Akyrak

Bad Coyote's page

14 posts. No reviews. 2 lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Technotrooper wrote:
Paizo is in a tough spot because, once they announce (or even hint) that they are working on PF2, it most likely significantly impacts the sale of PF1 products. I have personally stopped buying PF1 products as a result. If they had sent out surveys about what was desired in a new edition 2 years ago, their sales may have been impacted negatively for an unacceptable amount of time in terms of the company's financials. Not an easy problem to solve, but I don't think they were deliberately trying to ignore people's opinions.

I know they are good people, I have a friend on the inside... but back in the 80's TSR put out a survey for the upcoming edition of their game and I never heard of a drop in sales. If the products were going to still be coming out for another couple years, would you have stopped buying? Maybe they were not intentionally doing that, but not including us in the earlier stages, I feel that was a mistake.


Dire Ursus wrote:

I still think there's going to be major changes. Resonance for instance I expect will be significantly different when the core rules come out. Signature skills are going to be completely removed in the next errata that comes out today thanks to feedback. And I bet Ancestries are going to be significantly revised as well going off comments from some of the designers.

Just because you don't like some of the changes, doesn't mean they just made up all the changes out of thin air. It's obvious they are trying to address problems that people had with 1e. Just because they didn't ask you directly doesn't mean they weren't taking any feed back at all into consideration when they made the playtest rules.

If they did not ask the community directly, who did they ask?

Also, like I said, the game is ok. It may get good by publication, may be great in 5-10 years before PF3.

But the changes that will be made now, they are to the game that THEY wanted to make. The changes are going to be minor. Do you really think that resonance and signature skills are important on the grand scale? They are details.

Lets end it here, Dire Ursus. You and I are coming from different directions on this and I do not wish for this to at any point get heated.


Dire Ursus wrote:
I mean isn't this playtest us being included in the process?

We are being involved at the tail end. All of the main concepts are in place, all of the rules have been written. We are beta testers, not able to affect major change. That is what I am bothered by.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dire Ursus wrote:
Sounds like your main problem is it not being backwards compatible with 1e. I guess I can see why it's annoying but you have to know that it's impossible right? If they tried to make the entirety of 1e backwards compatible with 2e would it really be much of a new edition?

I think that more than anything, my main problem is that Paizo did not include us in the process. They wrote what they wanted and handed it to us. If they had included us in the process, I think that the other problems would have all solved themselves.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not happy with the Pathfinder playtest. I wanted to be, really bad, both for my sake and because I am a big supporter of Paizo. They saved D&D 3.0/3.5 and turned into what it should have been. Now I know there will be those of you who will not agree with me, I understand that, but this is my story, my point of view, so bare with me.

I believe that Paizo is headed by good people. I do not think that there is any sort of evil plan. I do feel though that they are being a little disingenuous about the possibilities of this playtest. I've seen interviews where it was made to sound as if major faucets of this game would be changed during this playtest if we wanted it to be. Is that the case though? I do not think so.

It is more than likely that Paizo wishes to release the game at Gen Con 2019, which begins on August 1st, 2019. That is 10 months and 21 days from when I am writing this. I assume they will need to be pretty much finished and off to setting and printing at least 3 or 4 months before that, so that amount of time comes off the almost 11 months, giving the playtest and any changes that will be made to the rules, about 6 or 7 months. I do not see where that leaves this playtest much room to make an impact other than bug fixes and small rule changes like the new death rules.

Had the powers that be at Paizo had been serious about making that game that we want to play, they would have sent out an extensive questionnaire asking us what it was that we wished to see in a second edition BEFORE they even started, perhaps 3 or maybe even more years ago. But that never happened. They got together at their HQ and wrote the game that they wanted to sell us. Not the game that we wanted to play.

The playtest is not a bad game. I am sure in 5 years it will be pretty good. But it is not what I think that the questionnaires would have asked for. The system is not easily backward compatible, players have spent a decade sending their money to Paizo and we have in our hands a veritable mountain of books containing rules that will no longer be useful or easily transferred to the new system. Sure, the setting and all the lore is there, the wonderful Golarion. Thank the gods that they are not going to pull a Spellplague on us... right?

But the rules. The rules are changed in a serious and fundamental bunch of ways that makes using content from the first edition problematical at best. They took away so many classes and so many races (ancestries now) that we are not going to get back for years. Instead of talking to us and maybe hearing that this game should come stock with race creation rules that actually work and make sense, they made the game that they wanted and are asking us to debug it for them. Not to actually have a hand in it from the start, but to be beta testers for something that is fundamentally finished.

They are nice people at Paizo, but doing that to us is a mean move. Perhaps they figured they had no choice. Perhaps their priority is to pull things closer to what the upcoming generation is used to with the new edition of D&D. Perhaps we are not as much of a priority as we thought we were.

I know... I am not forced to play second edition. I can stay with first edition and be happy with that. It is just that when I imagined a second edition, I imagined a Pathfinder that would incorporate all the great strengths that Pathfinder had, while fixing it's weaknesses. Instead, I have in my hands a book that does not fix the weaknesses and actually, in a lot of ways, fixes what is not broken while reinventing the wheel.

I've ranted enough. I know there will be a lot of you who will dispute everything that I have said and maybe even call me an idiot. But please don't. This is not meant as an attack, it is a lament. I am sad for the second edition that could have been, had Paizo really wanted our input. If what I've written makes you angry with me, I'm sorry.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I just realized that the typing of Adopted Ancestry should not be General. It is a first level feat and should be chosen at only first level because it is about thinks that happened before the character was first level. So it should be an Ancestry Feat and not General. Also, General Feats are not available to characters until 3rd level.

-- Gary Ciaramella


As this is my only anticipated RPG of the year so far, I'd say #1. I am planning to preorder it for my birthday. :)


Diachronos wrote:

I'm pretty sure bombs are considered a thrown weapon for the purpose of those feats. Whether or not a thrown weapon would still benefit from Point Blank Master, I'm not sure.

An alternative solution that might work better is Close-Quarters Thrower, since it requires the same number of feats, doesn't require multiclassing (which Weapon Specialization would require), and explicitly states that it prevents all AoOs for both making and throwing bombs.

Well you totally solved my issue though, I was not aware of the Close-Quarters Thrower feat, that will do nicely. Thank you for your help! :)


Is it legal to get Weapon Specialist (Bombs) and then Point Blank Master to eliminate the AoO for throwing Bombs while threatened. I ask because I am not sure that the thrown splash weapon which is what alchemist bombs are considered according to the text fall under ranged weapon or are in a category all their own.

Thank you for your time in advance! Pathfinder rocks! :)

-- Bad Coyote


I'm making a character and I was wondering if I should take a 3 level dip into paladin. The character is going to be 10th level, with 1st through 3rd being paladin and from then on being magus with the archtype black blade (we are keeping black blade mechanically the same and repainting it as a "bright blade"). He is a worshiper of Iomedae and is an angel-blooded aasimar, is it worth taking the first 3 levels as a paladin and then taking 17 levels in magus?


The only reason that a GM would have to fear the concept of "rules bloat" is that they do not have control of their game. If you are a GM you are a GAME MASTER. Take control of your game, master it. If a player wants to use rules that you do not include in your game, tell them no. If they insist on doing it anyway, let them run their own game. It is like being a parent and complaining about how other people are raising your children poorly. It is your job to control the rules, do not let the rules control you.


Banesfinger wrote:

@ Bad Coyote

8 PCs is going to be a handful, and they'll probably walk all over the encounters. You may want to consider beefing up the "good-guys" a little.

My group of 4 PCs is just about finished Book 2 in this adventure path.
A half-elf undead lord (cleric)
A halfling sorcerer
A half-elf archer (fighter)
A half-orc human bounty hunter (ranger)

They say it is one of the best campaigns they have played in over a decade (but they tend to have evil tendencies anyway...hahahah).

Oh I know I am going to need to beef things up some for this group... I also expect at least two of the PCs to drop out before too long due to school. 5 days to go until launch day! :D


6 Days until my Way of the Wicked campaign begins, wish me luck everyone!

I have 8 PCs to begin this story:

A Dhampir Rogue about to lose his parts from the neck up due to keeping one too many snack slaves in the basement...
A Human Bard sentenced to die for fraud...
A Human Cleric about to burn for consorting with the Dark Powers...
A Human Fighter who deserted and is going to hang for it...
A Human Ranger about to meet her end after attempting murder...
An Ifrit Sorcerer caught in rebellion and found guilty of sedition...
A Sylph Magus of the same rebellion and charged with high treason...
And a Tiefling Witch about to burn for consorting with Dark Powers of similar, yet different types than the Cleric above...

It has been a long time since I have been this excited to run a game. Fire Mountain has created a Masterwork in this adventure path.

Are you running a WotW campaign? Who are your PCs and how is it going? I'd love to hear about it and I would love to share our respective progresses as the weeks path.

Hope to hear from you all,

-- Bad Coyote (rawr!)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am curious as to how many players that the WotW encounters are set up for? I figure it would be likely 4 but possibly 6. I am considering running it, but I will have 8 players at the start, although I expect that to drop to 6 for the long term.

Say if the game was set up for 4, with 8 should I just double the number of monsters in the encounters, or is Pathfinder encounter building a case of 1 + 1 = more than 2?

-- Bad Coyote