Search Posts
I have not been a fan of Pathfinder 2E. As a player of mine said, you just do not feel heroic in 2E. Starfinder still manages to capture that heroic feeling without the crazier scaling issues of 1E. We as a group enjoy the Starfinder system. The setting has lead to quite a few very funny moments.
Mythic got into rocket tag pretty quickly when I ran an adventure path that involved it. I will never have mythic again as a option for players. As far as the Occult classes go. I have not really encountered any major balance issues. Kineticists do have to keep track of their burn but that has not really been an issue. Kineticists have been the most popular class from the book in my games. I did have a spirit dancer medium that was very flexible but not very powerful. Full hp per level makes fighter types take a long time to get into danger. People do need to feel that their characters are actually in danger to make the game exciting imho. I actually go the other way and ban abilities, feats, and spells that I feel are overpowered.
Hello Diego, Order 7963031 contains both Pathfinder Adventure Path #144: Midwives to Death and Pathfinder Adventure Path #145: Hellknight Hill. Could you please get #145 removed from the order? Please let me know if you have any issues with this request.
Hello Everyone,
I think he means the style is too different and these are barely the same characters, despite what we were told. And I will say Seoni doesnt feel like the same person, though I honestly contribute that more to the hairstyle and color personally, same with Harsk. But I dont mind the difference (though prefer the old hair on her) and I think she looks more like her personality from the comics and whatnot You are correct. These do not feel like the same characters at all despite Paizo stating that they would be. If they wanted character redesigns then Paizo should have just gone ahead and spent the time to create new characters rather than creating this mess. This does reflect poorly on second edition. Now, my main concern is letting my players and venture agents know how negative my thoughts on second edition have become.
Once again, I am very disappointed in the new art. I have decided that the artwork in second edition is just going to be a huge negative for me. I have been wavering on the migration for 2e for awhile and this definitely is not helping. This is nowhere the same portrayal design as the previous despite what was said from Paizo.
Having dealt with someone who had a drug addiction issue. They have issues taking care of themselves as well as the place they live. The bags under the eyes / glazed eyes as well as degeneration of apparent health and increased aggression were definitely there. Thus, the above illustration brings out reminders of drug addiction. Now, someone who through lack of experience in having dealt with drug addiction may not see this as signs but they definitely can be.
Ouch, this illustration is definitely going for the strung out drug addict look. Maybe she is doing crystal to give her strength to rage? The previous version looked a lot better. That version at least looked like she went outside and worked out. If this is the direction for the new iconics, I am not looking forward to seeing them.
Overall, I like most of changes. I am particularly impressed with the paladin changes. Opening up the character design space to more alignments is a good thing. The redeemer is an excellent idea that fits both the more peace oriented deities as well as being something different. The Liberator abilities may be a bit too situational. I also like the changes to cleric spell casting regarding somatic components.
Fortunately for them there is an option in playtest by which other classes (Fighter perhaps?) can gain legendary armor proficiency and therefore fill the role of defender. I am not actually hopeful at this point in time. If the system does not have a way for the other martials to be as good of a defender as a paladin then the whole of pathfinder 2.0 fails for me. If there is a way then I can simply ban paladins from any home games I run. For PFS, I may look into playing or running something else.
I am going to disagree with this decision from a business standpoint. There is a malignant effect created by having this class be the primary defender upon the whole PF 2.0 system. Many people have had bad experiences with self-righteous, demeaning, and / or condescending behavior from Paladin players due to the way the class and code creates entitlement in the “one true path”. Those experiences cannot be changed. These same / more people will have to possibly suffer through this behavior more often due to this class and code being the primary defender. I disagree with making this happen because of class fantasy. Having this behavior occur more often is not how you grow markets but rather shrink them. Also, you typically grow markets by being more inclusive not less. Please note, I do not care about the name but rather the mechanics around the primary defender in this system. I actually am not a fan of the name. I would suggest the class name being changed to knight \ warpriest \ etc. with Paladin being a special archetype or alternate class.
The extreme suppression of differing opinions in the Paizo Blog concerning Paladin 2.0 is sending a message that Paizo truly does not want to hear the experiences and opinions of its customers anymore. Is this truly the new Paizo direction? My post and the reasonable responses of which a few disagreed to said post were all removed. I have emailed community@paizo.com to get a detailed clarification of what was wrong with my post criticizing the Paladin 2.0 class Blog.
After talking with my venture agent on why I am looking to exit running and playing PF 2 ed after Gencon, he suggested that I give the reasons on why this poor class design bothers me so much. For me, this class design about being the one true way to behave is too reminiscent of dictatorial thinking patterns that cause heinous results. The holier than thou created by this design literally poisons table atmospheres. This poor class design encourages the paladin to believe that their character is "always right" because they are a "paladin" and there is one true path. The paladin player therefore feels entitled to tell others the way they should play their characters. I managed to escape one groupthink society so I have no desire to encourage similar thinking patterns. If this class was not essential and you rarely saw people playing them then you suffer thou the occasional table. However in PF 2.0, the paladin is a core component because no one is comparable in armor skills. Locking a core component of the system to such a groupthink character is pretty poor design.
As someone who has played since the early beginning when Paladins were just lawful counterparts to avengers, count me as one who is extremely disappointed. I am either now going to rework or ban paladins again or just move to 5 edition. I am really tired of paladin arguments. I wish Paizo the best but may be time for me to move on.
First, this was the shortest two and half hour movie I have ever seen. Second, I really liked the movie. I really enjoyed Thor and "Rabbit" in the film. I will agree that having a villain with at least reasonable viewpoint was pretty important in my enjoyment of the movie. I am planning to watch the movie again there seems to be details that I missed.
Having played DND from a time when Paladins just were lawful and Avengers were the chaotic counterparts with similar abilities, I have a different opinion then a lot of people. The game has changed over time. I am good with the game adding new flavors and varieties now. I still prefer to weave a story. A player who wants to play a CG paladin will need to provide a good background but I am confident that I can weave such a character into my campaign story like I have been doing for many decades. The game requires both players and DMs to have choices.
Humm, my favorites are below 1. Oracle (a spontaneous divine caster with flavor)
I really like that feat as fire resistance / immunity seems pretty common.
I want to correct some posters on the first appearance of Paladins was back in basic dnd. Paladins were lawful counterparts to avengers who were chaotic. Neither paladins nor avengers had good or evil as part of the class at the beginning. My opinion on alignment is that the concept is pretty weak. The reason is what makes a person good and lawful is open to various interpretations. I prefer codes of conduct because they can be defined and followed. For example, Shelyn's lead with a rose Code. Shelyn's followers are not supposed to strike first rather only in defense. This is a clear sign of what is allowed and what is not.
I am not a fan of the cure light wand spam that occurs in Pathfinder 1st edition. This is one of the most un heroic and boring parts of the game. Everyone stands around and pokes each other with magic sticks. This is just beyond silly so an attempt to fix this issue needs to be tried. However, I am not sure that resonance is the way to fix that issue. I will wait till the play test to make a judgement.
Okay, my two cents: 1. Lore Warden fighter (there needs to be a smart fighter)
Special note: there needs to be a way for paladins of NG and CG alignment without the crap archetype that is the Grey Paladin archetype.
I am not a big fan of alignment. Trying to do a murder mystery, just have the cleric / paladin detect evil until they find the evil person. No one detects as evil just have them take off their rings. There are a lot of loopholes with the arbitrary system of alignment we have now. The Monkey King is most definitely a monk. Paladins have no abilities grounded in law only good. Which funny enough is the exact opposite of the original which was only Lawful (ie no good at all). That being said the alignment system is used as a short hand for monster types in the game. For example LG (stuck up but generally helpful), NG (pure hearted), and CG (flighty but helpful). The easy classification allows players to go waaagh when seeing a normally hostile race like orcs and goblins. When seeing good aligned races they are more prepared to negotiate. This does make the game go faster and can be easier on both the dm and players. Is this good? I am not so sure.
I like the increasing of stats aka Starfinder. One of the big issues for me vs classical fantasy is the Xmas tree effect caused by stat boost items. You simply gimp your effectiveness if you did not use everyone of the items. When I play I prefer Conan style where the power is in the character versus the items. I also like the customization of characters quite a bit. I am looking forward to seeing the new system. Now, in regards to deadliness, I like faster paced combats where a good hit is a serious danger not something that inflicts 20% versus 10%.
Unlikely. Forbes had an article that said the falloff between TFA and TLJ is on par with the falloff between ANH and ESB (which is frequently touted by fans as the best of the entire series.) While I think his estimate of $660 million is overly optimistic especially with the theater contract locks coming off, I can understand his point. There is no doubt that the movie will be financial successful thou. The lower multiplier (especially for a Star Wars film) coupled with poor China sales does say that the movie is not universally loved. Will the discontent in the movie's main market of North America affect sequels? I do not know. I am off to see Jumanji.
The Last Jedi was an okay movie. The plot holes and changes from traditional Star Wars tropes made for a fairly hollow Star Wars experience thou. While the The Last Jedi is the highest grossing US domestic movie of the year, the performance vs The Force Awakens is off by about 30%. I am hoping that Disney will see the reaction / fall off and change the direction of the series.
Yeah, the humor added a lot to the movie. I really liked Ragnarok quite a bit. The sound track was also really good. Ragnarok is just a well made movie.
Thanks for the guide, I have a question. On your 6th level melee build, I see 19 +2 for strength for a total of 21. I see a revelation labeled "unbalanced" in bold as well. I cannot find an unbalanced revelation only disproportionate revelations make you take longer to hit zenith. Am I missing something?
I see a lot of 5E games around. The 5e books have officially sold more copies than their respective counterparts from the 3.5, 3, 4x series (individually not collectively of course). The pod casters and twitch streamers are fun to watch / listen to (especially Critical Role). The twitch streamers and pod casters overwhelmingly run 5e. 5e has been very successful. Now, I may prefer the complexity and build options of Pathfinder but I have had fun playing 5e. The most important feature of a game for myself is enjoying the social interaction with other players and DM.
I have been playing some Injustice 2. I found the story to be interesting. There are two main story versions. There are also alternate endings for all characters in the battle sim metaverse. I have been having fun collecting various gear pieces, playing the metaverse single player events, and playing against friends locally. There is a lot of stuff to do even before going to ranked online. The metaverse challenges really help keep the game fresh. I did get a little motion dizzy from the pendulum one where the stage keep changing angles.
I have read a bit of this thread. There is a lot of emotional stuff here. I do think a couple things need to be pointed out. Note, I am mostly a pathfinder player due to my like of the huge number of build options. 1. The 5e phb has out sold the 3.5, 3, & 4 phb lifetime sales. This is individually not collectively of course. Mike Mearls was pretty happy when he made that tweet a year ago. There is a large market out there for a rules lite system. 2. 5e Dnd has a huge presence on twitch and podcasts (Critical Role is really good imho). I think advertising is very important in expanding your market. This is an area that Paizo could improve. 3. Critical Roll plus tons of pod casts have shown that a high level 5e game can be both entertaining and fun for the players. The quality of a DM is very important of course especially for high level campaigns. The enjoyment level of campaigns is set by the DM and players. I had a large amount of fun with my old Rifts group for example despite the system. Now, I am going to talk about anecdotal observations. My local game stores just are not carrying a lot of pathfinder product these days. I think that Paizo needs something new to keep them in the public eye. However, a large number of my pathfinder buddies have ordered StarFinder. I am hopeful that Starfinder does well.
Yeah, I agree the visuals were amazing. I also agree that Dane DeHaan really did not work well as Valerian. The role really needed someone with a lot more charisma / maturity. The story was toned down a bit to much for adults while kids would not get some of the more complicated plot ideas. I did enjoy the movie because of the fun nature and different perspective not to mention great visuals.
I recently picked up the Marrowind expansion for ESO. I am impressed with how much the game has improved since launch. The quests in Marrowind feel impactful and meaningful. If you have the expansion, new characters you create will start in Marrowind. Levels do not prevent grouping below trials (aka raids) as mobs are scaled to your level so you can go anywhere and group with anyone.
Okay, there are some inaccurate statements being posted in this thread. First, original DnD only had Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic. Good and Evil did not exist in the game yet. Second, Paladins were Lawful and a subclass of fighter. Avengers were Chaotic and added later. All alignments had their special champions in basic dnd. Third, the very first DnD paladin was played by Gary's close friend ( Don Kaye) was a cowboy who used magical six shooters (special wands). Bonus, if you can identify the character. The character lived by a specific code. The concepts of Law and Chaos presented by Moorcock and Anderson were pretty important in the formation of the game. While I struggled to get through Anderson's work, I really enjoyed Moorcock's work. You can clearly see their influence on the game.
It has certainly encouraged me to never play a pregen unless its for no credit to fill a table. I am now in the same boat. I would let a table bust rather than play a pregen with this rule. I cannot even recommend in good conscious pregens to newer players anymore.
Speaking as someone whose first really enjoyable game was the original Bard's Tale before moving onto the Gold Box series. Elements in games shift in importance in the market. Funny enough graphics were a part of why both Bard's Tale and Gold Box series were successful as they were a step above what came before them. I do not see sequels as equating to bad. Two of the better games that I have played recently injustice 2 & Dishonored 2 were sequels. Both games have a high quality story which is an element that I really enjoy in games. In regards to E3, the Daud dlc in the first Dishonored was really good so I am looking forward to the extension of the story. I am also looking forward to other expansions of existing games such as Xcom 2 (war of the chosen), Horizon Zero dawn (frozen wilds), Tyranny (Bastard's Wound), Shantae (Pirate Queens Quest), etc. I can see your point about new series at E3 thou. Anthem was the only one that looked interesting. Even then mostly because of Drew Karpyshyn writing on other series that I have enjoyed. Sea of thieves could be interesting but I am in a wait and see position on the game atm.
|
Pathfinder Society GM. Starfinder Society GM. 529 posts (540 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 9 Organized Play characters. 1 alias. 