CrimsonKnight's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber. Organized Play Member. 220 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 4 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 220 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

As a subscriber how do you skip a release that you are not interested in? Or do you have to un subscribe and resubscribe after the release?

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

I hope ghost archetype along with skeletons will be sanctioned. The ghost hunger is not necessarily evil or even off putting.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

my order was just completed but is missing the book of the dead pdf


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Shifter- a marital wild shape character(natural weapons)
vessel of magic - similar to a summoner becoming an eidolon but retaining your spellcasting
blood mage - con caster
strategist- sacrifice your actions for party actions and buffs
dedicated fighter - a fighter that focuses on a single weapon or weapon type forgoing all others (like a polearm master binding and grappling or tripping with a billhook or halberd)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

the book was delayed and that is fine but can we get some content in the meantime?

--thanks


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

the book is delayed - ok but can we get some more info drops in the meantime?

--Thanks


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

good luck with this book I'll be skipping it though. Mechanics lite is one thing but I don't see anything here, I could be wrong. I like to have some mechanics in my books. if some mechanics are mentioned I'll go back to being a buy. I should have skipped that map folio earlier


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

1. a Kitsune Thaumaturge with a war flail (lantern staff)
2. PFS a poppet psychic
3. PFS a human time Oracle refugee from Rahadoum with the medic dedication. He gave up his name and is just called "The Doctor"


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Errenor wrote:
Perpdepog wrote:


I'm also hoping for an archetype that lets any caster learn how to use the psychic's method of casting, since I think that'd be pretty neat for other builds, like an illusion focused wizard.
If they leave this as it was in the playtest, this won't help you. Psychic's casting is as noisy and detectable as anyone else's.

like Tetsuo from Akira yelling as he sends pure kinetic force turning people into paste... wait that is too cool and too strong for pathfinder.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Hot take: we are spending too much time on this subject. Paizo will for the time being no longer publish material on slavery. You want to spend time in your game fighting slavery go ahead no one is stopping you. this is the writer's are agreeing with this so they are not being censored.

If you want to fight slavery, instead of doing it in forums how about making a stand and be the hero of your story and expose and stand up for the victims in slavery that is still going on. operation blooming onion is just a single occurrence many of which never get reported.

depending on what is considered objectionable content I'm fine depending on what is considered objectionable. Some people consider a positive representation of LGBTQIA+ objectionable I for one consider it good. things like PG-13 is a poor metric for acceptable after all MPAA has more issues than I care to discuss.

No writer should be forced to write something they find as objectional.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

so much good player stuff. You are spoiling us, I like it! We have space (Cosmos mysteries) now time. Maybe they use a re-roll mechanic or haste/slow or something else? either way that would be great.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
CrimsonKnight wrote:

My thoughts:

If paizo never wrote about slavery that would have been prefect but that boat has long since passed... Slavery is an atrocity and paizo's new stance is to be silent about it (no longer mention it in books).
The problem with at least the first two of these approaches is that the issue isn't really "Slavery is a bad thing to have in RPGs and should never be mentioned or should be removed at once", but "Paizo has repeated handled slavery badly, even when trying to clean up its previous bad handling of slavery."

the reason why I said "boat has long since passed" is that opportunity is passed. I wasn't missing the idea of my chaotic good champion fighting to free slaves in published adventures but it is one thing to just not bring up slavery and another to make a policy to never.

thejeff wrote:

If we could trust Paizo to be able to handle it well enough to clean it up with satisfying in world narrative, then we could trust them to handle it well enough to keep using it. The approach they're taking is unsatisfying. I agree. But it's basically them saying "We're going to drop this because we keep screwing it up and we've come to realize we can't handle it well." Which might not be great, but it's far better than a clumsy AP that keeps the focus on how badly they're handling it for years.

They basically tried that on a smaller scale in Absalom - with a PFS event that led to ending slavery there. It got mixed reviews, from what I can tell. And after that, the Absalom lore book still had a lot of not great references to the aftermath.

Maybe...

Then don't publish anything about it until they can get it right. hold on to some of these sensitive topics till they can be explored PROPERLY in the future. where as the responce to the letter makes it clear they are implementing a policy of silence including to the future.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

My thoughts:
If paizo never wrote about slavery that would have been prefect but that boat has long since passed. Golarion is their world and with a stroke of a pen remove it for the game. there are some ways to do this in my opinion some are better than others. Slavery is an atrocity and paizo's new stance is to be silent about it (no longer mention it in books).

“Silence in the face of atrocity is not neutrality; silence in the face of atrocity is acquiescence.”
— Samantha Power

the best is to end it in Golarion my ideas best to worst are:
1) An AP where the players work along side with one or more agencies (bellflower network, firebrands, etc.) to put an end to slavery. paizo makes money with this. (this AP should have a content disclaimer)
2) paizo give a lore reason for this such as those agencies actually succeed and move to fighting tyranny, disband, etc.
3) an errata (in my opinion not very satisfying)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

for the Undead Master archetype what sort of prerequisites other than the usual?
for the undead companions: are there ranged options (like skeleton archer) mount options (skeletal horse/Pegasus flight at high level obviously) or like the inventor/summoner how they "build" design their companion or undead version of animal companions?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Cyouni wrote:
CrimsonKnight wrote:

Scaling DC assumes maximum resources applied to all skills/checks even though that isn't given in the game.

I don't agree. Let's say you want to hit on a 10. In order to do that at level 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, what do we need?

Level 1: DC 15, or +5. Since we can only have trained, that's a 14 in the stat required.
Level 4: DC 19, or +9. For trained, that's a 16 required, or a 14 with a +1 item. For expert, that's a 12 required, or a 10 with +1 item.
Level 8, DC 24, or +14. From here on out, we can assume a +1 item since those are level 4-5. Trained needs 16 in stat, expert needs 12 in stat, master needs 8.
Level 12, DC 30, or +20. As +2 items start at level 9, we'll assume them here. Trained needs 18, Expert needs 14, Master needs 10.
Level 16, DC 35, or +25. Trained needs 20, Expert 16, Master 12, Legendary 8.
Level 20, DC 40, +30. Trained needs 22, Expert needs 18, Master 14, Legendary 10. Note that we can also have a +3 item at this point, decreasing stat required by 2.

So really, you can hit the DC over half the time with a 14-16 and Expert, as long as the item from a few levels back is there. If you're fully invested, by higher levels you'll easily have a +5 on the required DC, even if it's equal level to you.

relevant stat at 14 and only remained trained in that skill Since we are only using trained which is the cap for most character skills (not a hard cap just a practical cap).

Level 1: DC 15, with a character bonus of +5. , that's a 14 in the stat required. (agreed), success on 10+
Level 4: DC 19, with a character bonus of +8(possibly +9). For trained, that +1 item. we can't guaranty a plus 1 item on all skills, success on 11(10)+
Level 8, DC 24, with a character bonus of +12(possibly +13). For trained, that +1 item. we can't guaranty a plus 1 item on all skills, success on 12(11)+
Level 12, DC 30, with a character bonus of +16(possibly +18) now with +2 items possible, success on 14(12)+
Level 16, DC 35, with a character bonus of +20(possibly +22), success on 15(13)+
Level 20, DC 40, with a character bonus of +24(possibly +26), haven't seen many plus 3 skill items , success on 16(14)+


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Scaling DC assumes maximum resources applied to all skills/checks even though that isn't given in the game.
Paizo chose points at which to step back the table so that if you did put every possible advancement into a skill your % chance of success against your level of a DC would increase as your level rose. to succeed at a DC for your level at level 1 would be 50% reduces to only 25% at level 20 if you didn't focus into it most characters can only focus on 3 skills max and 1 only if all the party has to do the get from point a to point b skills (acrobatics and athletics)

resistance items with out a counter
+ to ac is countered by + to hit
you have items that have increase to saves without a opposite like spell penetration

no plus to hit for spells
expendable resource & less accurate


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Norade wrote:

If you could get a single book containing, 2 new classes, several archetypes, a dozen or so new spells and a similar number of items, and some setting details published what sorts of classes and spells would you pick?

My book would be based around the mental stats for martials and tactical synergy.

classes:
Strategist/tactician: depending on build can boost damage, defense, intuitive order/speed. sacrificing actions to act out of turn or giving them to party members.
Sapper: a half caster with debuff abilities
archetypes:
War mage
avenger- similar to barbarian features but with alignment/(positive or negative damage)

Feats
physiology- medicine and its actions become int-based instead of wis
lore master- recall knowledge (knowing their anatomy) to do bonus percussion damage i.e. punching the liver

spells:
Create snare- creates a snare at an unoccupied square for 1 min
walls and barricades to funnel enemies

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
This was a local convention so desperate for programming that they were willing to waive registration costs for our GMs. They got free badges if they GMed. The convention was downtown, so our GMs either carpooled or bused there each day, no hotel room needed. That meant they just had to pay for meals, parking or bus fare. This made it the perfect circumstances for us to recruit players to become nascent GMs.

it is great to have additional perks for GMing like free admission. The local conventions I saw (pre covid) in my home area had $100 was the basic price no GM discounts the limiting factor was the the number of physical tables and space available. All submissions to GM must be received by almost 2 months ahead of time to be considered for inclusion in the con. I think we have very different experiences.

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
This is why I want the ACP system to continue... Boons are a tremendous motivator for the casual or nascent GM. That said, I am totally happy that Starfinder now has 34 legal races without ACP, and hope to see PF2 just legalize kitsune and tengus and iruxi. Having some races with furry appeal that players can just play would be good.

I/we are trying to get legal races without ACP or at least reduced cost and we hope to see PF2 make available kitsune and tengus and iruxi. maybe make more of the older races free or some cool new ones available. we are using our imagination not a special effects budget. lets take the lessons learned starfinder cantina bring it to pathfinder and improve it more. at the rate we are going PF2 will end/PF3 before we get to 20 legal races without ACP. Now with covid the available tables has decreased like if I was in my home area I could not run a game at my FLGS.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Magical Mu wrote:

Lack of experience can alter how you comprehend data, and first impressions have a ton of impact on what you see as norms. Before nuars were legalized for everyone, there was a local convention that needed GMs. So I convinced half our players at Dreamers to run quests at that convention to help out, and everyone came home with a nuar. We had a whole herd of nuars running at our Starfinder tables for months...

New players saw them so often, they thought they were always available Starfinder race and were disappointed to discover they were a boon race. I'm just glad that they're available now, because we nuars are awesome.

I'm glad you where able to find those GMs

1. Kobolds and lechy are still an uncommon ancestry but are freely available because they decided to make them so.
2. players saw a cool race "and were disappointed to discover they were a boon race."
3. you are "glad that they're available now, because we nuars are awesome."
Would you say it would be reasonable to say, that if they where available before they saw it they would not be disappointed? would it have been better if they where not disappointed?
Would you begrudge these players for having access to nuars even thou you and others GMed? Would YOU have GMed if nuars where available and not just a Boon? Did nuars becoming available change
Alien Archive wrote:
Nuars are low in number, even in Absalom Station, where the nuar population is concentrated

Do you think that because of the nature of a Con ticket price and possibly a hotel room that the attendees are more likely more dedicated to the games and also more likely to have GMed in the past vs a FLGS? If so, would it be fair to assume that those who have GMed before are more likely to GM again (especially if they had a positive experience) rather than if they never have?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

humanoid animals: humanoid wolf, minotaur
merfolk and other water based
heritages I'd like to see is fey blooded (nymph/dryad, Satyr, "Huldra") and dragon blooded
I would like to see some ancestries that really push the limits. Centaurs, half giant, troll blooded

give the shoony more feats and options

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
GM OfAnything wrote:

Only if they are also aasimar. That way they all go to Heaven.

Why doesn't that sentiment extend to people who want to play in a setting where uncommon ancestries are uncommon?

probably because each player is in control of their character within the rules.

GM OfAnything wrote:
We have a system that lets people play Conrasu or Kitsune if they want it enough to play or GM for it. Why can't we also have a system that keeps those ancestries feeling special to run into?

i don't think I understand, what exactly is that system to be like or function? Limit the player that can run an uncommon ancestry at a time per table? When the players exceed the limit, what then? Kick them out?

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
RexAliquid wrote:
Donald wrote:
Blazej wrote:
If I see a number of leshy characters at my tables then that would tell people that leshy are not that rare or that that is some reason a lot of leshies joined the Society. That is the case for leshies though so I don't have that same disconnect.
Sorry, I don't see how that is a problem. Maybe it's just me but I've never checked out other tables to see what anyone else is playing.
You don't pay attention to what characters other people are playing at your tables? How do you even play the game?

I believe Donald is revering to not having issue with an ancestry. That is their character and their playstyle. And would welcome any to play the game (same or other table) with rather than try to force some kind of rarity ratio.

When book of the dead comes out: Because I would like to play a skeleton they will have the evil tag or the rare tag. Same with lich, etc. undead options will cost a lot of AcP

I would like to be proven wrong but I doubt I will be

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Blazej wrote:
CrimsonKnight wrote:
I repeat a sample size of a party does not represent a population. if Absalom had 10 poppets and 4 of them are in an adventuring party that party in all non-human in a human-dominant setting. Some GMs may find that odd and some would enjoy it

And that is perfectly fine, but in the context of an organized play game, if a new player comes into that group, their thoughts would not be that poppets are extraordinarily rare, but that they fairly common and mundane, at least within the Pathfinder Society. At the very least, it would indicate that a large population of poppets existed within the Society.

The same would go for leshies. If I see a number of leshy characters at tables then that would tell people that leshy are not that rare or that that is some reason a lot of leshies joined the Society. That is the case for leshies though so I don't have that same disconnect.

Again perception vs "reality" I would find it more odd that so many players are taking such a heavy drawback. Weakness to fire unless sealed poppet considering fire is the most common energy type in the game. So I don't really see them getting that popular. the people of this forum can't even be used as a demographic sample even of the total pathfinder community much less the world. single team sample size is too small.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Blake's Tiger wrote:

However, you're misunderstanding the opinion. The opinion is not that these ancestries should not be in the game, but that they shouldn't outnumber humans. The setting is human-dominant, so showing up to a table where everyone is a poppet is not everyone's cup of tea. Again, that's not the reason poppets are set as a participation reward, that's a reason some individual players are fine seeing them as participation rewards.

They are set as participation rewards because they're desirable and will motivate players to GM tables/more tables.

I repeat a sample size of a party does not represent a population. if Absalom had 10 poppets and 4 of them are in an adventuring party that party in all non-human in a human-dominant setting. Some GMs may find that odd and some would enjoy it as far as participation reward why should it be set at almost 80 percent of a year of regular play and multiple other characters to finally have the opportunity to play ONE. I repeat the motivation to GM is highly flawed. If I would ask her(the player who I know that wanted to plat a poppet) to GM the other players would quit the game, she has no incentive to put any actual effort or drive into running the game. So much as GMing for her is like having her teeth pulled. trying to force GMs is bad. I would posit that almost all of us in this forum have done some or are GMing because we are willing to take some of our time to discuss this. many tables have closed due to the pandemic and I want to minimize obstacles to get the players back/new players when more FLGS are more accepting to RPGs. I know You need GMs but you also need players.

Edit: the only problem with bounties is it only gets you through level 1
APs are great if you are a "regular"

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Because we are seeing a player aesthetic along with a game aesthetic one option I think is possible is. an account unlock of an ancestry in addition to character unlock for ancestry. the frequent shopper boons are an example of an account unlock.
This is by no means is a prefect solution but it does help for those who like to play tengus with out having to wait for the powers that control PFS to decide IF they will allow it for free like kobolds.

All of these ancestries DO ALREADY MATCH THE GAME AESTETIC because if they didn't they wouldn't be in a book.

what would be a dream is if each player got ONE free account ancestry unlock and start building up ACP for the others

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
SuperBidi wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


I'm curious what sort of response would be generated if someone announced they were grinding ACP for a Rare Ancestry and running the first twelve bounties non-stop to reach that goal.

Not because they wanted to have fun doing it, but because they're trying to build-up the NFT that is ACP.

I suspect there would be a huge outcry of how that's 'not in the spirit of promoting fun play'.

Yet, that appears to be a viable route given current costs...

The main goal of repeatable content is to be grinded... Whatever your goal: XP, gold or AcP, you don't repeat the same adventure if you are not somehow grinding.

The only sad thing would be if this player didn't got any pleasure in doing so (or were affecting the other's pleasure).

considering bounties are reduced rewards you would need to repeat those 12 multiple times just with different characters

SuperBidi wrote:
CrimsonKnight wrote:

GMing for AcP is as bad as Playing for AcP

so phrasing like so "just GM a little" results in GMing for AcP.

GMing for AcP is bad. But being rewarded for GMing is great. Sometimes, getting a small reward is just what is needed to feel taken into consideration.

Now, GMs are players, I 100% agree with that. But they are also working way more for the game to happen, and I think it's nice when the work done is recognized positively.

absolutely I love the bonus when I can GM I don't want it to feel or be necessary is the point.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
SuperBidi wrote:

I didn't know Ancestries were used as incentive for GMing. I must admit, as a 50/50 player/Gm, I'm quite fond of bringing my Fleshwarp to a game just because it feels a bit exclusive. So, it looks like it works.

Anyway, if it's the case, then there's no way Paizo will change the values to access Ancestries, especially the most desirable ones, unless there are so much more GMs that there's no more need for incentive.

If I just look at my home area (When I can get back) there are no FLGS in that area with RPG tables. It doesn't matter what incentive is used GMing at a FLGS is impossible. I dislike the back in my day statement but players became GMs with out incentive. I see that putting an incentive helps a player cross the hurtle if they where already leaning in that direction.

the gming to desire to GM right now may lead to false data. when the only data point available is tables being played.
to increase the participation (GMing) through incentives you can either increase incentives or discourage non-participation (players)

GMing for AcP is as bad as Playing for AcP

so phrasing like so "just GM a little" results in GMing for AcP.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

Why do we see making a character from the available races as a chore? Why do we brand them as 'grinding' characters? I recognize that some of the newer ancestries allow different kinds of stories, but there is an amazing diversity in the kinds of stories you can tell with the older ones.

My favorite character in PF2 is my gnomish lawyer, Pip. I love that she is intrepid and cares about making the world a better place and that she is constantly working on representing the downtrodden. She has offered more than once to represent the cases of captured villains so that they can get a fair trial.

My favorite character is a Half-elf draconic sorcerer trying to reach the level to transform into a dragon also outside of society seeks renew the fading draconic bloodline in her family. this is why she is a #5 free to make and play. There is only one of that character if I made another one of her the copy wouldn't be special and a third would just be a chore to play. I still have many #5 and have not had to use a #6 yet but as more and more of each new book is locked away the ratio of #4 to #5 is increasing and thus less valuable I might have to dip into #6.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Tomppa wrote:
Getting AcP takes time, but it's rare that you 'grind AcP by spending time'. Rather, AcP is something that accumulates "naturally" as you engage in the stories and play with other people. You don't sign up for a game with the thought that "Oh, I gotta sit through another 4 hours RPG just to get another 4 points" - you sign up for the game because you want to play the game and enjoy the story. OR, if you don't like playing the game and if you don't enjoy...

any method of grinding AcP is suboptimal.

step one of character creation create a CHARACTER CONCEPT
the character concepts I have come in a few categories
1. not theme appropriate (stored for other RPGs)
2. no sign on it being pathfinder compatible (centaur ranger, dragon or half dragon, etc)
3. waiting for book publishing (skeleton knight paladin, construct psychic)
4. concepts that require ACP
5. concepts that don't or low AcP
6. just another X (disposable human fighter #3 or grind characters)
some problems are there are a lot more in #4 than in #5

1. for someone brand new they have zero ACP
2. the rate of AcP acquired for taking #4 or #5 through their career levels 1-5 or 7 is not enough for another #4 (even with prefect play, no character death, no other AcP spent) any deficit in points must be gained with a #5 or #6
3. #6 concepts are not fun and to play one is a chore
4. another way to grind AcP is to GM

the system above requires grinding AcP. Grinding is not a bug in the system it is what the system was intended for.

I love RPGs they where a part of my life since I was young. I can only do it casually right now. When PF1 society was around I didn't even bother because with all the barriers it wasn't worth the investment in time to play.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

Crimson, you said something that is very interesting: you don't want to punish those with obligations with more and more barriers. That's fair. But you have to realize that just about every GM also has other obligations that they are balancing against GM prep time. I work, am a parent, and freelance as a game writer. I usually prep somewhere between 5-8 hours for every new four game I GM. If you don't incentivize GMing, most GMs will carve less time out of their busy schedules to GM.

It's not about not wanting players to get toys. It's about wanting tables to happen so that players can play.

Hmm

Yes I understand that. I'm on the road a lot. First I warhorn into a group failing that. I contact a FLGS where ever I'm stationed at the time to see if there is a table to try to GM sometimes with a donation to the FLGS. the reason why I'm player first is it is hard to set up a table unless there already is a pathfinder demand in the area. some FLGS are right now no RPG and only games you don't open your mouth for like MTG.

there is nothing wrong with being 1 percent it allows you choice as you said you can do 2 rare ancestries but choose not to. you also don't complain you doing have anything to spend it on. which is why more thing are gated off so there are more things to buy. if there are those who do complain
those who are in the bottom 10% want to game but unlikely or can't do so are daunted looking at a sprite as a serous investment like a car.
but as Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich said
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:
I can say with full honesty, if there is a player whose decision to play is based solely on whether or not they can play a specific ancestry, I am very unlikely to desire to play with that player. This is because the assumption is that said player doesn't seem to have any interest in the game itself, just the ancestry.

if there is a GM whose decision to GM is based solely on acquiring specific ancestry, I am very unlikely to desire to play with that GM. This is because the assumption is that said GM doesn't seem to have any interest in the reward and not GMing/making a fun game.

You by your statement above show you are focused on GMing and the AcP is a nice bonus

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


'cavernshark' wrote:
Side note: I've read your posts on low-level play and simply don't share your experiences or understand your anxiety around playing or GMing low level tables.

My experience with GMing PF2 has been near total TPK in two tables of #1-01 at GenCon launch with characters that appeared to be reasonably 'solid' and players that were fun to role-play with -- until the dice went to 'SCREW YOU MODE' with nearly impossible to hit DC numbers for L1 starting characters.

I'm NOT a 'killer' GM.

I don't have a tally board where I gleefully put 'kill' stickers any time a character outright gets murdered at my tables then chortle maniacally.

I don't like the idea of having to try to 'nerf' every scenario and pray someone who HAS played it doesn't 'catch on' and Report Me for Cheating.

I don't find it fun to put the players at my table under the same level of stress I feel.

That is from the GM side.

From the player side, games really go downhill fast and not in an enjoyable fashion when it feels like there's nearly no chance of success and one is hoping to hit a fifteen percent narrow range band at the top of the die while ALSO avoiding the lowest five percent (plus whatever percentage would make a roll into a critical failure by missing a target number by 10 or more).

it is not cheating for monsters and enemies to do some dumb tactics. "woops he provoked an attack of opportunity"

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

Crimson, there were some parts of your post that I could not parse, but for the most part, I think that I get what you're saying.

Why worry about the 1%?

I'm not sure that I agree with you that we're talking about 1% when we're generally talking about the person who GMs each week at their FLGS, but I'll go with it.

This is a fair question, and here's my answer. We need to worry about them because they make games happen at conventions. There is a reason why GenCon offered the best boons to its PF1 GMs who would GM the entire convention. That was because otherwise, they would not get enough GMs, and they would have to turn players away.

If tables don't happen, then there are fewer places for players to play the character of their dreams. I not only want players to play the character that they want to play, I want them to be able to play, period.

As I said, this is all a balancing act.
Hmm

we are talking about different things as far as 1%. a FLGS GM usually serves 4-6 people at a table once a week GMs are about 10-20 percent of the community, 20 percent is a lot more than one percent I met a retired couple at dragon con when pf2 started and they drive con to con GMing (something that is loved by cons). To make things more difficult for the masses for their sake of the few is to put the cart before the horses. I don't want them hurt but I don't thing it is right to punish those with obligations with more and more barriers.

I doubt many FLGS GMs mind players having a bit of fun too with their toys. If I had different life circumstances I would love to GM at cons but that is not my life.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
zeonsghost wrote:

I think in the case of the current 160 AcP options, many of them are mechanically unique in some ways. Pixies being tiny, the 4 constructs having unique rules, Beastkin kind of just changing how a character works, etc. I think 160 is probably a good number so that a certain amount of system mastery is earned, which benefits both players and GMs in the timeframe we have for scenarios.

wile I usually agree with you 160 ACP can easily be 180 to 200 hour. that is more than a semester's worth of contact hours for a full time student in the US. learning how to play a game is not like a full time course load. what about the Shisk Ancestry is so difficult?

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Wile I seriously doubt that free all ancestries will be a thing:

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

One of my issues is that no matter what price tag we set, the rarest and most expensive races will always be seen as desirable, because its human nature to hanker after what we cannot have. I expected to see a lot more goblins in Organized Play when they became common, and instead I see far more dwarves and elves. Even though the race has awesome and weird ancestry feats and is a ton of fun!

as well as some of the most powerful feats. So even free players still elect to go to the standbys. for the tone that is so sacred to some of these people.

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

All in all, I like ACP, and don't want to toss a system out that has been working. On the other hand, I do wonder if the prices are too steep for many options. Still, the system needs some things with steep prices, or the most hard-core GMs will complain that they have nowhere to spend their ACP.

I'd like to find a way to incentivize players by putting more options in easy reach, while still incentivizing the hard core GMs who make the games happen. It's not an easy balancing act, but that doesn't mean that we could not come up with some workable answers in this discussion.

Hard-core GMs are vital but only account for a small percentage of the GMs and even less of society total player base. Do you put your focus on satisfying the 1 percent or the 99 percent. I'm not saying 99 percent want it to be zero but as more options are becoming ACP locked such as archetypes and many FLGS games are on hiatus (where many games happen) and some con participation is also decreased due to the pandemic the flow of points has likely dwindled. The desire to see a decrease in prices is desired. There are more players and GMs at the bottom of the pyramid than at the top.

There are those who think things are prefect and others who find any change to the status quo undesirable. Even if I had 1 million ACP I would not begrudge someone from what they want desiring anything to be more expensive or things to spend it on but I would still fight to see them have the character of their dreams.

at first we had the pathfinder boons locked behind ACP
then Ancestries and Heritage was locked behind ACP
then archetypes and items was locked behind ACP
What is next?
classes and feats?

it is not that these things are overpowered broken but they are locked so these hard-core GMs wont complain that they have nowhere to spend their ACP.

with more things to spend ACP on I'd love to see things at 40/80 as that would reduce the need for unwanted characters and would make things more available to all players
current ancestries/Heritage at 160:
Shoony Ancestry
Android Ancestry
Beastkin Heritage
Fleshwarp Ancestry
Sprite Ancestry
Strix Ancestry
Anadi Ancestry
Conrasu Ancestry
Goloma Ancestry
Shisk Ancestry
Poppet Ancestry
Automaton Ancestry
The Shoony have the least options for all the published Ancestries and most of their options are weak.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Blake's Tiger wrote:

So forget anything any of us not-Organized-Play-administrators have said about why we, individually, think there should be a bell curve spread of Common, Uncommon, and Rare races. Arguing with any of us about aesthetic serves no purpose other than raising blood pressures. Just ignore posts bringing up that as a rationale. The key issue is incentivizing GMs. If you want them free, they're no longer an incentive, so you need to propose an alternative that does not add power to a character as an incentivizing reward to entice people to GM more.

If you don't, then what you're asking is both "Give me all the ancestries for free" and "Think up a new way to incentivize GMs."

just off the top of my head

1.there are many unlocks that are not ancestries heck we now have more equipment unlocks and archetype unlocks. this is without increasing the flow of ACP to GMs
2. things like vanities
3. have points that are GM only. (gm a game get ACP and GMP and put some nifty things there.
4. A special discord sever for 3+ star or planet
5. discount on adventure products

Blake's Tiger wrote:

I don't mind the current AcP costs because I think I understand their pricing system--not because I'm overflowing with AcP; I'm primarily PbP so accrual is slow--but if they adjusted, maybe spreading the races out over more layers (20, 40, 60, 80, 120, 160, 200).

I will note that people keep pointing at the 160 AcP ancestries as how big the problem is, but those are the equivalent of charity auction boons of old, the things only a few people had. Now everyone can.

an adjustment is what Mark is asking for.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
It sets the tone and aesthetic for the campaign, more or less.

how does a party of an orc, a catfolk, a tengu, and a kitsune change the tone from a party of a half-orc, a goblin, an elf, and a dwarf?

If so why is it seen as irreconcilable with the greater campaign or undesirable?

So what is "wrong" or with stories with in that campaign with "different" characters after all we are encouraged to play OUR characters and not just the iconics?

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

honestly I don't understand the whole issue with common/uncommon/rare and why it should limit player choice

(the numbers are random)
1. the composition of a area does not represent the composition of a world
This is explained in the regional rarities
2. the composition of a organization(pathfinder lodge) does not represent the composition of an area
I'm going to orcs for this example but the orc population might be over represented in fighting professions like pathfinders (such as 2-5% of the population of a city but might occupy 10% of the guards, soldiers, and pathfinders)
3. the composition of a party does not represent the composition of an organization(pathfinder lodge) in this hypothetical it would not be uncommon for them to form all orc/mostly orc parties.

As wonderful of a person HMM is her comment of the "weird stuff" as well as other people's sentiment displayed. these "weird stuff" characters might find comradery in being the oddballs and form groups to do things together.
None of these things change the composition of the world or the lodge. if there is a party of sprites it doesn't mean that sprites are common it just mean they grouped up to maximize their racial advantages or are sick of almost being stepped on by their allies.

What I find odd is having to make another character to unlock something so you can play what you want. you wouldn't be as invested in that character because that is not what you wanted to play. With the decreased investment you (unconsciously) bring down the mood of the table making the experience for all worse (which I think is a greater risk). In my opinion (which on one cares about) it is better to get into your account and say I need to make a new character because of lack of high level content or the GM is going back to levels 1-4, I'll buy x,y,z instead of I'll make a throwaway character to eventually get x and maybe someday y and z. This is not even factoring the time investment.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:
All of my previous points being said, I'm full in favor of an AcP/Boon gifting system.

Me too. I have more ACP than I need... I would love to be able to surprise helpful players with something that they really wanted.

Hmm

Me too but I'm worried that ACP could be traded for money. Naw it is not like some GMs with low funds and ACP to burn wouldn't be tempted with a little bit of money. it is not like there is gold farming or power leveling in video games to skip part of the game they payed for to get to the content they want. granted there won't be buyers.

you say kobold I say mini-dragon. They are one of my favorites .

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Rysky wrote:

I’m not dismissing your complaints, I’m disagreeing with your push to have the whole campaign system completely changed to suit you, when that would affect everyone as well, so that has to be taken into consideration.

And you do have that “luxury” actually, you can play online. You not wanting to play online though is your choice.

Also the attempt at moralizing other posters have done on your side of the argument hasn’t done it any favors.

Really online. Text pbp sure most of the time. Even that can be difficult when you work/live in a shielded dead zone where your internet activity is monitored. Not everyone has reliable internet access all the time. So when someone says online is not a possibility it isn't. Before you ask I can't tell you why. There are a lot of places in America and around the world with limited to no internet.

*

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
I wouldn’t have much better luck with PFS if that was the case.

that is why I might have to drive a couple of hours to have an open session. That is why it comes off as insensitive (unintentionally I'm sure) with the suggestion of "just do a home style game". No everyone has that luxury. So society and adventures' league (yuck 5e) are all I have as choices. During the pandemic things just got worse. Because I can't reliably do a session or gm every week I'm looking at 1-2 Years to make one character. So please have a shred of compassion don't dismiss others problems. "Home" style games is not the silver bullet some of you think it is.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Donald wrote:

I was thinking Kitsune, Tengu, and Anadi, all tied to specific real world cultures.

And earlier in the post you quoted I spoke against comparing Paizo's "being unwelcomed" to not wanting to play due to arbitrary restrictions.

The word poppet is an older spelling of puppet, from Middle English popet, meaning a small child or a doll. currently the word is used for a tool in sympathetic magic.

the origins come from the imaginations of children around the world as a trope it is heavily used but a few stories pop up in my head

Russian fairy tail. Vasilisa the Beautiful overcoming baba yaga and her (evil)step family with her animated doll's help.(who was final gift from her dying mother and my belief as the origin on the helpful poppet feat) as well as many other stories.

Italian fairy tail: pinocchio

Americana cursed dolls and Raggedy Ann (1917)

Japanese folklore: in the 10th century have tsukumogami, which are things like tools and dolls that have been used so long that they have come to life on their hundredth birthday.

for you Tolkien worshipers: J. R. R. Tolkien's children's book Roverandom tells about a small toy dog, which used to be a real dog before a sorcerer cursed him. His quest to regain his dogginess takes him under the sea and up to the moon.

depending on where you draw the line between golems and poppet

Polish 16th century, homunculus.

many more examples throughout time and around the world

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Rysky wrote:

I think the main disconnect here is, the claim that people don’t know each other/don’t have time/schedule for a campaign. While knowing people and having time/schedule for a campaign.

A “home” campaign doesn’t have to be played at a home, you can play it in the FLGS or wherever. PFS is a specialized campaign that you’re [general] choosing to play over other types of campaigns. If everyone in your group want to play the locked options without unlocking them just play a “home” campaign. If you’re [singular] the only one wanting to do that then that’s something to take into account, that the group prefers the rules and restrictions of this particular campaign. Conrasu and Poppets have a cost to play in PFS. They might be completely banned in a home campaign.

try doing a "home" campaign not online and your "home" is a different state every few weeks.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:
CrimsonKnight wrote:
I may be unique in saying this but I find poppets, automatons, and sprites more fitting companions or heroes than goblins. even if we somehow remove the ACP requirements it is not going to change anyone's desire to play something uncommon or rare, they will just be more free to do so. We are just trying to increase freedom of choice by reducing cost.

I don't mean this maliciously, if you want freedom of choice, play a home game. The reasoning for the restrictions are not some arbitrary whim. The restrictions are placed with deliberation and intention. If you disagree (*shrug*) sorry. It happens.

I have disagreed and do disagree with a number of things the Org play and Paizo chooses. But it is their game, not mine. I merely appreciate the opportunity to not have to create my own story and to have a wealth of opportunities to play with the same characters wherever I travel to. Such benefits will always come with drawbacks.

I respect that but all I do see is an arbitrary whim because I really don't see the reason. what I see is something with a virtually infinite supply having a cost.

for me society means having people to game with where ever I find myself, mostly, in other countries it is more hit or miss but relatively easy in the states(home games are a little hard when you are not in your home area for much of the year because of work). I relished GMing home games when I could. I built worlds: complex societies, cultures. cities, infrastructure, politics, intrigue, family trees. then life happens going place to place from client to client never having time to build a table of friends. it is because I searched for people to game with wanting desperately to join or host that makes me hurt to tell someone NO. I know I can't world build and many other things in society, it is their world. I am unlikely to change anything but I want to try to improve my and those I know experiences. In society a couple hour drive and a reservation and I'm in or hosting a PUG usually at a FLGS.

Yea there is drawbacks but it doesn't mean you can't want it to get better.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Watery Soup wrote:

They're perfectly fine ancestries for play in general, just not for an open-style play format where anyone can show up and anyone can GM.

That's why they're locked behind AcP. It assures the GM that the player has played a certain amount.

OK, if ACP is used to gage player experience then would you say it is acceptable for ACP costs to instead of a character unlock to change to a player unlock. (pay for orc once and you unlock forever you can make as many orcs as you want. now there are player unlocks for equipment availability) or even 40 ACP you unlock all uncommon ancestries and 80 ACP you unlock all rare ancestries (must unlock uncommon first)

paizo did a great job in balancing ancestries. even most rare ancestries are weaker than the uncommon or common ones looking at you goblin and hobgoblin.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Blazej wrote:
Now what I was referring to was the idea that "one free rare ancestry" being an issue with character death because a brand new player would be less familiar with the Pathfinder Society systems and likely unable to fix that character death. I would suggest that someone who has played through two character careers will be far more familiar with those systems and would be able to resolve a character death within Society (or would otherwise be far more familiar with the risks they are taking).

first time in society is always going to be first time in society, whether common ancestry or rare ancestry the first death you are unlike to know what to do. the point is the more you invest in a character the more devastated you would be at character death if you spent 0 points into a character it may still hurt but if you spent everything you had and lost that it would be more painful. to get one rare character you may have resigned yourself to putting multiple characters into the trash can or stored in some folder somewhere just to get enough points if that character's sole purpose you wouldn't dream of raising them.

by reducing/removing ACP costs for ancestries it frees players to spend those valuable points on thing like raising characters and making their characters unique and special.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Blazej wrote:
I do feel empathetic toward anyone who walks away because Pathfinder Society's rules are so restrictive to remove any character they want to play. However the composition of the party is going to do a lot to set the tone for a game. I would be very content to run for a group of players playing poppets, automatons, and sprites, but seeing less common ancestries at the forefront of each game will change how the game feels than if it were a number of ancestries from the Core Rulebook.

I may be unique in saying this but I find poppets, automatons, and sprites more fitting companions or heroes than goblins. even if we somehow remove the ACP requirements it is not going to change anyone's desire to play something uncommon or rare, they will just be more free to do so. We are just trying to increase freedom of choice by reducing cost.

Blazej wrote:

Different doesn't mean this is bad, but I think it is fair for Pathfinder Society to have a goal for setting a tone for the campaign. For both PFS and any GM, I do think that they can reasonably set rules that prohibit or just restrict the options people have access in order to attempt to maintain a feeling for the game.

That said, I would be curious to exploring if there if a better option exists for causing this scarcity than what exists now. I don't think removing all restrictions is a great option and I worry that having one free ancestry on sign up would cause character death to feel worse (even more than if you had to spend points on it).

I would have to disagree if you spend 10 months investment go though 2 characters' active carriers and anticipation in playing a character the one you want: their/your hopes and dreams, backstory, outfit, drawing them, creating a custom 3d model/mini, what ever else is part of your character creation process you will have more invested into them and feel worse at character death.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
SuperBidi wrote:
Personally, I'm among those who like when the party is not looking like a circus. At the end of PF1, in my gaming group, we were having this joke: How do you recognize a PFS party? There's no core races in there.

easy PFS parties come in all shapes, sizes, and ancestries

SuperBidi wrote:
So I like the AcP system. When someone brings an Uncommon race, it's the only one in the party. So it feels like actually Uncommon, and not like "another tiefling". And when you bring a Rare race, you're kind of the only one in your gaming group to play such a character. I like that, it makes the character more important and it keeps the verisimilitude of the world.

the AcP system does not prevent an all tiefling party, an all kitsune party, an all pixie party it just makes a hurtle to making your tiefling, kitsune, or pixie.

SuperBidi wrote:
And "new" players who are bored to play humans, dwarves and elves are not "new" players. They have experience and as such they can GM. The real new players are certainly happy to play in a world where the races around the table are famous enough so they can recognize them. At least, they are not bored with the races available.

Like you are the arbitrator of what a new player is and what they want. 1. I never said bored. 2. Being in both Anime and role playing do you know how many want their first character to be a kitsune(or other Japanese folk lore creature)? 3. yea like kitsune, animated puppets, FAIRIES, golems, animal people, etc. aren't famous.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

let's look at something simple
premise 1 the reason one would want to play a non-standard race is because they believe they would have more fun that way
premise 2 this being a cooperative game is not a net 0
premise 3 this being a cooperative game fun is a desired outcome
premise 4 there are new people that have not played
premise 5 people tend to want to maximize their fun
premise 6 there is no hidden finite number of any ancestry thus no scarcity.

what is the cost of the status quo
for paizo: nothing
for new players: less options , less variety of characters. potentially less fun, and potentially feeling rejected
for veteran players: having to save up longer for a fun new character idea to no cost because they get plenty to be happy. difficulty bringing friends who are casuals or new players, less variety of characters.
for GMs: having to save up longer for a fun new character idea to no cost because they get plenty to be happy difficulty bringing friends who are casuals or new players, less variety of characters.

what is gained from the status quo
for paizo: nothing
for new players: nothing
for veteran players: more tolkienesque+ environment if that is what they want(elf, human, dwarf, halflings)
for GMs: more tolkienesque+ environment if that is what they want(elf, human, dwarf, halflings) more incentive to GM

what is the cost of no ACP for ancestry
for paizo: none
for new players: none
for veteran players: you might be fighting along side something different/interesting
for GMs: your monsters might have fighting something different/interesting, more diverse characters

what is gained from no ACP for ancestry
for paizo: if new players more money
for new players: more fun and free to choose the ancestry they want
for veteran players: more fun and free to choose the ancestry they want, might get to fighting along side something different/interesting more often
for GMs: more diverse characters potentially more groups to GM for

*

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Tomppa wrote:

The player that was driven away because they couldn't play a poppet from the get-go? The poppet wasn't even society legal a week ago, and the book was published just a few weeks ago. If we hadn't gotten the sanctioning document for the Grand Bazaar yet and didn't know poppet would be locked behind 160acp, would the player had played something else while waiting for sanctioning, or declined to play?

declined to play

Tomppa wrote:

If we didn't get a poppet -at all- in the grand bazaar, would the player had declined to play because the only concept they wanted to do is a doll/toy and 2e had no such options available?

the sprite was an option but it runs into an identical problem

Tomppa wrote:

If nobody told them about the existence of the poppet, had they not played 2e at all?

Now that they can't play a poppet immediately and declined to play 2e, what will they do? Play 5e? That doesn't have a poppet either.

No. She plays cute, 5e has nothing cute. pathfinder has some cute options so she was going to give it a try. I've gotten her to play Anime-based and superhero games because both are not allergic to cute. (low demand to do not in-person)

A Welcoming Environment
Core Rulebook page 485 wrote:


Gaming is for everyone. Never let those acting in bad faith undermine your game or exclude other players. Your efforts are part of the long-term process of making games and game culture welcoming to all.
Blake's Tiger wrote:
...it minimizes very real issues.

I had no idea, what very real issues is artificially limiting choice though a restrictive social credit system expectably things that are fundamental to play? hunger? poverty? No unless I'm mistaken it is a lack of GMs. fine incentivize them. give them bonuses don't take away from others. P.S. GMing is fun, I love hamming up the description of the the environment and creatures.

Blake's Tiger wrote:


The role of Game Master comes with the responsibility of ensuring you and the rest of the players have a rewarding, fun time during the game.

is exactly what I'm advocating for. it is not content that ACP is guarding from. some people don't find human, elf, dwarf fun. some of us have been playing RPGs for years and we are used to these options. New options exist and we shouldn't exclude others from partaking in them or be forced to play the old way to get to play what they want. I too would like to play a centaur but that is not an option. We restrict play in ways that is not conductive to the overall enjoyment of the game and exclude stories from the table especially having to be forced to play a character you don't want to play for almost a year.

*

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber

I understand using ACP for boons that actually give an advantage but locking away the basic elements of a character just reeks of gatekeeping. (ACP is a way of saying "you can't play that, you haven't been a fan/player in this system for X number of years.")

Granted it is better than before.

Paizo is trying to make a welcome and accepting environment. I know some potential players who have been barred by ACP. The latest one was because of the barrier of entry to play (she wanted to play a poppet) and the group not wanting to do non sactioned games and miss out on potential ACP. APs are a long commitment.

No part of character identity (ancestry, background, class) should be locked behind ACP especially because you can only get it through play with a character thus needing it.

They could try GMing. First time GMing is daunting, even more so if you never played.

As a GM and a player we need to do better than this. We need to stop pushing good people away.

1 to 50 of 220 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>