Simon Legrande |
Pan wrote:I confess to being underwhelmed lately by the AP choices. I understand that not all of them will be perfect for me, and I embrace that. However, the last several have been meh for me and I'm afraid for the upcoming announcement at gencon.On a somewhat related note...
I confess that I loathe the Kingmaker AP, and can't for the life of me fathom why it's so popular on the boards. My experiences with it have been almost uniformly disappointing at best and disastrous at worst--my first foray into it (on the tabletop) ended very poorly.
I'm currently in a Kingmaker PbP now, and I'm doing my best to give the AP a second chance, but so far things aren't looking up...
I'm with you on that. Kingmaker was an interesting idea poorly executed.
LazarX |
Another confession:
I really love "star wars cantina" type settings. I like tons of unique races, the less traditional the better.
I especially love it when a setting incorporates oddball races that are not simply reskinned elves or dwarves, or even worse, existing earth ethnicities reskinned as elves and dwarves.
Strangely enough though I also like the human baseline, where they are the most common/dominant race. I admit to having a really weird time reconciling these factors.
You kind of have to make a choice between Golarion and Talislanta...they're about as opposite world concepts as you can get.
dien RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16 |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dragoncat wrote:I'm with you on that. Kingmaker was an interesting idea poorly executed.Pan wrote:I confess to being underwhelmed lately by the AP choices. I understand that not all of them will be perfect for me, and I embrace that. However, the last several have been meh for me and I'm afraid for the upcoming announcement at gencon.On a somewhat related note...
I confess that I loathe the Kingmaker AP, and can't for the life of me fathom why it's so popular on the boards. My experiences with it have been almost uniformly disappointing at best and disastrous at worst--my first foray into it (on the tabletop) ended very poorly.
I'm currently in a Kingmaker PbP now, and I'm doing my best to give the AP a second chance, but so far things aren't looking up...
Kingmaker is everything I want in life from a traditional, party-centered RPG that-hybrids-with kingdom management.... computer game.
I seriously think Kingmaker might have made a really fantastic computer game idea; a lot of times when I sit down to play Civ 5 I think to myself about how Kingmaker tile benefits and improvements could port over to the conveniently-also-hex-based map...
I really like both the RPG and the kingdom management. For me, those are two tastes that go great together. But there's multiple reasons it works poorly at the table, and well as a solo computer game:
1) Party dis/agreement on what to focus on: when I played Kingmaker, most of the party couldn't have given a rat's ass about the kingdom stuff. I think we had one player whose entire suggestion as far as that side of the game went was that our capital city should be called Penisville. We also argued endlessly about what alignment our nation should be, because we had the full spectrum of alignment in the group, and compromise is a dirty word...
When the party DID get invested at all in the kingdom stuff, it was to disagree endlessly about what we should build next. Martials wanted barracks and forts, casters wanted academies, nobody really wanted to focus on boring stuff like 'mills' and 'docks'. Obviously, you have to make group decisions in a non-Kingmaker AP, too, but they don't usually have the same sort of long-term, recurring, constant consequences for doing so. It's tough to try and play by the OOC gamer etiquette of "well, we all decide together" when in-character one person is supposed to be the ruler.
Sure, the AP suggests that the kingdom stuff can be largely handwaved if "the group's" not into it, but what about when half your group is and half your group isn't? Or one vs everybody else? In my case, I really got into it, so I spent time emailing back and forth with the GM about what was happening downtime with the kingdom, and it worked... for us... to an extent... but the part of the game I found super-compelling and wanted to spend time on simply bored everyone else. Arguably you have that dichotomy with things like RP vs combat too, but usually the choice to have a diplomatic RP encounter won't wind up taking several hours to handle, either.... unlike Kingdom Stuff.
2) Too dang complicated for running at the table: I created an unwieldy and bulky spreadsheet to track our ongoing kingdom improvements, net stats and changes each month, and... it was really, really awkward. I wound up finding better spreadsheets, fan-created, on the boards, and used those to some success.... but if you really need a multi-page, multi-formula spreadsheet to calculate bonuses in your Kingdom, I think that's a pretty good argument right there that that should be a computer game, not a pen and paper. If you're already relying on a computer to do a lot of the number crunching, just play a game where that's... part of the game.
3) Charisma for the ruler: I think it was a pointlessly narrow decision to make CHA the only valid choice for your king/queen. Highest cha in our group was a character described as a 15-year old girl with a sword as tall as she is who sprouts claws when she's angry and is a CN psychopath. (Dragon disciple barb/sorc.) The player insisted that with the CHA, that character was the best to rule. My gnome bard wound up being allowed to play 'regent' until she came of age (largely since the DD had no interest in actually playing the kingdom stuff, they just wanted to 'be king').
It's a simple house rule to allow other stats to manifest for leadership, of course, but I just don't really grasp why the devs felt the need to list it as CHA-only to begin with. A wise, patient cleric can surely be just as good a ruler as a chaotic sorcerer whose default response to everything is 'fireball it'.... but by listing CHA as the official way of doing it, it can result in making subpar RP choices for the sake of squeaking out that extra +1/+2 to kingdom rolls. Not every GM will THINK to houserule out options, alas.
If you were controlling your entire party, a la a Baldur's Gate type game, you better plan your composition to build a CHA-character who would also be an enjoyable ruler from a flavor standpoint, however you personally defined that. ("Fireball" is a legitimate governing choice, I suppose!)
MMCJawa |
MMCJawa wrote:You kind of have to make a choice between Golarion and Talislanta...they're about as opposite world concepts as you can get.Another confession:
I really love "star wars cantina" type settings. I like tons of unique races, the less traditional the better.
I especially love it when a setting incorporates oddball races that are not simply reskinned elves or dwarves, or even worse, existing earth ethnicities reskinned as elves and dwarves.
Strangely enough though I also like the human baseline, where they are the most common/dominant race. I admit to having a really weird time reconciling these factors.
At the moment I am compromising by having huge swath of kingdoms where humans are practically the only thing around, with other races absent/persecuted/considered myths. However there are other areas with multiple races living in harmony, or areas humans are excluded from.
Randarak |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I love what others call fluff. The time and effort to create such an extensive background to the adventuring world at large appeals to what remains of my sense of wonder. And sometimes, knowing some of those fluffy bits of info help to discover what's going on in an adventure or AP.
Not to mention, what GM running a homebrew doesn't appreciate the occasional "Wow" or "That's so cool" to the fluff filled details that they took such time and effort to create?
Dragoncat |
I love playing the gunslinger and don't find it broken
edit: I also love playing non-core races
Amen to non-core!
I confess that I'm a shameless drow fanboy. Not of Drizzt & his many clones, mind you--I prefer my drow to be antagonists/very dark anti-heroes. Think more Viconia De'Vir than anything else. :)
I also love the direction Paizo took the drow in, but that's mostly because I hate Lolth with a passion rivalled only by my hatred for Kingmaker.
Blackvial |
Blackvial wrote:I love playing the gunslinger and don't find it broken
edit: I also love playing non-core races
Amen to non-core!
I confess that I'm a shameless drow fanboy. Not of Drizzt & his many clones, mind you--I prefer my drow to be antagonists/very dark anti-heroes. Think more Viconia De'Vir than anything else. :)
I also love the direction Paizo took the drow in, but that's mostly because I hate Lolth with a passion rivalled only by my hatred for Kingmaker.
preach, my favorite non-core race tends to be full orcs followed by drow, fecthlings, and kobolds
knightnday |
I'd like to see a book regarding customs and information of the Inner Sea (and elsewhere) that builds off the various region books and expands on it. toss in romance, religion, recipes and other things of a non-fighting nature and I'd find it much more entertaining and useful than another book of things to kill.
Rosita the Riveter |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love 3PP and am willing to give anything brought to me by a player a chance before telling them no.
I don't ban 3PP, but what I allow has to fit the theme of the setting and not introduce anything overly complicated that I haven't read. Path of War is okay because I own that, but if someone wanted me to implement new 3PP of similar complexity, I'd have an issue.
Doggan |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I love the Gunslinger, and think it's one of the more fun classes to play.
I can't stand the Shaman iconic. I think the trans-gendered aspect to it was pandering, and ham-fisted. Easily the worst iconic to date.
It annoys the crap out of me to see players constantly playing the same super optimized characters over and over again.
I hate playing with DMs who feel it necessary to ban everything outside of the CRB, but it seems to be all I find.
Pathfinder Society is a waste of time, and every DM that I've run across during PFS sessions aren't worth a damn.
I dislike the Adventure Paths. I think it's a bit crappy that Adventure Path subscribers are the only ones who get store discounts.
Pathfinder Online is a terrible game, and if it wasn't for the minis I got from the Kickstarter, I'd forever regret buying into it.
Kobold Catgirl |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love the Gunslinger, and think it's one of the more fun classes to play.
I can't stand the Shaman iconic. I think the trans-gendered aspect to it was pandering, and ham-fisted. Easily the worst iconic to date.
It annoys the crap out of me to see players constantly playing the same super optimized characters over and over again.
I hate playing with DMs who feel it necessary to ban everything outside of the CRB, but it seems to be all I find.
Pathfinder Society is a waste of time, and every DM that I've run across during PFS sessions aren't worth a damn.
I dislike the Adventure Paths. I think it's a bit crappy that Adventure Path subscribers are the only ones who get store discounts.
Pathfinder Online is a terrible game, and if it wasn't for the minis I got from the Kickstarter, I'd forever regret buying into it.
I think jaywalking is sometimes okay if there aren't any cars coming.
Dragoncat |
I confess that I'm prone to changing certain things about adventures if I think it'll make for a better story or if I want to challenge my PCs.
Example 1: I changed the Catacombs of Wrath from their original location under the Sandpoint Glassworks to underneath Chopper's Isle for Burnt Offerings.
Example 2: I introduced the Licktoad Heroes in the Sandpoint Glassworks, and had Tsuto trick the PCs into entering the basement before escaping, locking the door behind him and ordering his goblins to burn the place down.
Simon Legrande |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can do a spot on imitation of Spongebob Squarepants' voice, and Patrick, Mr. Krabs, Larry the Lobster, Plankton... any way the point is I've seen entirely too much Spongebob over the years:-)
But really, who hasn't?
Little kid: Those guys are dorks.
Flying Dutchman: *sigh* Yeah, but they're my dorks.
captain yesterday |
Every year my parents would take the family to the renaissance fair, every year I would beg my boss to work that weekend, which considering I was a landscape foreman for a company that didn't work on weekends was harder than it seems, you would not believe what I had to do, the hoops I had to jump through to get out of going to the renaissance fair for a whole weekend.
And it was totally worth it :-)
EntrerisShadow |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I confess that now that my group has largely switched to 5E, I miss doing some of the absurd gamebreaking stuff Pathfinder let me get away with.
-Nearly impossible to beat Enchantment DCs.
-+18 stealth at Level 1
-Halfling Cavalier who could 300+ damage on a charge
I know those are all signs of an unbalanced system, but I can't help it - occasionally I want to be an invincible badass.
EntrerisShadow |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I always hoped for the day when Artemis Entreri would kill Drizz't, I wouldn't know if it happened yet as I stopped reading his books after The Ghost King the worst book I ever bought, in hard cover :-)
I couldn't read much past The Pirate King. It's clear Salvatore is tired of Drizzt - which I understand and would be fine with, except the newer characters he's attempted to introduce I find very uninteresting.
Though I always liked Entreri better anyway (obviously) and thought that the Sellswords series was better than anything he'd done since The Dark Elf Trilogy.
Joe Hex |
I confess that after receiving tons of feedback on the forums (some very thoughtful and well intended, some in the form of virtual tomatoes thrown at my head), I still cannot comprehend how a Bard can preform as free action, while doing other stuff at the same time. :)
Edit: Even concentrating on a spell is a standard action. You'd think maintaining a performance would require at least that much effort.
Joe Hex |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Naturally, it's probably bards throwing those at you.
Ha! "Hello, I'm a Bard..." is probably the best explanation for what they do. :)
Aniuś the Talewise |
I confess that I hate those haughty pointy-eared elves with a passion and thus in my world they rule an oppressive and violent empire in which they have enslaved civilizations of every race except gnomes, from whom they keep their distance and tend to treat as second-class citizens anyway)
Yeah I'm a classic dwarf.
(But seriously, no offense intended to people who like elves or play elf characters c: )
Hello? Yes, this is Bard. |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Kobold Cleaver wrote:Naturally, it's probably bards throwing those at you.Ha! "Hello, I'm a Bard..." is probably the best explanation for what they do. :)
I have no idea what I'm doing.
EntrerisShadow |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I confess that I hate those haughty pointy-eared elves with a passion and thus in my world they rule an oppressive and violent empire in which they have enslaved civilizations of every race except gnomes, from whom they keep their distance and tend to treat as second-class citizens anyway)
Yeah I'm a classic dwarf.
(But seriously, no offense intended to people who like elves or play elf characters c: )
I don't hate elves, but I typically play elves the same way. Why?
Elves are damn near immortal, mystical, and supposedly very intelligent. They never have the problems that humans have and are almost always presented as superior in nearly every way.
My thought was, with the crapsack worlds most RPG lands tend to be, why on earth would these beings let mankind run the show?
Elves in my homebrew world have a continent spanning empire and are largely in charge of things. It's a patrician, gentle sort of tyranny - they see humans less as animals to be broken and more as unruly children that need the adults to corral them for their own safety. They'll even give them some nominal responsibility the way you might let your kid be in "charge" of the family pet or some chore. But it is tyranny nonetheless.
The difference being that they don't mess with Dwarves (the Dwarves have the underground, which holds no interest, and besides, provides a nice bulwark against Drow - who aren't actually evil, per se, but it'd be way too long to explain here) and still kill Orcs and Goblinoids on sight.
Aniuś the Talewise |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Aniuś the Talewise wrote:I confess that I hate those haughty pointy-eared elves with a passion and thus in my world they rule an oppressive and violent empire in which they have enslaved civilizations of every race except gnomes, from whom they keep their distance and tend to treat as second-class citizens anyway)
Yeah I'm a classic dwarf.
(But seriously, no offense intended to people who like elves or play elf characters c: )
I don't hate elves, but I typically play elves the same way. Why?
Elves are damn near immortal, mystical, and supposedly very intelligent. They never have the problems that humans have and are almost always presented as superior in nearly every way.
My thought was, with the crapsack worlds most RPG lands tend to be, why on earth would these beings let mankind run the show?
Elves in my homebrew world have a continent spanning empire and are largely in charge of things. It's a patrician, gentle sort of tyranny - they see humans less as animals to be broken and more as unruly children that need the adults to corral them for their own safety. They'll even give them some nominal responsibility the way you might let your kid be in "charge" of the family pet or some chore. But it is tyranny nonetheless.
The difference being that they don't mess with Dwarves (the Dwarves have the underground, which holds no interest, and besides, provides a nice bulwark against Drow - who aren't actually evil, per se, but it'd be way too long to explain here) and still kill Orcs and Goblinoids on sight.
o: I think you'd like my world. Yours has some similarities to mine.
But yeah I've always agreed that haughty elves wouldn't let mankind run the show of course.
In my world Drow are also not actually evil and just have a bad reputation from being fiercely protective of their homeland and unforgiving towards elves. They descend from an ancient undercaste of the elven empire who did the farming and handled the dirty work. When they revolted, they were driven out and into the mountains and eventually became Drow.
Kobold Catgirl |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I confess that I cannot stand aasimars. I think they're the very definition of a Mary Sue race. It's somewhat telling, I think, that the only aasimar I've ever found interesting is an NPC who was driven to villainry by the "so perfect it's a curse" device. Good aasimars can exist, but it's entirely in spite of the race design. No joke, aasimars are my kender.
I don't like dhampirs either, but that's only because I've only ever seen them played as annoying broody Cullens. The elemental planetouched are pretty much just uninteresting to me—they don't feel like four distinct races, more like four subraces off of one actual species. I probably wouldn't mind them if the Bestiary 2 acknowledged this. They just aren't interesting enough to carry four separate statblocks.
Tieflings are okay. I don't love them, but I don't dislike them, either. There's nothing inherently bad about the race.
knightnday |
I confess that I cannot stand aasimars. I think they're the very definition of a Mary Sue race. It's somewhat telling, I think, that the only aasimar I've ever found interesting is an NPC who was driven to villainry by the "so perfect it's a curse" device. Good aasimars can exist, but it's entirely in spite of the race design. No joke, aasimars are my kender.
I don't like dhampirs either, but that's only because I've only ever seen them played as annoying broody Cullens. The elemental planetouched are pretty much just uninteresting to me—they don't feel like four distinct races, more like four subraces off of one actual species. I probably wouldn't mind them if the Bestiary 2 acknowledged this. They just aren't interesting enough to carry four separate statblocks.
Tieflings are okay. I don't love them, but I don't dislike them, either. There's nothing inherently bad about the race.
Oddly, I am just reversed on it. I intensely dislike Tieflings. I do agree about dhampirs and more so. I just feels like a way to let people play vampires without actually letting them play vampires. Meh.
Lord Mhoram |
I love Paladins, and generally prefer that approach to problem solving (i.e. no torture, poison ect). Paladin is probably my most played class. When I GM I only let good aligned characters in my game (absolutely no evil, and neutrals are by default banned, but can be argued to play with good reason)
I love the Mythic Rules, and while I make changes to them for my campaign, the concept is great as well as a lot of the mechanics.
I prefer high level play 15+
I like alignments.
I have more stuff in my campaigns from 3PP than Paizo - although Paizo has the single most stuff from a single publisher.
I don't care about game balance, as long as the players are actually having fun. If not then it's a problem.
I do the Moss Eisly Spaceport cantina in my large metropolitan cities as well.