Chris Kennedy's page

We made it just past the sewers now, and I don't know how to spell her name, but Jenoven is insane and has turned off everyone in the party except for the more-opportunistic gnome.

I think the quickest and best solution would be a bit of historical revision; rather than roll new characters, or try to find some clunky way to keep the ones you've created motivated, your group should just hand-wave the outright sedition in Jenoven's speech, and have it cleave a bit more toward the "neighborhood watch with fireballs" pitch.

Honestly, that opening adventure is pretty poor on a number of levels, but they do get much better and the story will be well worth following. :)

P.H. Dungeon wrote:

I concur with the last part of your post. I find that the page after page of tactical encounters is really dry and dull to read. It is probably useful if you actual run one of the adventures, but because I find it so uninspiring I don't run them in the first place. Furthermore, all the little encounter maps leaves no room for art, so the modules are very bare on visuals compared to say Pazio's mods. I miss the illustrations, and the lack of them further adds to overall dry feel of the adventures. I started trying to run keep on Shadowfell, but after having just run the Savage Tide AP, I found it totally boring and I scrapped it after one sesssion.

Ding! This summarizes my reaction to the Delve format in general. I could take a Paizo AP (in Dungeon or Pathfinder) with me to the gym and read it like a good book. When I print out a WotC adventure and try to do the same thing I feel like I'm doing homework. Yuck. I'm going to try to read enough of SoW to get to the good parts, but I really want more story!

+1.

In the end, this turned me away from 4e. It was smooth and the fights ran well, but prepping for games felt like work, except nobody was paying me. I went away from gaming altogether for a few months, then started re-reading the Pathfinder modules and realized that I still loved D&D. I just didn't love 4e. :)

I did buy all the initial 4e modules, and I think they are dull and lifeless as an editorial direction; I think they crafted exactly the modules they intended to. The idea of creating a "world" for the core-rules was good, but the world they ended up with was uninspiring -- I never thought "ooh, I want to adventure there!." Having met a lot of the 4e creatives at Gen Con, I can say they are all genuinely good guys, and hopefully everyone involved can have great success, but 4e left me flat and I won't be playing it any time soon.

So here's to Paizo for not sucking! I've spent accordingly -- bought a good half-dozen books this month and am looking forward to kicking the tires of your campaign world. Cheers!

Kansas Jayhawks in back-to-back bowl games for the first time EVAH. Rock Chalk Jayhawk!

If soccer is going to make it in America, the offsides rule is going to have to be modified in order for scoring to increase.

Taking soccer outside of the context the rest of the world plays with would be a massive mistake and ghettoize the sport further in the long run. Nobody cares about all the goals in indoor soccer. ;)

Besides, if you're really into the sport, you know that while the goals can be the huge emotional moments that make or break the drama, the play's the thing. Americans think nothing is going on because they don't understand the sport -- in fact, the opposite is true. There's something going on for the full 90 minutes (unless you are watching Newcastle United). And no commercials during play. :)

I feel you on this one. I've run two by-the-book 3x campaigns through 20th level, and boy-oh-boy do they suffer from complexity creep.

Here's what I did for my third game -- I boiled stat blocks down to the absolute minimum (HP, AC, resistances, Saves, list of actions), and only kept whatever powers/abilities I thought the baddy might use in 3 rounds of a fight. Meteor Swarm? Keeper. Change Self? Not so much.

Less is definitely more.

I think that is completely reasonable. There is no way we're going to be able to please everyone with every choice we make, and while I hope every gamer in the world buys the Core Rulebook, I'm aware that that's an unreasonable expectation.

When I am made God Emperor, each citizen will be given a puppy. If they do not purchase your Core Rulebook, their puppies will be slain.

If you do not write me into your products as a mysterious NPC who shows up at the end of the modules to solve them for the PCs, your puppy will be slain.

Thus does the God Emperor giveth and taketh away.

-----

I just downloaded the Beta ruleset two weeks ago, so yeah, I'm still excited. In fact, I'm just now excited at all. :)

Teh internetz are great for facilitating communication, but like a God Emperor they give with one hand and take with another. Heard of "Mall Fatigue"? I sometimes get "Topic Fatigue" as well, and whenever I start suffering a bit of burnout the first fix is to stop reading people's opinions about it on the internet (all sports topics, I'm looking at you).

In the end, this game is really about the group I play with, and for what it's worth I'm over the moon that Paizo has picked up the 3x mantle and is giving my group an alternative from that other significantly less fun game with an ampersand in the middle of its name.

1) Drop low BAB entirely from the game (or save it for NPC classes). Everyone either has full BAB (Fighters, Barbarians, Paladins, Rangers) or medium BAB (everybody else).

This is what I'm doing. Full BAB for any fighter-type class, 9/10 BAB progression for Monks and Rogues (1 behind through 11th level, and 2 behind thereafter), and 3/4 progression for all spellcasters.

We're also looking at capping iterative attacks to no more than 2 for any character class that doesn't start with "fig" and end with "hter".

This doesn't solve the issue fully, but it's a couple of steps in the right direction without adding further complexity to the rule-set (which is already mortally cumbersome after level 15 or so). Less rolls = better high level play.

I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays at levels 15-20 (ask me in a year or so, ha).

If I could figure out how to pull it off without my players feeling shafted, I'd 86 stat-boosting items altogether and significantly scale back the role of magic treasure in the game. It fits my sense of flavor both as a DM and a player, and it puts the spotlight back on the character build, which appeals to me, as well as helping the various class archetypes to stay within spitting distance of one another in terms of attacks and saves at higher levels.

I personally don't need the wizard and fighter to be equivalent in the same way, but I do need the ranger/pally to be only *slightly* less useful in a brawl than the fighter -- the ranger and paladin get other toys, so the fighter should be the meanest all-round combatant, but they should all be able to meet the same challenges and contribute meaningfully. The balance between the combative classes at about 7th level is excellent, but the disparity between them at 18th is not. One of the very few things about PRPG Beta that made be balk was adding another +4/+4 untyped combat bonuses to the fighter progression!

IMHO, the entire hobby owes a huge debt of gratitude to people like Ryan Dancey and Peter Adkison who took a huge gamble on the OGL licensing scheme back in the late 1990's.

+1

Hello all,

I'm a huge fan of the Pathfinder line (and Paizo as a company), but until recently had lemminged over to 4e. My group and I found that 4e was a great minis game, but seemed to be missing that D&D soul, so I've gleefully hopped on to the Pathfinder RPG bandwagon as the way forward for our group.

Accordingly, I'm a bit behind the curve and have yet to see the rules in action. I'm hoping folks here can help me out.

Reading through the Beta rules, I'm overall very pleased with what I see, but I have a concern with the fighter class. The weapon training rule is fantastic in principle, but in my 3x games, one of the ways high-level play tended to fall apart was the increasingly dramatic gap between the fighter's best attacks and other melee combatant's best attacks.

Has anyone playtested a high level fighter, and if so, how did it play? I know that I could calibrate ACs for the second-tier combatants, but I'd rather not have to if it can be helped.

Thanks in advance to anyone who has an experience they can share. Jason, if you can spare a couple minutes to explain your thinking regarding the ability, I'd love to hear it.

Cheers all,

ck

Would love to see some art.

British cuisine - finest in the world old chap - just like our cricket and football teams...

The best part of being an English international footballer?

Summers off.

OK, nevermind. :)

James Jacobs mentioned a preview of the CotCT in Pathfinder #6, and what do you know? There's that overview I was on about.

Thanks for being one step ahead of me, Paizo!

ck

Hello all,

I really like what I've seen for the CotCT AP so far, and am considering running a modded version of it for my new campaign this summer. I'm wondering, other than the (necessarily vague) promotional text, is there a campaign overview similar to the one in the Age of Worms Overload?

For that matter, does one exist for the Rise of the Runelords adventure?

If not, would it be possible to get one? I'm running AoW for a group right now, and am finding it extremely useful to keep my eyes on the Big Picture without needing to read too far in advance of the current session (quite handy as I'm big on love for the game, but short on time).

Thanks for any help you can offer!

ck

This area doesn't make much sense to me, either.

I think I'll just ignore the mechanism and let it be ye olde submergede passage leadinge to the bad guy laire (TM), and assume the doppelgangers use Zyrxog's entrance to get in and out.

Why stretch credulity and add unnecessary (i.e not contributing to theme or plot) complication at the same time? Life is too short . . . que sera d20!

There are a couple of encounters during HTBM and the previous module that just assume the PCs wind up stuck in some situation that they have to adventure their way out of.

If it breaks your group's conventions to do this to the group, have their ship attacked by a sea-monster that destroys or damages it, forcing them to shore. This way, the Heavy Hand of teh DM can take its usual form-- a monster, and maybe not feel so railroady.

The part that kept making me and my PCs laugh was that just before each of the unavoidable encounters (the sargasso and the shipwreck) you're supposed to ask for Naviagtion checks. To (presumably) determine the *degree* of lost you are going to get no matter what you do? :D

Waiter: What kind of soup would you like?

Customer: I choose lobster bisque.

Waiter: The soup today is creamy squash.

Congrats to your players-- that's a fantastic RP choice, and deserves a reward!

I'd suggest a two-part appearance by Big Z:

1. Flavor: The fangs of Zotzilaha begin to rumble and smoke when the invaders arrive, and as the battle progresses, the smoke takes on the clear image of Zotzilaha. As the fight continues, descibe the occasional rapacious pirate just spontaneously immolating, or fall to the ground his blood spurting from a pair of fang-like throat wounds delivered by some unseen ally.

2. Game mechanics: Give each PC who donated items a single fire-themed power-up to their abilities/attacks. Something like an additional 1d6 to each attack (a la flaming sword), or possibly +2 to fire spell DCs. To ram the point home, if you suspect that any of your players sacrificed their items reluctantly, or cynically, give them a lesser bonus (d4 and +1).

You might also have the village zombie-master tell the PCs that Zotzilaha came to him in a vision and ordered them to aid the PCs-- the story supposes they will secure the Olmec's aid anyway, but make this appear to be a direct result of your PCs very un PC-like behavior and you have an insta-reward (TM).

I think using something direct rather than just adding VP will make the PCs feel rewarded, and put them back in the center of the story.

I like this approach. It lets the player think that his character was critical to the success of the mission. It doesn't allow much room for planning ahead, though, and my control freak nature doesn't allow for not planning eight dungeons ahead.

Why wouldn't that allow room for planning ahead? The way the module's written, they have to get past the puzzle room in order to complete the story. The specifics of how they get past it shouldn't affect your planning.

Just assume, "they're going to solve it," and let whatever approach they try bear fruit.

I'm more than happy to hand-wave these sorts of encounters if there's no players who enjoy them in any given group. Some groups love this kind of stuff, others don't.

In this case, I let the party's tracker determine the order in which the demons had approached the objects, and then they replicated it and *poof* it just worked. Like magic.

Must... submit... awesome idea... for new... monster...

Cannot... find... submission guidelines...

Need... format... for... write-up...

Please... help me...

Must . . . reach . . . shark repellant

However, I would like to add that if anyone here does have a way to make your spouse do what you want, please email me ASAP at cklarock at cklarock.com.

Thanks!

Unfortunately, I don't think you get them to RTFM. For some people reading TFM is about as much fun as going to the dentist and asking for "the works."

I like to play with my friends, and have over time, taught almost all of my good friends to play. For whatever reason, it's always been easier for me to find friends outside of gaming and teach them to play than it has been to bring gamers into my friendship circle.

So I've gotten to watch different people embrace the game at many diferent levels. Some love the numbers, some the puzzles and exploration, others the roleplay, etc.

One of the best players I ever had took two years to learn even the most basic of rules. Every session we would have to remind her about the way some of her character's abilities worked. But my god, could she roleplay. I mean, really sublime stuff.

Just last night another new player who has played either a fighter or a barbarian for a dozen or so games tried to make her attack roll with her initiative bonus.

But I wouldn't trade either of those two players for the world.

In fact, I contrast them with a player I had a while back who loved TFM, and was really in to the "rules as written." He would stop the game to point out each time I'd missed a rule. It absolutely killed any momentum the game had going, and prevented me from taking any dramatic license. For example, when describing a monstrosity the party was facing, he interrupts me to point out that it sounds like I'm describing a size gargantuan creature, whereas the miniature I'd pulled out was clearly size huge.

So, in short, you don't make her RTFM, and you let her run her game the way she wants to.

In their sentimental (but insubstantial) essay on what the mags meant to Wizards employees, Scott Rouse said: "More women, more teens, more adults, more people around the world should play D&D, and I have made that my single most important goal. With that in mind, I never do anything that I feel would work counter to that goal."

Implying, of course, that putting Dungeon and Dragon online is intended to widen the fan base. Okay, I can see that line of thinking, although I think it's ultimately a dumb idea.

But I don't see how pulling in all their licenses (particularly the niche ones) helps broaden the fan base, unless the idea is to get all D&D content back under the WotC umbrella in advance of the Next New Thing.

If that's the case, it explains the silence-- that would be a pretty hard sell at this point.

It's actually exciting in an "oh f---, Micheal's going to drop the baby" kind of way.

I think the 2e to 3e transition was really well done and the game is so much better now, I couldn't imagine going back. I'm only hopeful that when they do put 4e out they'll put the quality of brains together on the team that they had in Monte, Skip and James (as opposed to the brains that made D&D Online, or the inital e-Tools launch -- does anyone else remember that fiasco?).

Honestly, if the new game is better but closed, it'll be a giant moral dilemma for me, which (as a gaming pragmati . . . coughmercenarycough) will end up after gnashing of teeth and much b$#@~ing with me playing the better game. If the game sucks, or remains open, it's an easy call-- follow the talent and buy things from the people with the good track record (Paizo, I'm looking at you).

As mad as people are right now, 4e had better kick more ass than a 14th level fighter smoking sherm in a biker bar.

A Pathfinder blog RSS would be appreciated as well. :)

For me, I have no interest in buying unpainted metal minis anymore-- I run games, but I don't paint minis.

I would be all over pre-painted plastic versions, particularly if you sold them in themed packs (goblin raiding party), or in groups (10 skirmisher goblins, or 4 giants, etc.).

The collectable aspect of the D&D minis makes them suck, and ultimately reminds the P&P gamers that we're not on the priority list.

Two weeks ago, I was Dungeon and Dragon magazine fan, but now I am a Paizo fan.

You guys did a fantastic job managing our collective tizzy and sold me on a couple new projects while you were at it.

(golf clap)

Would love to see a combined subscription service. Great idea.

Something WoTC hasn't considered;

I have many friends overseas, especially in Iraq. Their only connection to the game is through these magazines. They've said that these publications have been a Godsend. When they aren't being shot at and blown away, their gaming and remembering what it's like to be normal people playing a game.
What are our gaming men in uniform going to do now?

This is a great point. I hope WotC adresses this issue.

Nicolas Logue wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Way ahead of you. Sort of... As in, if you're interested in seeing Iggwilv's stats... make sure you don't miss Dungeon #149. It's gonna have her and a whole lot more as far as the high-CR end of things goes...

HOLY s&#*! Iggwilv's stats! I only trust James J. to do her justice. Thank god you are doing this James!!! I love you!!! I love Iggwilv!!! I want to bear her demon-tainted children!!!

NO! She's MINE, you cad!

Wow. James is a real wand-blocker.

In my game, there's enough Iggwilv to go 'round. And 'round, and 'round:

From an adventure log: "Lucius lies at the feet of a corpse. Not surprisingly, this isn’t the first time he has done so, although it might be the last. Towering over him is a naked mountain of flesh; layers of fat given a vaguely woman-like shape. A pair of stubby arms protrude feebly just below a hairless round nub that hides eyes and a mouth within fleshy overhangs, and just above a pair of horribly bloated breasts.

The bottom half of the creature is given over to legs — eight in total, spaced equidistantly around the main mass, each one dimpled and rolled.

What lies between each pair is best not contemplated by those who would remain sane."

There once was a lass from Fontaine
And Iggwilv the witch was her name;
She brought Graz’zt forth
And she rode his black horse
But the get was senior to the dame!

I need small ones to interlace with my homebrewed game, and for the reason above, I doubt Pathfinder will last long.

Lots of us disagree. I like the small bits and single adventures as well, but Pathfinder is more of what I like from Dragon and Dungeon mags, and less of what I don't.

That said, the current WotC plan is to provide the kind of content you are talking about for your game online. They've been unfortunately vague about the deal, but it looks like you're going to be able to continue to find what you're looking for.

Most likely, they'll do a good job with the actual D&D bits. The Public Relations? . . . Not so much.

Actually, given the way that WotC has handled this and the way Paizo has handled this, I strongly suspect the later, that it was a Paizo decision to use the runway prior to the launch of 4e to build their own product line independent of Dragon/Dungeon.

Paizo won initiative!

I do not plan on buying much or any WotC/Hasboro products in the foreseeable future, but it isn't because I want to punish them for their decision to yank the licenses from Paizo, it is because they are no longer producing products or content that appeals to me. For WotC to win me over, Paizo has to fail to deliver and WotC/Hasboro has to radically improve their consumable content and hardbook quality.

I agree with you 100% here. According to the Paizo guys and gals here on these boards, Wizards was really good about ending the license-- they extended it 4 issuses so the current AP could conclude, etc.

They're not evil, and not even necessarily making a bad decision-- they're just badly undercommunicating with their customer base at the moment.

If their online venture turns out well, more power to them. If it bombs . . . we'll all point and laugh, just like at D&D Online.

Clearly, rescinding Paizo's license is part of a business strategy on the part of WotC.

Whether it's a good or bad strategy, we can't really say, because they're not talking.

What we do know:

1. Dragon and Dungeon magazines were flourishing under Paizo's care.

2. WotC intends to move licensed D&D content online.

3. They aren't sharing any details of their reasoning or their plan.

In my opinion, #3 is a clumsy mistake. Why sour the waters in advance of a new launch?

Party foul, WotC.

More than a few businesses, small or large, could learn a thing or two from Paizo on how to handle its customer relations.

Couldn't agree more. Paizo gets an "A" from me. And in this case, "A" stands for "more business."

Wizards gets an incomplete.

A) I love you guys.

B) 7 day a week blogging and senior staff (from Lisa down) posting here to keep us informed and happy is a far cry from the WotC approach.

Couldn't agree more. Praise = Praise +1

Hm. I hadn't heard about the other licenses. I wonder what their game plan is, but they're not talking. This month's Wired magazine has a fantastic article about "Radical Transparency" that Wizards would do well to read.

The short version: opaque business practices alienate customers, while openess invites them to identify with you.

I don't (and will never) hate Wizards, but I am starting to get worried that they're not doing a good job caretaking my favorite game.

Hi, folks. I just wanted to chime in with some praise for the way you've handled this transition. You clearly had a plan and were prepared to enact it. You've been present and responsive-- ready with an answer and (most importantly) an option.

When I dashed over here half in a panic after reading that I'd be losing two magazines, it only took about 5 minutes to decide that Pathfinder was in essence more of what I want from Dragon and Dungeon, and less of what I don't. I'll happily pay more per month for it.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, WotC had nothing on offer and didn't even give out details of their plan! Sure, the transition is still several months away, but the *announcement* is right now. I'd say they dropped the ball, but it really looks more like they weren't even paying attention and took the ball in the grill. (In fact, I think their glasses might have been broken.)

Add in the fact that they have already been offering online D&D content for years, and it's never struck me as being particularly good, their vague assurances aren't cutting it.

On your end, you said very clearly, "we're taking the great work we've already been doing and making it go to eleven."

They should have hired you all as consultants. ;) I'm both shocked and somehow not shocked at all as to how clumsily they've handled this, but Paizo comes out smelling like a rose (and with more of my money in your pocket)!

Looking forward to giving you my hard earned cash each month -- you guys always deliver the goods.

Great run, Paizo-- the years you took over were the best years in the magazine's history, so congratulations are well due. I'm personally looking forward to the Pathfinder adventure path.

Eventually, WotC will ressurect Dungeon and Dragon again, although it might not be for a few years.

Nothing in D&D ever really dies, it just keeps getting re-imagined, just like "race books" and my fighter who has had incarnations in all 3 editions. :)