that starts off good and gets lured to the bad side as the module progresses? Assuming that that the low levels the interactions with hell would be relatively limited mighty be a fun approach. My reign of winter campaign nearly includes a paladin who was likely to fall and become an anti paladin as the full impact of working to rescue an evil near diety took its role (plus character decisions ). Unfortunately that player couldn't continue the campaign due to scheduling.


I can see where Hell's Vengeance could include just about anyone seeing as Inner Sea Gods said Asmodeus has/will work with any other god save for lamashthu and rovagug. I'd guess that its focused on a party heavily tied to Asmodeus, but open to most characters. I could even see a good character covertly working for good ends in the party (What, good characters are allowed to use deception too)


I don't really see good characters being very willing to put down a revolution for LE allies of Hell. I do think that House Thrune probably pays well, though, so that covers neutral and/or chaotic characters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't see an evil party lasting beyond the first volume before they kill each other considering how people in this game play evil characters;)


If you have played a game like Civilization and conquered the world through warfare - congratulations! You played evil!

Evil doesn't (necessarily) mean psychopathic killers of everything that moves. Sometimes it's just good old fashioned world domination. :)


What if you've played Civ, conquered the world and never started a war? I had at least one game where all my wars were defensive and conquest was strictly to move the core cities away from the front lines.

Also had another game where everyone vassalized to me.

Point is, world unification is not necessarily evil (though it frequently is ;) )

Liberty's Edge

Albatoonoe wrote:
I don't really see good characters being very willing to put down a revolution for LE allies of Hell.

I could see a situation where good guys could perceive that a war between Thrune and Hell would inevitably lead to everyone in Cheliax being ultimately dead. As they see thousands of people dying day after day after day as the rebellion goes on and on, I could see good people coming to the perspective of, "this is just going to end up killing everyone", and feeling that the rebellion has to end one way or another.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If Hell's Vengeance and Hell's Rebels take place in a similar timeframe (I haven't read much about them yet so not sure) just had the thought - would it be possible to run BOTH? Perhaps with the same group but with different characters - alternating one book from one then one book from the other? (and possibly having the two parties effect each other in some fashion?) May not be possible if the stories don't allow for it - but just had the thought that it might be a fun exercise with the right group (or alternatively with two groups that one GM runs...)


Dragon78 wrote:
I don't see an evil party lasting beyond the first volume before they kill each other considering how people in this game play evil characters;)

You mean people that you know...which is a really small sample of the total number of players. ;)

Community Manager

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rycaut wrote:
If Hell's Vengeance and Hell's Rebels take place in a similar timeframe (I haven't read much about them yet so not sure) just had the thought - would it be possible to run BOTH? Perhaps with the same group but with different characters - alternating one book from one then one book from the other? (and possibly having the two parties effect each other in some fashion?) May not be possible if the stories don't allow for it - but just had the thought that it might be a fun exercise with the right group (or alternatively with two groups that one GM runs...)

:)

I'm not sure if it's going to be *deliberately* set up like that (yet), but I know if my players were interested in that kind of setup, I would definitely Make It So.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Champions of Corruption (from the Player Companion line) has tips on how to play evil characters without the entire party melting down and/or one character trying to control everyone else.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

WotW suggests LE, and some kind of contract binding the characters...

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

A contract would only bind Lawful Evil, and it's been pointed out that the AP is written to accommodate Chaotic Evil as well. If it's some kind of forced connection, some sort of magical life energy bond might be more likely (one of you dies, the others die/suffer as well). On the other hand, having some sort of thing *forcing* the group together might by nature make Chaotic individuals chafe and want to break the bonds just to be free of them in principle, so it might be best not to have a bond of any sort to avoid motivation for Chaotics to want to break free. It might be better to just handle the issue OOC and make clear to the players (not the characters) the need to work together.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Just because you are chaotic doesn´t mean you aren´t bound by contracts or never ever have one or act somehow logically.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I disagree on that first one. A chaotic character would most definitely not be bound by contracts. They are the epitome of breaking the rules. They would follow a contract only as long as they felt it benefited them, and the moment it didn't, they would not hesitate to throw it in the trash.

As for the latter, chaotic behavior is, IMO, *more* logical because it does what's right for the moment instead of being forced into doing things that don't make sense because of some contracts.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hmm. These new iconics might be evil, and they might have serious differences with each other, but that doesn't mean that they can't see that they have common cause, or that they could even be friends. I can see good people betray each other, and I can see evil people be loyal unto death. Mortals are weird like that.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In fact evil people being loyal to something or someone is one of the best ways to make them deep characters. Magneto's loyalty to other mutants, or Doctor Doom's loyalty to Latveria, rather than being out for just themselves, is what makes them compelling characters, and separates them from cardboard evil.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

That's why evil parties can be difficult. A lot of people have this idea that "bad guys need to be out for themselves all the time", but that's not really true. Hell, it's not even practical.

Silver Crusade

Cat-thulhu wrote:
Any word on the pathfinder battles iconics line? And can someone confirm the incentive piece for the next battles set is actually a bar?

Yes, the incentive for the Rusty Dragon Inn set is indeed a bar. Looked pretty nice in the photos. Note it's just the bar area (bar and liquor racks), not an entire building.

51 to 80 of 80 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / General Discussion / News from Paizocon 2015? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.