Calybos1's page

The simplest solution is to have monsters that don’t carry much loot.

I'm puzzled... what problem are you solving with this?

This was said as a half-serious, half-joking comment in a recent session, to our charismatic bard/priest: "Will you quit trying to talk our way out of these encounters? It's costing us valuable treasure!"

Now, the players generally enjoy the priest's antics as he tries different RP approaches to charm, confuse, distract, barter with, or negotiate through various foes that the party runs into. And of course, the party gets full XP for 'defeating' any given encounter, whether it's through combat, stealth, deception, and so on.

But that's XP... and NOT treasure.

Despite some memorably funny encounter stories, the party is still progressing well in terms of level. But they're way, way behind on actual wealth, because the only way to get wealth is through murder-looting. Let's face it, a level 5 fighter who's accumulated less than 1000gp in the campaign is not going to be as effective as one with the standard murderhobo's bank account.

How do your groups deal with the wealth-by-level issue if/when PCs insist on thinking and talking their way past encounters too often, instead of stabbing and looting?

Spoiler:

Finally, the PCs know all of the powers and abilities of both the Amatatsu Seal and its warding box

Ahh, that could be the problem. You see, the GM took this part literally too, so he gave us the writeup of the magic item in question. And as a result, in the brief in-character discussion that followed....

This wasn't done maliciously; we honestly expected the Kalsgard chapter to provide us with the reason to go on to Minkai.

Yeah, we were kinda hoping that investigations in Kalsgard would lead us to a trip to Minkai. Maybe these surprisingly well funded and well-organized "Frozen Shadows" are up to something that points in that direction, or maybe if someone asked us to rescue a missing guide who knew something about a problem in Minkai it could suggest a trip there. We're more than willing to go there, we just need a reason.

The GM's concern is that apparently a bunch of plot points require our PCs to already want to go to Minkai before he can give them to us, and we're trying to figure out how to link up what's already happened to making that a thing. As it is, our PCs are wandering the streets of Kalsgard, being hunted by mystery assassins while we try to identify them and track down a stolen magic sword, and the plot requires us to stop suddenly, smack ourselves in the forehead, and announce, "Of course! What we really need to do right now is (choose one):

a) "Take a cruise to Japan!"
b) "Enroll in an alchemical college!"
c) "Take up country line-dancing!"

We COULD do any one of those things, but how do they apply to our situation? The story hasn't taken us there.

For our group it was very simple:

Ameiko, now aware of her family legacy, wants to get to Tian to claim her throne. And as we are her friends and are looking for an adventure (something EVERY character should do!!!!), it was no question that we help her achieving this.

Ah, but that's the problem. She doesn't want to do this. We all saw the same vision she did--weird and tragic family history, desperate need to sell a family treasure to somebody in Kalsgard. And her conclusion was not "I need to travel across the world to Minkai!" It was "Dammit, I want my family's sword back, and there's a chance that this merchant in Kalsgard still has it."

We're 100% on Ameiko's side. We're glad to help her get that sword. And as adventurers, if a random stranger in Kalsgard comes running up to us, panting "Help, help! My friend (who happens to be an experienced guide across arctic terrain) has gone missing!" we'll gladly help rescue him, too. But the PCs still aren't planning a trek to Tian Xia, because literally nothing in the story has suggested the idea.

The players know we need to go there, and we want our PCs to get there--quite looking forward to it, in fact! (That's the main reason we decided on this AP.) We just haven't found the in-game reason for the PCs to actually hit on the idea, and we thought the story had offered one that we'd missed.

(Do we really need spoiler tags by this date?)

Our group successfully got through Brinewall Castle to recover Ameiko's family seal, cure her magical coma, see a nifty historical vision about her family's arrival in Avistan, etc. She expressed an interest in traveling to Kalsgard to recover their ancestral sword, sold to a merchant up there many years back. No problem, we chorused; Ameiko's our friend, we got a caravan here, sounds like a fun trip!

Now we're most of the way through Book 2 (Night of Frozen Shadows), and the GM's getting nervous. Why? Because apparently a LOT of the story depends on the PCs looking for a guide to take them across the Crown of the World to Minkai. Only... we're not looking for such a guide. Because it's never occurred to us to make such a trip. Why would we?

Seriously, we must have missed something here. Why are the PCs supposed to be interested in traveling to Tian Xia at this stage of the story? Sure, there's a crazily well-funded and well-organized thieves' guild trying to stop us from recovering Ameiko's family sword, and we're happily doing all we can to put a stop to that. But we're not lifting a finger to find any 'missing guide,' because we don't know he exists and we don't know that we should be looking for one.

Now, maybe it will turn out that these Frozen Shadows are part of a larger organization with all sorts of schemes that involve Minkai, and we'll eventually want to go there.... But at this exact moment, the GM is saying the story is stalled because we don't want to go there already. And until we start hunting down a guide for a trip none of us have even considered taking, the plot can't advance.

What's up, folks? Are the PCs supposed to start Book 2 already eager for a trip to Tian Xia? If so, where does the idea come from? None of the NPCs have mentioned it to us, and we've gone back and double-checked with everyone we can think of to see if we missed something.

Addendum: As players, we're not trying to be difficult. We know the Adventure Path is supposed to go there. And we're trying our best to find some reason, some clue or hint SOMEWHERE, that will suggest to our PCs that a tip to Minkai might be a good idea. But so far, we haven't found any.

Our group—fairly experienced tabletop RPG players—is having great difficulty surviving any combats in 2E. We listen to each other, stay out of each other’s way, support each other when possible, etc., but the monsters regularly stomp all over us and the GM has to keep scaling down every encounter just to keep the game alive… and that’s after bumping us up a level above norm. (This is across several games, with several sets of different PCs.) Combats take forever, and no one’s having any fun because most of each session is wasted on boring, endless combats instead of an actual story.

When we look around for suggestions, we keep hearing “2E is a more tactical game.” “You need better tactics.” “Focus on your combat tactics and teamwork instead of just mindlessly pounding away.”

Okay; fine. But WHAT tactics?! We need some specifics here. We don’t want to become combat experts here (far from it--the last thing we want is to spend even more time on combat!), but we’re looking for more than just vague terms like “action denial.”

So let’s set some baseline rules to operate from.

Rule 1: 2E monsters hit much harder and more effectively than the PCs. They have better AC and hit points, too. In the long run, blow for blow, the monsters will win.

Rule 2: Action economy matters. Denying a monster an action is great, unless it costs you the same number of actions (or more, in the case of spellcasters). Losing an attack to deny the monster an attack is a bad bargain because it just prolongs the fight… and in the long run, the monsters will win.

So for a suggested tactic like "Just keep focusing on in-combat healing," we refer back to Rule 1. In the long run, that favors the monsters. And for suggestions like "Cast a spell to Daze somebody," we point to Rule 2; this is a bad tradeoff that just prolongs the fight.

Here are our group’s already known and practiced tactics:

• *Stay out of each other’s AOE spells.
  
• *Provide flanking when possible.
  
• *If someone has a simple or repeatable buff effect (such as Inspire Courage or Bless), cast it.

And our corresponding hard-earned lessons learned:

• *Don’t expect enemies to fail saves.
  
• *Don’t waste time on knowledge, deception, or Seek checks; the DCs are too high.
  
• *Everyone needs the Medicine skill for Battle Medicine.
  
• *Aid Another is a trap.
  
• *Don’t bother with actions like Intimidate; the DCs are too high and they do nothing.

So: Can anyone give examples of specific actions in combat beyond the basic attacks that will help a group survive, and even win occasionally, in a 2E fight? I know it’s easiest to give advice for a specific party composition, but this seems to happen with any party we play, regardless of makeup or level.

If the AoA thread is any indication, level 8 versus a level 9 boss, which should put his DC at 26 and the bosses saves between 18 and 16. Very far from "bosses don't fail saves."

If this is about a certain book 1 encounter, that's a whole 'nother story that has nothing to do with wizards and everything to do with the wonkiness of that encounter.

Level 7, spell DC 25. I know everyone keeps saying, "the math is very tightly tuned," but around what value? If a caster targets a spell at the boss's worst save, the odds of beating him should be around 75%, not 50/50.

Getting everything exactly right with all factors in my favor shouldn't be the expected bare-minimum break-even point; it's a a rare and lucky occurrence that should result in extremely high likelihood of success.

Cast slow on the bbeg and get back to me on how much wizards suck in 2e

Already tried, several times in several different fights. Not just successful saves, but critical successes, are commonplace when this wizard throws out attack spells. This is part of what led to the conclusion "bosses don't fail saves."

As Thunder points out, even if you do have a good guess of the boss's weakness and have the right type of spell to target it, that still gives you a very slim chance of weakening him. A bit.

With AOEs, most of the enemies make their saves and take half damage. So the wizard has blown one of her three precious top-level spell slots for the entire day to do maybe half as much damage to 2-3 foes as the warrior does in a single swing. And there are probably several more fights today. Not looking good for resources.

The party IS failing, quite often, over and over.

A level 10 dragon wouldn't have been a helpful ally? Was this a roleplaying decision by the GM? Yes he's wounded, but one more ally means fewer attacks/spells directed at the party and better action economy.

The skull can be disabled with thievery. Did the rogue critically fail a knowledge check or was the DC too high?

Did the party's arcane casters not think to switch to spells that don't require a save? Buffing the party or casting dispel magic on the skull are great options here.

The hook for entering the next gate is in the start of book 3, did your GM not read ahead? Some people think it's not a great hook, but it is indeed there.

I agree with the last part; if your party isn't the kind that would naturally want to investigate the mysterious gates in the basement of their new home, you're probably better off playing another AP.

According to the GM:

*The dragon was at very low HP and had a single attack, which all the enemy priests were immune to anyway.
*The skull was not a trap, so Thievery wouldn't work on it.
*Dispel Magic would have required a check against a DC that the wizard couldn't beat.

I'm puzzled by these references to debuffs. None of the conditions (prone, frightened, dazed, etc.) have any effect on saves, right? And even if they did, the maximum effect is -1 since they don't stack. Spending two rounds to work up an attack combo with a -1 save penalty seems like a lot of effort that's still likely to fail. Debuff spells have the same problem already mentioned: they allow a save (low and fixed DC), and therefore don't work.

I recognize that it's best to target different spells to different save types, but Knowledges are gone too, so we don't know what an enemy's weakness might be unless we waste a round trying to figure it out (and usually failing, according to the DCs).

The wizard in our group spends every combat doing the same thing; two actions to cast an attack spell that fails, then third action to move or cast Shield (which is a pointless gesture, since +1 AC never matters to the enemy's overwhelming attack bonuses). She almost never takes down an enemy apart from the occasional low-level goon who's already weakened by the party's actual combatants (the warrior classes). It's kinda frustrating.

Compared to 1st edition, what is a good focus for a 2E wizard in an adventuring party? Taking on bosses is out, because range is gone and bosses don't fail saves any more. Defensive and offensive buffs have largely disappeared or dwindled in duration to nearly zero. More types of enemies are vulnerable to more types of spell effects (enchantment, mental, etc.), but the fact that save DCs remain fixed means you're still not going to have an impact using offensive spells in combat.

"Battlefield control" doesn't seem to exist any more, and summoning is still more of a headache than it's worth. Maybe AOEs vs. large numbers of low-level thugs could still be an option? It seems kind of dull to just load up on Fireballs and Magic Missiles every day, though. Former transport and utility winners like Teleport and Invisibility aren't reliable either. I'm kind of stumped for a good, fun niche for a 2E wizard to occupy.

This past weekend, our group failed the end-boss fight against Belmazog & Kyrion and failed hard... so hard they decided to drop the Adventure Path entirely.

We sent in the rogue to try to free the captive dragon, who wasted time determining that freeing the dragon was impossible because there were no locks. He studied the magic-blasting skull, too, but concluded that there was no chance of disabling it, either. Wasted turns on a potential ally that (as it turns out) wouldn't have been much help anyway.

The enemy priests all opened with multiple Fireballs affecting the whole party, four in sequence. (Gotta love that huge radius!) Two PCs dropped before getting a single action. The enemy priests then followed with cones of fire breath for their second actions, further toasting the entire party; the healer had no chance of keeping up with that damage output, especially on top of the dragon-skull's blasts.

The melee warriors got a few bad rolls, and the arcane caster's spells all failed (which we're used to; no enemy in Book 2, where "every fight's a boss fight," has failed a save that we've seen). Belmazog didn't really have to do anything.

Afterward, the GM filled us in on the storyline conclusion of what would have happened if we'd won:

GM: "So in looting the place, you find this starknife that looks super-special. In fact, after a bunch of Arcana checks you somehow determine that it's the key to one of the other elfgates."
Players: "Umm... okay? But we weren't looking for another key to begin with."
GM: "Yeah. Still, there it is."
Players: "... Right. Uhh, guess we take it along. And then go home. Because we're not seized with a mad desire to test out every gate. We took down the Cult of Dahak, yay, curse on the valley's broken, we win, we go home to Breachhill."
GM: "Yeah, I get ya. Not really sure how this is supposed to lead anywhere else...."

Group is now deciding what to play next. We're definitely looking for something with a lot more story/RP and lot less combat.

Well, 18 is a standard DC for a level 3 monster, and 20 is a standard DC for level 5, so seeing those numbers which aren't particularly high for level 4 fail isn't actually odd, since they're numbers you expect to see be failures with other skills for level appropriate challenges. (The the 20 I'd only expect to fail on something uncommon or something thats a pretty significant threat at your level)

And that seems pretty high to me. The only way you'll consistently meet those levels is if you're both trained in the skill AND you have a high stat bonus that happens to line up with it. That's nice on the occasions when it happens, but there's no way you can make it happen with every monster-knowledge skill. Not even with a bard or Int-based character, as the bard and investigator PCs are finding.

And the players of the investigator and bard chose those classes for the express purpose of 'making every monster knowledge check in the game.' So the fact that it isn't happening is causing some frustration.

Cooperation at level 1 consists almost entirely of skill checks and emergency first aid. There are no potions, there is no Assurance; crit-fail = killing your teammate, and scenario rules often mean that crit-fails reduce the party's chance of mission success. That is at level 1, where new players are introduced to the game.

Sure, there are still ways to contribute to party success--by being solo specialists each playing a solo-specialist role, as Eric Nielsen and I both mentioned, e.g. "You check that door for traps while she watches the entrance and I translate these runes." That's teamwork (of a sort), but it's far short of true cooperation.

Level 1 is where first impressions of Society play are made, and the message of level 1 is "No, don't try to help me--you'll only make things worse."

So starting the game Friday pretty excited for it sure got everything lined up expect one thing I want to add in is games if the players want to explore the festival.

I can't seem to find it but wasn't there a spreadsheet filled with games and rules posted before, I know it's a bit vague but if someone has a link to it or even a thread with a bunch of games in that would be amazing.

I don't know about a compiled spreadsheet, but there are several threads with collected suggestions for festival games & events, many of which are also given in the free download Wayfinder #7.

New Swallowtail Festival Games
How to run festival games
Compiled list of additional Swallowtail games

Calybos1 wrote:

And over here is… WTF? An owlbear? We’re level 1 here! This is crazy!

Welcome to Pathfinder 2.

Every adventure path is like this.

Heck, even even the introductory demo adventure Torment and Legacy is like this, meant to be played by complete beginners.

** spoiler omitted **

And I'm sure complete beginners are just loving it. "You squeal helplessly as it crushes you with a casual swing. SPLAT. Thanks for playing, come back next time for more fun!"

To clarify: I'm not asking for tips on how to be more effective combat monster. I'm asking why it's necessary.

If we need more sophisticated tactics to deliver greater damage and stay alive longer against much deadlier monsters in 2E, fine... but why is that the case? Why does Agents of Edgewatch suggest the exact opposite in the Player's Guide writeup? Why even bother talking about nonlethal attacks, or serving the community as peacekeepers, or negotiation and diplomacy options, if the opposition is going to be so mindlessly and relentlessly brutal?

And don't say "That's just how 2E works, it's unavoidable." CR still exists, and so does good writing. There was no reason to throw level 3 and 4 monsters at a level 1 party here, much less make them all mindless rage-monsters while removing any NPCs or possible sources of aid from the scene. This was designed as a meat grinder. It is not what it said on the tin.

So our rookie cops (2 martials, 1 ranged, 1 caster) are sent into the Knight’s Menagerie at the Radiant Festival to recapture some escaped animals. We’re peacekeepers, and we’re encouraged to look for ways to capture and contain our targets non-lethally, which the Player’s Guide emphasized. We certainly made characters with that in mind, and the initial bar fight bore that out. Should be interesting!

We wrangle a surprisingly dangerous cockatrice, but manage to overcome its deadly attacks with some difficulty and some clever tactics. A tough fight, but okay.

Then we move on to some noise in the forge. A rust monster? Really? It trashes essential gear for half the party, and its free incidental AOO alone can take down a PC with a single casual swipe. Holy cow, these things are deadly! Maybe we should skip the cute lure-and-trap ideas and just focus on putting these beasts down…

And over here is… WTF? An owlbear? We’re level 1 here! This is crazy! And there’s no clever tactics option, it’s just a straight-out smackdown against something that’s way above our weight class. “Holy crap, this thing’s got a +11 attack bonus!” one player pointed out, courtesy of Roll20's chat log. We checked; yep, +11. That’s insane. That’s roughly twice the attack bonus of a PC. We looked at the previous critters; they had the same +11, and similarly super-high ACs and save bonuses. What was going on here? Why were level 1 characters fighting level 3 or 4 monsters—a whole string of them?

More and more deadly monsters kept coming, each of them easily capable of tearing us to shreds in short order. All with that absurd +11 attack bonus, ensuring that they never, ever missed. All of their abilities were well above anything a level 1 PC could counter, and forget trying to figure out any tactics: Recall Knowledge of 16? “You fail and know nothing about this.”

We quickly realized that “critical success” was a rule that existed only for the monsters’ benefit, not ours. We’d never be able to roll 10 higher than the target DC for anything-—not a Recall Knowledge check, not a poison/acid save, and certainly never an enemy AC. The highest number any level 1 PC could theoretically roll was 26; these monsters were way out of that league. At one point, I even heard the dreaded phrase that had convinced me to walk away from PFS Organized Play tables: “Might as well take all three attacks; my only hope is a nat 20 anyway.”

No doubt about it: It was going to be a loooong session, and all of it was going to be nothing but combat. No diplomacy, no investigation, no story; just an aboveground dungeon-crawl, slogging from one bloody and hopeless fight to the next.

So the mood shifted. The laughter and clever strategies died out, as did any attempts to do nonlethal damage or capture the creatures unharmed. An NPC tried to babble something at us about the ringmaster and the zoo vet at one point, but we were too beaten and bloody to care by then. And what difference did it make, really? What’s the next death-dealing monstrosity headed our way?

The pattern repeated: monster takes three strikes, all of them hitting, often with a crit thrown in. By the end of the first round, one or maybe two of the martials have dropped (if not by Round 1, then definitely by Round 2). The martials had made as many desperate attacks as possible during the brief seconds they were conscious in hopes of dealing at least a little damage, because why waste actions on anything else? The other two PCs then scramble desperately trying to stabilize them with no viable healing options (Medicine was used up long ago), and the GM looks for ways to be lenient and allow them extra actions, time, or other leeway to avoid a TPK… again. Between fights, we pool our gold to see if we can afford to go buy some potions or scrolls or some sort of healing, because Medicine has a cooldown.

Water snake. Ankhrav. Almiraj. This isn’t a wacky zoo escape; it’s Jurassic Park, and the PCs are in an exhaustive, brutal struggle for their very survival. The frustrated players aren’t even considering capture anymore; every battle ends with the terrifying monsters chopped into pieces, and often ground viciously into the dirt afterward. “Screw taking them alive!” snarls one player. “These killers aren’t going to threaten anyone ever again, even if I have to burn this whole place to the ground.”

At the end, the GM feebly announces we’ve leveled up to 2(!) and reminds us that we can redesign our characters if we want. One of the martial PC players declares he’ll drop his roleplay-friendly concept and try to come back with something ‘a bit deadlier,’ looking into ways to make a more efficient killing machine. The caster says he’s rethinking the myth that 2E parties don’t require a dedicated healer. Another player’s unsure if he even wants to continue with 2E at all. Nobody discusses the story, because there wasn’t any.

And I’m left wondering how this outcome lines up with what the designers of Agents of Edgewatch wanted to accomplish with their ‘nonlethal peacekeepers and agents of justice’ adventure path.

"Help me fill in the continent of Azlant."

I thought the ocean did a pretty good job of that. *rimshot*

For fairness' sake, here's a player gripe: NPCs who somehow know exactly how long to delay confronting the PCs until all their buffs have had time to expire.

And for that matter, NPCs who must have a constant Seek Thoughts ability to ensure that they will never, ever take the action you just readied for. Example: "I ready to fire Scorching Ray at the first guard who comes around the corner in response to the alarm." "Hmm, for some reason they all seem to be hanging back....."

This is such a reliable thing that at times, I've declared a readied action just to guarantee that none of our enemies will use a given tactic. "I ready to cast Glitterdust--huh, they've all decided to stay visible, what a huge surprise."

Secretive casting: The rule I use in my games is that casting a spell, under any circumstances, is treated exactly the same as drawing a sword: Always Obvious, Always Noticed, Always Treated As Hostile. And still my players ask if they can sneak in a cast while someone else is talking to the NPC.

On the disabilities side, I did play a one-armed monk. Never slowed him down in the slightest, including Two-Weapon Fighting. ("A knee is a weapon!")

Additional gripe: Knowledge checks. I have one player who always, always, always asks about "Special Abilities"--meaning all of a monster's special attacks, defenses, spells and SLAs, auras, supernatural senses, flight speed, etc. No matter how many times I tell him that his questions need to be more specific, he always ignores me and defaults to asking "Tell me all its special abilities."

It's a powerful roleplaying aid for people that are, essentially, amateur actors trying to pretend to be someone else and needing all the characterization support they can get. I love it and my games will always use it.

Thinking in another direction... what if x-per-day items were flat-out eliminated entirely? Nothing with charges (no wands, staffs, etc.), just two types of magic items: one-use consumables and permanent effects. If you want to keep wands and staffs around for flavor, give them a different permanent effect instead of extra spell charges--for example, metamagic such as heightening.

The part I like best has nothing to do with mechanics. It's the setting. I love all the nations, the history, the lore, the cultural clashes, and the different beliefs and philosophies you can encounter.

Sorry to hear that. Good luck to you.

"I'm bored, I pick a fight." Seen it way too many times, and with multiple players.

Metaphysician wrote:

Calybos1 wrote:

We have a dragonkin soldier in our group. His primary function is to provide cover for our enemies against all other PC attacks. Once he goes down, then the rest of us can participate in the fight.

Why are they not shooting at other enemies? Or using abilities that aren't dependent on cover? Or, if there's only one enemy, just maneuvering so their one big ally is *not* between them and the foe anymore?

Splitting damage is bad. So is depending on everyone to have abilities that ignore cover and environments that allow you to easily maneuver around.

Correct. I keep hearing about these "maneuver around" ideas and wondering if we're the only group that never gets to fight in wide, open terrain. All of our fights are in narrow, cramped spaces with zero maneuvering options. Once the dragonkin blocks the only access point, the rest of us sit around behind him, unable to do anything until he drops.

How to deal with this? Encourage it. This should be a standard element of every good sci-fi game. Stealth and cunning and cool technology should ALWAYS provide a significant advantage over a frontal attack.

We have a dragonkin soldier in our group. His primary function is to provide cover for our enemies against all other PC attacks. Once he goes down, then the rest of us can participate in the fight.

Someone pointed out yesterday at a PFS game that I have an uncommon character on several points. She's a non-spellcasting elf, good-aligned and in the Silver Crusade. And she's a rogue, with low Charisma (8).

Setting. Golarion's nations, cultures, history, races, factions... all of it. I snap up every nation book I can find. Some dismiss it as 'fluff'--I call it the core of the game and its main attraction.

My home group wants to fight some undead... has anything been published that takes place in Geb, other than You Only Die Twice? Something around 9-11 would be ideal, maybe involving Arazni.

As for character concept, yes... I don't have to be optimal in combat. In fact it would fit Elana's personality not to be.

Side note: With this comment, you have probably caused several dozen posters' heads to explode. Well done! Keep the focus on fun.

Oh, Reginald...

I disagree!

One of my players never levels up until game time. He spends ALL his free time on comic book and Dr. Who forums.

To be fair, that sounds like a life well-spent.

A lot of GMs seem to have Favored Enemy: Paladins, don't they?

One of my online groups are hardcore powergaming optimizers... I'm afraid to tell them that I basically never plan out my leveling and just browse for neat ideas or options whenever I happen to level up.

Seriously. I don't know which of them might have heart conditions. It's just too risky.

I wonder how the Paizo staff would rewrite the rules if they had the chance to go back and start over... knowing what they know now about how each one affects complications and delays in gameplay.

Anything that has a "stop and do it over again" effect would surely get a LOT of scrutiny.

Lying is an example of a behavior that is often dishonorable; lying is not automatically, completely, and always dishonorable. Thus, a paladin can lie under certain circumstances, provided he does so honorably and in a just cause.

In principle, any spell effect can be used in both honorable and dishonorable ways; the same applies to Disguise Self.

Side note: Objections that it's dishonorable to use magic for an "unfair advantage" can be quickly dismissed by demanding that the paladin always fight naked with a sharp stick, so as to avoid the unfair advantage of armor and weapons. Also, paladins should not level up because it's dishonorable to ever fight a weaker opponent with fewer hit dice. (Yes, I've heard that one.)

"Reality is the enemy, but we have the tools to defeat it."

Calybos1 wrote:

"Alignment is morally offensive to me, and smacks of slavery and fascism. No good person can approve of it. Paizo should quit publishing stuff that mentions it. And apologize for their moral turpitude. Attica! Attica!"

Nice strawman. Again, its about alignment restriction (which don't make sense especially in the light of other published classes, in cases other than paladin).

I use alignment in my games, but will probably be using "people are neutral" variant in future ones (paladins will still be affected).

Not a strawman. Again, check the previous thread.

Listen, I came here for a good argument!

CBDunkerson wrote:

I can't figure out what you were trying to say with your second and third points. People won't buy EVs because they are sleek, quiet, and require less maintenance?

This is actually dead-on true for a large percentage of drivers. Most of the people who commute around Houston, for example, insist on driving the biggest, noisiest, most gas-guzzling trucks imaginable. More than one of my co-workers has seen my tiny car and very earnestly explained to me that I *NEED* a 3/4 ton truck (at minimum), extended cab preferred, and that my very survival is at dire risk until I get one. And these are educated scientists -- the hicks are even worse. It's an image/lifestyle thing -- if these people could legally drive Abrams tanks downtown, they would all totally do that. So, yes, the reality is that, to a very large proportion of drivers, size does matter.

Excellent point, and one that's often overlooked. There is a psychological angle to many consumers' choices; SUVs were consciously designed to appeal to people's very worst instincts of insecurity and aggression, ironically marketed as "safety." The book High and Mighty: The world's most dangerous vehicles and how they got that way explores this mentality. Some SUV drivers even request more 'aggressive' and 'dangerous'-looking grills, or idly wish they could get front-mounted spikes to ensure that they destroy anything that gets in their way.

Even at the egotistical-teen level, you can see this in any town. Many young drivers prefer to have no muffler, or even remove it, to ensure a maximum of engine noise from their Power Machine.

Short form: If you want to ensure that no conservative ever buys an electric car, simply slap a 'liberal' label on it. No amount of logical arguments based on safety, cost savings, personal convenience, or long-term species survival will compare with the emotional high of buying something liberals hate. And the applicability to why anti-climate conspiracy theories are so popular should be obvious.

Key differences:

"I don't like alignment, so I don't use it in my games."

vs

"I don't like alignment, so nobody should use it in THEIR games."

vs

"Alignment is morally offensive to me, and smacks of slavery and fascism. No good person can approve of it. Paizo should quit publishing stuff that mentions it. And apologize for their moral turpitude. Attica! Attica!"

I see it as a two-stage process. When you're first trying out roleplaying, picking a nonhuman race for your character is a good way to feel 'different' from yourself. And as you get more familiar with the world's most common races, the more exotic ones--catfolk, tengu, nagaji, etc.--remain a quick and easy way to get your "This Character is Different" fix.

But later on, you find that creating interesting personas and backstories is all it takes to make your character fun and interesting to play. At that point, racial selection becomes less important, unless you have a setting-specific backstory or motivation in mind.

Or, as one player in our group put it, "If you've got a good character concept, you don't need to staple on wings and glitter to make it special."

There is a Lawful Good Empyreal Lord of Ignorance. If no one even knows Cthulhu exists then they won't worship him.

Yep. My monk is a follower of this one (Ghenshau). "Sorry, I don't have any Knowledge skills; it's against my religion."

"Concordance of Rivals" continues to exist only in the mind... the denizens and hierarchies of the neutral planes remain a mystery.

Just had a rare sighting yesterday: an all-human party. Six players, every one of them bringing a human PC to the table. No "it looks human, but isn't," just Actual Humans. SIX of 'em.

I had a player at a PFS table who flat-out refused to believe that my character was a rogue. "Rogues don't exist. You're kidding us, right? It's actually a slayer, it's gotta be--there's just no REASON to play a rogue. Slayers are the rogues that actually work. What were you thinking?"