ChrisRevocateur's page

Goblin Squad Member. Organized Play Member. 762 posts (836 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. 6 wishlists. 6 aliases.


1 to 50 of 762 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
This is what we're doing going forward with the rulebooks for the foreseeable future.

Then I wish you, and the rest of Paizo, luck in your future endeavors. This is where we part ways.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I heard an interview on the Know Direction podcast the other day that said that Paizo was going to be experimenting with putting Golarion specific content into the RPG line of books. Then I come to check out what new books are coming.

I gotta say, I do not agree with this new direction. Keep the campaign specific stuff in the Campaign Setting line, and keep the RPG line setting neutral. This should NOT be in the RPG line.

I will not be buying this book, not because I don't like the idea of it, but because I don't want to contribute to Paizo thinking that all of us consumers are supportive of the blurring of the lines between the RPG and Campaign Setting stuff.

I know this has been hashed out back and forth between plenty of people in this thread, and I understand both sides. I don't agree at all with the people defending this crossover. I'm not expecting them to agree with me at all either. I'm not posting this to renew this discussion. I'm posting to add my voice as an additional number to those that have spoken up about their disagreement with the crossover.

So it's June now, the book should have arrived. Any update?

Sent out today via UPS.

So, since my name isn't associated with the order at all, should I also put my e-mail address or something on the note, so they know what account to put the store credit on?

I just received Inner Sea World Guide and the Pathfinder shoulder bag as gifts from my mother. She ordered it herself, in her name, but had it shipped to my PO Box.

Now, unfortunately I already have Inner Sea World guide, and my mother is EXTREMELY sensitive about people "not liking" the gifts she's given them, so I was wondering if there was some way that we could maybe do an exchange? I'll pay the shipping.

MordredofFairy wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

I'm not using Wikipedia, I'm using VIDEO.

look at this.


Granted, she's using a shortbow. But still, she's doing 1/3 seconds.

This one was a head turner. watch Lars at work.


Also an awesome reason to use a shortbow. Due to the draw length, you couldn't do this with a longbow. Just an Awesome Ten Arrows technique.

You can get to some good videos by Googling 'speed archery'.

Granted, longbow technique, and especially with volley fire, is going to take longer. But you can certainly fire faster if you want to.

And there is definitely a difference between composite long and short bows.

The daikyu is a composite bow, and seven feet long on average. That's definitely a longbow.

A Mongol's bow is three, maybe four feet long, tops, and is definitely a short bow, as well as the world's first composite bows.


you are using video about medieval longbow warfare? or about people doing sports in modern times? because i feel we may be talking about different things here.

like, people doing this for fun versus people actually using it in combat situations versus a target that actively tries not to get hit? and as you said, those were mostly shortbows.
As for speed archery: Again: Quickly shooting against an immobile target is one thing. Against a armored person with a shield charging towards you, different thing.

I know the Daikyu, but i do hope you agree it's quite a unique variant of bow(and was, in the used form, developed before the advent of horse archery in japan) that is NOT generally represented by what a typical "Longbow" in the pathfinder setting should be, same as a typical "Longsword" would not be a Katana or Nodachi. The medieval Longbows used alongside Full Plates, Lances, Morning Stars and all the other fancy stuff were generally speaking of the british origin-variant, for foot archers.

As for the mongol's bows, even earlier steppe...

Except that in the Pathfinder system, they tend to group similar but not exactly the same weapon together as one weapon statblock to make sure there aren't a million different weapons to choose from. This has been happening ever since the beginning of the D&D/Pathfinder evolution, for example the Broad Sword getting folded into the Longsword when it went from 2nd edition to 3rd edition.

They include the ability for the Composite Longbow to be used on horseback so that it can be both "Composite Longbow" and "Daikyu." As this isn't the Pathfinder Society forum, I'd say if you're concerned about it, just don't let characters that don't have Japanese style flavor (or having bought the composite longbow in a Japanese flavored area of your campaign world) use the bow on horseback. The image of a European rider wielding a (composite or not) longbow doesn't work in my head either, so I'd never make or play one, even though the shortbow is an inferior weapon.

psywarrior84 wrote:
Anyone know of a good one that runs on a droid platform?

There are some okay character sheets for Android, but I haven't seen a single character creator/manager, and I've been looking all the time.

mdt wrote:
ChrisRevocateur wrote:
EWHM wrote:


I'm not fond at all of the downtime rules in Ultimate Campaign. I find the retrain rules way way too generous.
Just to clarify something, the Retraining Rules aren't part of the Downtime Rules.
Well, technically they are listed as something you can do in yoru downtime, but no, the rules themselves aren't in the downtime.

I'm just saying that someone shouldn't dismiss the downtime rules because they don't like the retraining rules, as they are not intrinsically linked.

The person's complaint about being too stingy with resources is a good reason to dismiss (or modify) them though. I don't agree, as building up resources isn't an easy thing to do. I could work my whole life and not have enough money to buy a brand new building, staff it with workers, and get purchase product to sell, because, unless I work some very lucrative position, I'm mostly spinning my wheels enough to support myself and make a modest savings. You make it too easy, and one would wonder why everyone in your world doesn't run a business. Low cost, high profit, no brainer.

EWHM wrote:


I'm not fond at all of the downtime rules in Ultimate Campaign. I find the retrain rules way way too generous.

Just to clarify something, the Retraining Rules aren't part of the Downtime Rules.

Methabroax wrote:
MDT, that's an amazing set of rules you linked to. I'm going to start running RoTRL adventure path soon and I love the idea that my players can have already fleshed out rules to build up businesses in Sandpoint. Now someone should come up with rules for guilds now, especially guilds of harlots....

Within those downtime rules, look at the rules for Teams and Organizations.

Thorri Grimbeard wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
There's absolutely no "arguably" here because your implication, that you could select actual "racial traits" makes no sense because there is no context for how you could select them.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
This is a perfect example of where common sense trumps RAW, and if you try to justify it otherwise, you're trying to break the game.

Huh? Someone (not me) arguing that one core race, half elves, should get 100% of the stuff that makes another core race, elves, cool/interesting/worth playing, is trying to break the game, but as long as you're only arguing that half elves should get 97% of the stuff that makes another core race cool/interesting/worth playing - which Paizo has ruled they get - that's somehow not trying to break the game? These aren't significantly different things. "Elven magic" is the only elven racial that half elves can't get (elven weapon familiarity can already be obtained by characters of any race through a feat), and it's not all that.

With this ruling there's no reason to have elves as a playable race at all, except for players who want to gimp themselves for the fun of gimping themselves.

What, exactly, do you think this ruling lets half-elves have access to? It allows Half-Elves to choose Elven Race Character Traits, I think everyone can agree on that. Now, you're the only one arguing that this ruling means that Racial Traits are also included (though I know I mistakenly used the term when referring to Race Character Traits in one of my earlier posts, the context made it obvious what I was really talking about I believe). IF your concept of what this ruling means holds true, the most that a half-elf could get would be trading in Elven Immunities, Low-Light Vision, or Keen Senses for Darkvision, Dreamspeaker, Elemental Resistance, or Urbanite. An elf would be able to make the EXACT same trades for the EXACT same cost, AND has Elven Magic and Weapon Familiarity that they would be able to keep or trade for other Alternate Racial Traits if they wished. Considering Elven Magic and all the neat Alternate Racial Traits an elf could trade it in for, I'd have to argue that the amount of stuff that a half-elf gets from the Elf that makes the Elf fun and unique to be FAR less than your "97%"

Thorri Grimbeard wrote:

The interpretation of the rules that you guys are making is sane, makes sense, and is probably what Paizo meant. But it's not what they wrote:

paizo/faq wrote:
...Half-elves and half-orcs may select racial favored class options, archetypes, traits, and so on...
That quite definitely says they can select racial traits. That's what it explicitly says. If the adjective "racial" applies to "archetypes" it also applies to "traits". "Race traits" are presumably? arguably? covered by the "and so on".

So show me when and where in character creation you get to "pick" your racial traits. No, you pick a race, and that gives you your Racial Traits. You are then allowed to take the Racial Traits that you have and trade them for other Racial Traits. At most a Half-Elf or Half-Orc would be able to trade in Racial Traits that both their race (Half-whatever) and one of the other races (Human, Elf, Orc, depending on the halfbreed) have in common for a Alternative Racial Trait of the respective base race. Now, let's look at the Racial Traits of the Half-Elf and Half-Orc compared to their respective parent races.

+2 to One Ability Score
Normal Speed
Low-Light Vision
Elf Blood
Elven Immunities
Keen Senses

+2 to One Ability Score
Normal Speed
Bonus Feat

+2 Dexterity, +2 Intelligence, -2 Constitution
Normal Speed
Low-Light Vision
Elven Immunities
Elven Magic
Keen Senses
Weapon Familiarity

Half-Elf/Human Commonalities
+2 to One Ability Score
Normal Speed

Half-Elf/Elf Commonalities
Normal Speed
Low-Light Vision
Elven Immunities
Keen Senses

Human Alternate Racial Traits Accessible to a Half-Elf

Elven Alternate Racial Traits Accessible to a Half-Elf
Elemental Resistance

+2 to One Ability Score
Normal Speed
Orc Blood
Orc Ferocity
Weapon Familiarity

(See above)

+4 Strength, -2 Intelligence, -2 Wisdom, -2 Charisma
Normal Speed
Light Sensitivity
Weapon Familiarity

Half-Orc/Human Commonalities
+2 to One Ability Score
Normal Speed

Half-Orc/Orc Commonalities
Normal Speed
Weapon Familiarity

Human Alternate Racial Traits Accessible to a Half-Orc

Orc Alternate Racial Traits Accessible to a Half-Orc

That's it, IF you're interpretation that Racial Traits are included and they didn't just mean Race Traits. Would you consider these to be game breaking, or making a halfbreed to be better than the parent races?

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

So, I've played a few games and I admit I can't roleplay for crap. I tend to play the numbers and tend to think within the skillset rather than within a character. I don't know why but I just can't get over this and play Pathfinder like it were a puzzle instead of a supposedly continuous story.

Makes me a bit sad.

So what I've come to ask is how one gets over and around playing the numbers? I tend to over compensate with gear to make up for my failures ( my backpack has every tool it can carry in it ) and while I'm really good at thinking of new and smart ways to get around I'm really bad at doing this from an "in-character" point of view. If I was playing myself as a chessmaster I'd probably do better but that's breaking the 4th wall, etc.

Something that I do that gets around the numbers is I look at the numbers and everything as the laws of physics of that world. You know your characters numbers because you are your character, and your character, having lived at least 15 years (less if you're a goblin or something), he has a fairly good idea of what he's capable of. But you don't know the number to anyone or anything else, because you don't have the familiarity with their body that they do.

For me, this allows me to play the numbers, but IN game. The numbers become a huge part of what I base my character's personality and actions on.

One drawback to this though, is that I come to expect "physics" to work a certain way, and when the verisimilitude of the numbers breaks (because the GM decided to fudge something, or a rule is forgotten and the GM makes an on the fly ruling) it breaks my mentality from the game, as the "realism" just got screwed with. It makes me a bit of a rules lawyer in my head, but I do my best to only speak up when its helpful to the game (or just when it breaks 'reality' too much for me).

jimibones83 wrote:
Sweet I'll check that out. I'm trying to compile all the duplicate minis I could use. I've noticed some encounters have creatures that neither have a mini nor a pawn though. That kinda sux. I managed to dig a shadow out of a beastiary box but I only had 1 when it called for 3. Also I need a dozen freakin shock lizards next week and they are nowhere to be found

I've been using the Pathfinder Paper Minis to fill out the stuff that the pawn collection doesn't have.

Thorri Grimbeard wrote:
Noireve wrote:
Actually, Dex is often considered the Secondary stat to wizards.

That's why I said "matter of opinion".

Noireve wrote:
Additionally, Elves happen to also have a racial "spell penetration" that stacks with spell penetration. All in all, elves are THE wizard race.

Except that half-elves get that now, if they want it.

Noireve wrote:
Now granted of course just simply cherry picking abilities from 3 different races will net you a fairly powerful race, but that is simply a stupid and illogical thing to do (oh how about I go ahead and grab the elven spell penetration ability with the human's extra feat to grab spell penetration and haven Elven Immunities, that sounds cool right?)

Allowing people to do exactly that sort of thing is the point of this change.

Maybe I just happen to play with unusually liberal DM's, but most DM's I know will allow you a player to take something that's not strictly speaking legal if it fits in with the flavor of the character. What we wouldn't have allowed is what you say. But now, "Paizo says we can have spell penetration and the extra feat and Elven Immunities."

Except that's not what's been opened up at all. They opened up Favored Class Bonuses, archetypes, and TRAITS. This word might cause some confusion, as the abilities listed under a race are called traits. But more likely is that they're saying you can choose Racial Traits as in the traits listed in the Player Companion books and the back of the APG.

I don't KNOW if I'm right here, but I've seen that exact language trip people up before and one of the Paizo people coming along (I can't remember whom, or what thread, so I'm not claiming this as irrefutable truth or anything) and correcting that misconception and clearing up that it only refers to Traits as in the chosen abilities, and not traits as in what you get for being an Elf automatically.

Vic Wertz wrote:
Obfuscated wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:
James Jacobs provided just such a list here.
Well, unfortunately that's a dead link. Any way to bring this info back to life?

Link resurrected!

And now that link is dead...... This information would be GREATLY appreciated.

Ishyna wrote:

Again lets not get hung up on the Gunslinger spoiler. I just wanted to offer context. The thread isn't about him but rather about the definition of a Full-Round Action.

Obviously both Darkstar and Mathwei agree with my interpretation:
Standard + Move =/= Full-Round.

But I don't think that Mathwei's Quote is the "Plain as Day" answer we are looking for. In fact that quote is the one piece of evidence that someone might use to justify the extra Full-Round.

Mathwei wrote:
In a normal round, you can perform a standard action and a move action, or you can perform a full-round action.
I can see that being interpreted either way.

The operating word in that sentence is OR. As mentioned, there is NO statement of equivalency, at all, in the rules. A standard action and a move action together normally take the same amount of TIME as a full-round action. A full round action takes 6 seconds (approximately) to complete, and that's why it's a full round action. Neither Mythic Haste, nor Amazing Initiative, give the characters more time for their turn, it allows them to quickly add in a move or standard action to the actions they're already able to do during the round.

Unless an ability specifically says it gives an extra full-round action, it doesn't.

You misfire as much as you crit, which while not that often, it definitely gets in the way. I was able to actually sit back and relax and play my mysterious stranger without stress after I got the Stranger's Fortune class ability. Believe me, you're gonna want it. Ignoring a misfire is MUCH better than having to draw another gun, unless you've got quickdraw, or were planning on moving that round.

Matt Filla wrote:
Lethuin wrote:
Matt Filla wrote:
"Entitled" is exactly the term I would use for some of the posts I have seen here.
I'm sick of seeing this word. Please, PLEASE look this word up, everyone. I doesn't mean what you all seem to think it means.
Yeah, I understand the English language. I'm fine with that word choice.

Except that they can't be entitled. They can ACT as if they are entitled, but that doesn't actually mean they are.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
gbonehead wrote:
Like then the people in my town put together a petition to try to force the town council to stop Dollar Tree from opening a warehouse, for example.

And what "force" did they threaten to use if their petition was not fulfilled?

That petition you're talking about probably didn't 'force' anything. It was probably nothing more than a list of citizens that didn't want that Dollar Tree Warehouse in their community. The Town Council had every right to make whatever decision they wanted to in that case. They might have had a whole town of unhappy people that wouldn't re-elect them next term, but I doubt there was any specific 'force' behind that petition.

What I'm trying to get at here is the cultural concept that a petition forces anything is just plain wrong, unless that petition specifically states or insinuates what force would be brought to bare if the petition is unfulfilled. But even then, with the statement of force, it's no longer a request, and thus, no longer a petition, but a communal demand. No matter the context, if you get "strongarmed" or "forced" from the word petition, then you seriously need to 1.) re-evaluate your understanding of the English language and 2.) understand how force works, both on a social and physics level. When you even look for synonyms for petition, demand isn't even among them, the strongest word I could find was 'urge,' which is only to strongly request.

The thread was not named "Demand for corrected cards," or anything, and there was no threatened action if corrected cards weren't provided (though one customer did cancel his subscription, it was AFTER Vic attacked the thread, and was due to that, not the lack of corrected cards). Thus Vic's reaction is WAY off base. Does it piss him off when his wife (or whom/what ever he lives with, if anyone/thing) asks (i.e. 'petitions') him to mow the lawn or fix a lightbulb? Does he tell Lisa Stevens that she's pissed him off because she asked (again, 'petitioned') him to take care of something at the office? Does he get pissed off at customers at a convention because they ask ('petition') him to maybe hand them a product that is behind the table so that they can look at it?

TL;DR: The idea that a petition is FORCING anything is cultural garbage. A petition is a request, and nothing more, so Vic needs to get off his high horse and calm down.

In sources, do you have the bestiary checked? At the bottom of sources, is "No NPC races" unchecked? Are you creating a PC or an NPC?

Also, while there are people here willing to help you with your Hero Lab issues, you'll get quicker, more complete responses by people specifically talking about Hero Lab at the Hero Lab forums @ Lone Wolf

Personally I use d20Pro. Most people don't like it because you have to pay for it, but as a VTT that was built from the ground up to support the d20 system, and the recent addition of options to run the pathfinder system specifically, it makes running combat a freaking BREEZE (though your up front prep time can be a little heavy, what with creating each creature). You can use as much or as little of the rules integration as you want though.

It is a separate client, not browser based.
It has a character sheet function that is part of the rules integration.
It has fog of war (draw on and click to reveal, not dynamic, but that's something they're working on).
It has tiling and square by square color or image painting. It's no Dundjinni or Campaign Cartographer, but it gets the job done.

The thing that I really like about it is the rules integration, and they're making that more and more powerful every day. I love the fact that I don't have to pay such close attention to math and stats, and can just concentrate on telling the story while still being able to use the rules correctly.

Matthew Shelton wrote:
Will it be possible to have 20 tiers of mythic?

Probably in the same way it's currently possible to play past 20th level. You can do it, and there are minor suggestions on how to do it in the back of the book, but it's not going to be officially supported.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is probably a big fat NO, as I'm sure the price point has to do with linking it to Paizo's own VTT, but is there any way that those of us that use other VTT's (I use d20Pro because I want rules automation) could purchase these high-def, grid optimized maps for a similar price? I love the map packs and the flip mats, but the price of the PDF's are WAY too high.

Digitalelf wrote:

Put me in a suit & tie, and the Italian in me really stands out...

You talkin' to me??

A suit and tie does that to you? Every time I hear that line, I think of DeNiro looking in the mirror wearing a military jacket, and I don't mean dress blues.

The fact that you have support for metamagic spells is something that pretty much every other spell management program I've seen is missing. Add support for spontaneous casters, and you're golden.

I'd like to throw in some encouragement for that eventual Android port. Maybe optimize it for a tablet before optimizing for a phone display.

Evil Lincoln wrote:

So basically, it would would be reproducing the functionality of hero lab-maptool integration in a single package?


It's Hero Lab, MapTools/d20Pro, Dundjinni/Campaign Cartographer, Hero Machine, and Obsidian Portal/Realm Works all in one integrated package.

Personally I think it's too big, and that it's gonna be vaporware. If they come out and prove me wrong, with full integration of the rules the same way that Hero Lab is (and d20Pro can be with some work), along with all the functionality of Dundjinni and Realm Works, then I will be switching over. But that's an extremely tall order, 4 extremely complex programs and a not too simple character illustrator all in one package?

Fantasy Grounds 2
Tabletop Forge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've always considered becoming undead to be preserving the body at the point of death, and as aging penalties represent the effects on the body to that point, I wouldn't reverse the physical penalties of aging. I wouldn't add more aging penalties either though.

Now the mental bonuses I'd probably apply, to the maximum for normal for that race, though it would depend on the race, and the form of undead that they became.

Alright, so I'm creating a campaign setting that is set in the age of legends period of the world. The PC's (and significant NPC's) will be the ones that create the mythology of the world. Mythic Adventures is gonna be key in this campaign setting.

Now, for my question. The setting is actually set in a time BEFORE the different planes of existence have been separated. The outer planes, the elemental planes, and the material plane are all still one, and the transitive planes don't exist as a result yet. The very nature of the reality of this world is infused with powerful, and chaotic, magic. Wizardly magic is slowly being formed (actually taught to the humans by the devils, but that's something different), and eventually, after the planes rift, a steadier, more set kind of magic will take precedence. So while I don't want to change how Wizards work, at all, I want to change what Sorcerers do (there won't be bards, as the combination of music and magic hasn't been made into a discipline yet, though a multiclass fighter/rogue/sorcerer could be the creator of it in this world), and divine magic other than Druids doesn't exist, as there are no deities yet (some of the PC's and NPC's shall become the first gods). I'm thinking to emulate the nature of magic for the druids, I'm going to make them into spontaneous casters.

Anyway, as I said, the real issue is the sorcerer. I want to do something that creates the flavor of chaotic magic that these sorcerers can tap, at great risk, to be able to create effects that they don't already have in their spell list, or to cast spells of higher level than they normally can, and things of that nature. I'm not much of a game designer, so I was wondering if anyone here might have any ideas for how this could be executed. Thanks for helping out.

Urath DM wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:
Fair enough, I haven't read those.

I don't remember seeing anything like that in the GMG.. I'll have to look when I get home.

As for the NPC Codex.. it is not out yet.

Not the GMG or the NPC Codex. The NPC Guide is a Pathfinder Campaign Setting book, with some playtest PC's in the back. It says that since they are equipped at the same level as a PC, that their CR is equal to their character level. I don't remember where it was stated in the forums, but it was said that the CR for the iconics in the NPC Codex will be the same, as they will be outfitted with PC-equivalent gear.

Evil Lincoln wrote:
EATERoftheDEAD wrote:

I am assuming that the methodology for determining CR (CR4/MR2 equals CR6) holds true for determining APL. As in a party of level 3/MR2 characters would have an APL 5 for the purposes of determining level appropriate CR and treasure.

Am I correct in this assumption?

Of course we all know what happens when you make an assumption, it makes an ass out of you and umption.

Probably not, since CR does not equal level for these calculations, even in the core rules. It's level -1 for CR, so by this math calculating APL would be level -1 + Mythic Rating.

Actually, based on what is said in the back of the NPC Guide, and from what I've heard about the iconics in the NPC Codex, PC's, due to the amount of wealth they have, are CR=Character Level.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Saint Caleth wrote:
RAhadoum is unambiguously a democracy. It has a representative assembly who elects a leader with strong term limits.

That's a republic, not a democracy.

HTC Wildfire S (Android 2.3.4)
Vizio 8" Tablet (Android 3.2.1)

Though I use HeroLab, and would love to see Lone Wolf come out with a smartphone/tablet version, I think a character tracker app would be cool from you guys as well.

A spellbook app would be PHENOMENAL, one that could keep track of spells known, in which spellbook (as a Wizard can often end up with many), as well as spells memorized, spells/day and spells used, support for metamagic spells, save DC's, number of creatures, area of effect, etc. calculated for the character, and of course the description of the spell right at hand.

Battle tracker, like an initiative tracker, but also with HP, click to roll attack, damage, and saves, maybe even with a database of creatures from the bestiaries.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rules automation is one of the reasons I use d20Pro, so I do not see myself switching to Gamespace. Great idea though.

We don't need another president, we need a revolution.

I would buy the **** out of a Golarion file for Realm Works.

bigkilla wrote:
As a avid user of D20Pro and player of Pathfinder I DO NOT want to see Paizo released stuff for the D20pro marketplace unless it would be unique to D20Pro Marketplace materials, just rehashed AP's and other stuff that I already own and are extremely simple to enter into D20Pro has 0 value to me.

So importing the maps, and making all the creatures with their special abilities programmed in, setting fog of war, using tiles to set up closed and open trap doors or other secrets, setting up markers with information for the traps or other special spaces or just important information, typing out a text file with all the boxed text for the adventure, etc. That's all extremely simple for you to put in yourself?

Show me how, cause I can't get the grids in the AP maps to fit for the life of me, the grid will NEVER match up. The grids in the Map Packs match up, and a friend of mine told me that the flip mat pdfs match up, but the maps from the APs and modules won't.

Even using Hero Lab, inputting creatures takes forever, 'cause there will always be mistakes between the Hero Lab version and the one that d20Pro makes. Also, none of the special abilities come programmed in the transfer.

Same with tiles and markers. It all takes time, and in the case of markers, time that often isn't worth it, but if it were done for me, would make my gaming just that bit easier.

Plus, I don't own too much of the AP's or modules, but I'd probably start buying them up like hot cakes if I had them already programmed into d20Pro.

Pathfinder content for the d20Pro market place would be awesome.

Adventure Paths, Modules, and Scenarios would be pretty awesome for sure, but what I'd like to see sold in the marketplace are the GameMastery Map Packs and Flip-Mats formatted for VTT use. I could just buy them from Paizo directly, rip the images out, modify ones like the Map Packs so that they fit the particular tile size that they are (little room in the City pack, I'm lookin at you!), and then import the maps individually into d20Pro, but if I didn't have to, I'd pay an extra dollar or so over the regular PDF price.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Go with Hero Lab. At least that's what I would suggest. Using it, I've been able to make PC's of 20th level in less than 15 minutes. It can literally be 3 or 4 minutes for a 1st level character.

It's more than just a character creator too. I use it as my character sheet these days. You can track items, spell memorization and use, buffs, conditions, and even different tactics, such as fighting defensively or higher ground, all with the math done for you.

And it's so straightforward and easy to use.

PCGen I've found a little difficult to navigate in.

The only problem with Hero Lab is it can get a bit expensive if you want a lot of the Pathfinder stuff beyond core programmed in for you.

Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
nosig wrote:
The Shaman wrote:
Pedantic wrote:
The Shaman wrote:
Pedantic wrote:
The biggest conclusion I drew is that spears are so unfairly shafted. :(
Yep. Even among simple weapons, the basic shortspear is about as good as a club, and the two-handed versions aren't exactly great either.
This calls for a movement for spear equality. If we're lucky, we might get a few tax-feats to allow effective spear wielders. :p
Well, there's the spear dancer feat, but it's imo more oriented towards martial polearms - such as a paladin of Shelyn with a glaive.. For now, I'm thinking of maybe making the shortspear and trident's critical modifier x3, maybe removing the trident range increment - it seems a bit too top-heavy to be throwable except as an improvised tactic.

Depends upon the Trident, some are designed to be thrown (I'd give those a +1 to hit if thrown). Perhaps not as far as a Jav, but more than a club.

Also, spears should just do more damage. IRL spears where the weapon of choice for militarys, swords were normally a secondary weapon (yes, even for Japanesse armies, and the Romans used a type of spear as a "opening" attack). In a different RPG (RuneQuest), spears were often the weapon of choice, and javelins were a nasty thrown weapon (did a D10).

I figure the fixation on swords comes out of the fact that most game designers (esp. the early ones) are readers of Swords and Sorcerey fiction, and most fantasy writers are not military (or weapon) historians. Swords are what officers/nobles use (kind of like pistols in a modern army), so that's what the Hero should use.

Here's another thought for you. Why are there so many kinds of swords in RPGs, but there are so few spears? There are A LOT of different spears... most of them just lumped into "short spear" and "long spear".

In large numbers a spear armed unit is pretty devastating presuming you can find relatively flat unbroken terrain but if your just wandering around with you and a...

I know this isn't seriously accurate combat simulation, but just go check out some LARP or just regular boffer combat. You'll see beginners wielding spears that are able to hold against the experienced sword fighters, and the experienced spear fighters end up dominating battles. Not only are spears longer than swords, but their sweet spot is at the END of the weapon, not in the middle as it is with a swung sword. Also, thrusting a spear is faster and easier to re-ready than swinging a sword, and switching ranges with a spear is easy, just slide your grip up or down the shaft. With a sword, you're stuck with one range and one range only. A spear is also capable of being wielded as a "double-weapon" with a quarterstaff like end, historically often capped off (at least in Europe). Finally, even if you do sunder the tip off of a spear, it's still a staff. Oh, then there's just the straight superiority of poking rather than slashing. Slashing leads to more flesh wounds, or injured limbs. Poking pretty much just kills. Spears punch through armor easier than a sword slices through it.

Swords are superior weapons only in the hand of a superior warrior, or in cases where close quarters restrict you from using weapons with long shafts. For a decent cinematic expression of this, think of the part in Legend of Drunken Master where Chan is dueling the old man under and around the train. A lot of the time Chan was on the defensive because the spear never allowed him within striking distance of the old man.

Arikiel wrote:
Maybe tweek a 3rd edition Psychic Warrior?

Or just use Dreamscarred Press' Pathfinder update to psionics.

Scott Betts wrote:
Importantly, however, is that there is less story disconnect this way than if such things were not instanced, and the villain simply kept respawning in the same place so that each group could kill it in turn, in full view of everyone else waiting their turn to kill him.

Not to me. Just as much story disconnect for me.

MMO's don't fit my play style, partly due to continuity issues that may not be such a big deal to other people.

Now, can we please stop attacking my perfectly valid opinion that I don't like MMO's because of these issues, and get back to talking about digital gaming aids to traditional PnP RPGs?

Matthew Koelbl wrote:

Here is what it actually corresponds to: Playing the same adventure as another table in any living campaign. LFR, LG, whatever - there will be times when you sit down at a table with some characters, ask them about their former adventures, and find out that you both helped save the Crimson Widget of Questing - only when you did it, you saved the town of Innocentville and defeated the Evil Overlord, while they teamed up with the Overlord to burn the town and then stole the Widget away from him when his back was turned.

And that's one of the reasons I don't play PFS or any other living campaigns either.

This isn't a problem that has arisen due to the 'evil interwebs', it is a problem intrinsic to any shared-world game system with a massive number of players. Yes, some discrepancies arise, but typically the coherency of the story for any individual character remains intact.

I never said it was a problem that arisen due to the 'evil interwebs,' and never said that the problem was limited to that format. I said that the format has that problem, nothing else. I really don't understand where you got that I thought it was because of the internet that these problems in story continuity can exist. To me, if a character runs into another character that went on the same adventure outside of the original character's story, the coherency of the story for both characters is no longer in tact.

Now, there are genuine limits to story impact and interaction that are imposed, both by the MMO format and by CRPGs in general. That's absolutely true. But several of your comments here seem to making some assumptions that aren't actually true, as well as attributing causes to the format (video game) rather than other elements that can be just as much an issue when sitting around a game table.

In no place did I attribute the cause to the format, only that the format has those issues. Someone said that the kind of digital tools I was speaking of in the original post were akin to playing MMOs, and I was refuting that, on the basis that those digital tools do not restrict storytelling or roleplaying, nor do they create a shared world with respawning quests or continuity issues.

Now, what assumptions am I making that aren't true?

Actually, an MMO I do like is Minecraft. I like that it's questless, meaning that no one goes on the same adventure you do, and that the entire environment is manipulable and persistent. Let the players on the server create the stories and quests for themselves, rather than creating stories for them to run through.

I'd like to see an MMO with that basis, but add typical RPG statistical and ability elements.

Arnwyn wrote:
ChrisRevocateur wrote:

Realm Works

This tool actually isn't out yet, so I don't use it, but this is one of the tools I'm most excited about, I've even put off paying for another similar service that I can get now in favor of waiting until these much better tools come out. It also represents another branch of what I see as the future of RPGs, and that's why I'm talking about it here. Realm Works is to campaigns and adventures what Hero Lab is to characters, a tool to easily and quickly, but still completely and correctly, put together, change, and manage a storyline with maps, npc's, flowcharts, etc. all linked together. Also, all instances of characters or creatures can link directly to their Hero Lab portfolio. GM's can share this information is some way online that I don't quite understand. Honestly, with all the different tools that could help a GM out, I can see this utility going a million different places, and like Hero Lab grew into the comprehensive character program it is now, I'm sure Realm Works will become the comprehensive campaign management software.
While I'm not too keen on electronics being used during the game (it really depends on the type of person using it, of course), the above sounds really spiffy...

It is really spiffy. I really hope it lives up to my expectations, and since it's by the people that have put together Hero Lab, I have no reason to think it won't.

TOZ wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
ChrisRevocateur wrote:
Sounds to me like that makes it even more true than before. Now, not only do you "save" the town only to have the next person come through find it in the exact same predicament that you just saved it from, but while you're running around buying stuff and talking to townsfolk after rescuing it, there's someone else running around the same town at the same time, trying to save it from flames and Horde that don't exist to you. Major disconnect there. Coherent story = gone.
There is no disconnect. The game keeps each character ignorant of the other and his or her actions. The only characters you see are those who are progressing through the story at the same "stage" as you. When you restore health to a devastated valley in the Cataclysm expansion, you get to see the effect your actions have had on it.
Agreed Scott. Complaining that other players on the server are doing the same instance is like complaining that the group at the table next to yours is running the same module.

I wouldn't agree. Complaining that other players on OTHER servers are doing the same instance is like complaining the group at the next table is running the same module. The next table metaphorically is a different server. The other players at the table with you are the players that are metaphorically on the same server with you.

To give a PNP example of what I'm talking about, how would you feel if your GM ran you through "The Temple of Elemental Evil," and on another night during the week, runs a different group through the same adventure. Then later the GM decides to find some way to get the two parties together. There's a lot of story disconnect when you run into that other group that went through the exact same adventure you did. What is the explanation for both those groups defeating the exact same villians in the exact same places under the exact same circumstances?

With this "Phasing" thing you're talking about, sure, they may be invisible to you if they aren't on the same phase, but once they ARE on the same phase, they got there by finishing the exact same quest you had to to get to that phase as well. The respawned quest problem to the RPing in MMO's isn't gone with the "Phasing" concept, it's just changed a bit.

Now, I'm not saying that MMO's are bad. I'm saying I personally don't like the limits to story continuity that the MMO format imposes, and these are limits that aren't gonna go away without programming entire ecosystems and economies into the game, extensive increase in AI capabilities, and a quest system that would put together various story combinations almost randomly each time someone came into a "quest zone" or something.

So have fun with your MMO's, me, I'm gonna stick to PnP and single player CRPG's.

LazarX wrote:
ChrisRevocateur wrote:
I hate...hate, Hate, HATE!!! MMOs. The constant level grinding is not something I find very fun. But more than that, MMOs have no ACTUAL story. Yeah, sure, there's a background history, and there are quests you can do and such, but the thing is, that they don't matter. It doesn't matter that you're the one that defeated such and such beast, because it's just gonna respawn, and someone else is gonna go slay it and get the exact same item you got for defeating it. You don't ever actually save anything, or find anything, or vanquish anything.

That's not quite as true as it used to be. For example Blizzard introduced "phasing" in it's last World of Warcraft expansion and really kicked it up for this one. One example is the Night Elven town of Astranaar. When you first arrive there it's in flames and under Horde aerial attack, after a series of quests which start with you dousing fires, and end with you shooting the Horde bombadiers, the town is restored to a more peaceful state. Other people entering the town for the first time would still be in the earlier phases until they've resolved the story for themselves, or as a party.

It does help if you're willing to be a bit more flexible in how you roleplay though.

Sounds to me like that makes it even more true than before. Now, not only do you "save" the town only to have the next person come through find it in the exact same predicament that you just saved it from, but while you're running around buying stuff and talking to townsfolk after rescuing it, there's someone else running around the same town at the same time, trying to save it from flames and Horde that don't exist to you. Major disconnect there. Coherent story = gone.

About Akkori

Male Fetchling Gestalt Gunslinger/Rogue 1 (Scout, Sniper)
CG Humanoid (Native Outsider)
Init +1 Senses Darkvision 60 ft; Low-light vision, Perception +4
AC 18, touch 14, flat-footed 14 (+4 Dex, +4 Chain Shirt)
HP 13 (1d10+3) [+3 Con]
Fort +5, Ref +6, Will +1
Resist cold and electricity 5
Shadow Blending
Spd 30 ft
Melee Pistol +4 1d6+3 x3 B and
.. Cold Iron War Knife +4 1d6+3 18-20/x3 P and S
Ranged Pistol +5 1d8 x4 B and P and
.. Dagger +5 1d4+3 19-20/x2 10' P or S
Special Attacks Sneak Attack 2d6
Spell-like Abilities (CL 1st)
1/day -- disguise self
Str 16, Dex 19, Con 16, Int 16, Wis 12, Cha 19
BAB +1, CMB +4, CMD +18
Feats Exotic Weapon Proficiency (War Knife), Gunslinger Weapon Proficiencies, Rogue Weapon Proficiencies, Two Weapon Fighting
Traits Ambidexterous, Child of the Streets (Bravo)
Skills Acrobatics +2, Appraise +3, Bluff +8, Climb +1, Craft (Gunsmithing) +7, Diplomacy +4, Disguise +8, Escape Artist +2, Handle Animal +4, Heal +1, Intimidate +4, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +7, Knowledge (engineering) +7, Knowledge (local) +7, Knowledge (planes) +5, Linguistics +7, Perception +5, Perform +4, Profession +1, Ride +2, Sense Motive +1, Sleight of Hand +8, Stealth +10, Survival +1, Swim +1, Use Magic Device +8
Languages Aklo, Aquan, Auran, Common, Draconic, D'ziriak, Ignan, Terran
Combat Gear dagger, pistol, battered, war knife, cold iron, studded leather armour, gunsmithing kit, pouch, belt (240 gp), uniform, Sable Company, black

SQ Accuracy (Ex): Halve range increment penalties on ranged attacks with projectile weapons, Deeds: Deadeye, Gunslinger's Dodge, Quick Clear; Grit: 4/day (CHA +4) use to power Deeds; Shadow Blending (Su): Attacks against the fetchling have a 50% miss chance in areas of dim light

Age: 25 yrs
Height: 6'3"
Weight: 162 lbs