Mark Seifter wrote:
I guess I read what you said wrong, it sounded like you were stating the probability of my shot was dependant on his.On reread I see that it was me reading it incorrectly, and hats off for posting the Wiki link. I was trolling a bit there and got excited that I had ya. Thanks for being gracious about it.
It's not our fault that this is the manner in which they are releasing information. If I want to respond in a negative manner because they are not supplying us with sufficient information i should be free to do so. Nearly everything else I've heard about P2.0 has seemed rather stupid to be frank. I feel this is the appropriate place to share these concerns. It is a public forum after all.
Mark Seifter wrote:
That's not how statistics work. You can't apply the long run average to a single instance in that manner.That's like saying since 25% of eggs have salmonella you can't ever safely make a 4 egg omelette.
Mark Seifter wrote:
What you say makes sense since we are talking attacks and saving throws. I think most people view skills differently, which is why using the same math doesn't work. (At least to a layman)
Btw he didn't say they aren't taking away our D20's
You think maybe they aren't using a d20 for skill checks anymore? That's the only way this math works out. D6 + skill score would explain why there is this spread of 5 from untrained to legendary.
How in the world can you make goblins core? They are an evil race that are generally killed on sight. Now I'm supposed to believe that they are tolerated in cities? Why on earth would that happen?
This is precisely the kind of bull crap I don't want in my games.
I agree, old ads for pathfinder stated that not only is 3.5 alive its Thriving over at Pathfinder. I don't want a new system. I liked 3E, which is why I jumped ship when 4E came out. Now they are saying buy our new system. No, i like Pathfinder the way it is. if I wanted a new system I wouldn't have bought Pathfinder in the first place.
Any opinion on this Erik Mona? How are we not supposed to feel left out in the cold when you are CHANGING the game we love?
Brother Fen wrote:
I agree, I've spent ENTIRELY too much on books to switch systems. I like pathfinder, not interested in a "streamlined" game. IF I was I would have tried out 5th edition already.
The third book is great IMO. Sanderson has said that he isn't looking to work with the level of realism/cynicism that GRRM does. He want's a lighter fantasy read. I've read all 3 when they came out, and been happy with the $ I've spent. I will agree the first book is a bit of a slog as he does SOOOOO much worldbuilding, but it pays off. He wanted to make something enormous and epic, and bring his own flavor of magic system/worldbuilding to it.
I can't wait for the next one.
Thanks for the info, I'll keep this in mind for when I GM.
This falls into the "PFS rules are applied differently table to table" category. The tables I have played at all over western Washington this is a common threat. If your character is declared evil by the GM they are ineligible to be played again. This keeps newbies who like to murder hobo in line, and the common understanding is that the GM gets to make that call.This was a Venture Lieutenant's table I was playing at, so for what it's worth sometimes the GM is overly strict with interpreting "evil" acts. (His argument is that one action would cause an alignment shift)
Like I've said I have no problem with the way things went down. I was having a lot of fun playing an a#~&&!& and wen't a little too far.
I've had to pay for an atonement spell with one of my PC's. The character I was playing was petty, vengeful, underhanded, & bloodthirsty. Neutral, but just short of neutral evil. This is the kind of character I wanted to play, and I should accept the consequences of my actions.
Long story cut very short, I was playing 8-02: Ward Asunder. We entered their temple, and during a particularly hard fight Davryk (My character) threatened an opponent with beheading if he targeted him with Scorching Ray again. Well after the fight but before we left initiative my character walked over and cut his head in half. (didn't check to see if he was alive or not)
At the time it felt justified for the character, but that is an evil act. The combat is over, I don't have to walk over there and behead someone to make my point clear. With reflection I have 0 problems with the atonement requirement by the GM. Good people don't walk around slitting throats after a battle.
Just wondering for myself, do you have a link to the discord server? I would love to do some online play.
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
Pretty cool man, I'm going to look into this further
You guys realize the moment Paizo comments publicly on any of these allegations that opens them up to libel suits right? Unless they can prove the allegations in a court of law if they were to accuse someone of something they are liable for the financial damage the allegation makes.
What they could do is issue a blanket statement to vendors and employees stating X behavior will not be tolerated, and not invite back any offending parties.
And when you have one employee accusing another, neither having proof of the allegation, how is a company supposed to respond? If they fire the accused they open themselves up to a lawsuit for wrongful termination. X employee made an allegation is not justified cause for termination, unless that was a clause in their employment contract. And even then it might not hold up in court. And i would sure as hell hope that I wouldn't be fired because 1 coworker accused me of something. Step back from the man/woman thing here. all people have rights, even those who are guilty. I don't want to live in a world where one person's testimony has that much power.
I love how allegations now have to be read on twitter. Maybe I'm an idiot and can't figure that site out, but where is the substance of the allegations? All I am reading is he said she said. I have absolutely no idea if Robert or Jessica are lying, but i haven't read specific allegations either. Harassing a female customer is entirely too vague. Was he screaming at her calling her an idiot? Was he using sexual language in a threatening way? Was he physical with the person in question? Without listing details of what occurred im going to err on the side of innocent until proven guilty. All these accused might be scumbags, I'm not really arguing for them. I would just prefer that if I was in their place maybe others would reserve judgement until they have all the facts.
Perfect Tommy wrote:
Don't give yourself 3 7's, even if it is for pfs.
Neal Litherland wrote:
Great article Neal. I've been reading your blog over the last few months. Just wanted to say Thanks for sharing all your hard work.
Jason Wedel wrote:
As a GM having only run a few scenarios in PFS with them, they slow the game down entirely too much with their counter abilities. I've seen other GM's simply not target them to make the combats run smoother.
Justin McKeon wrote:
This is why when I started I played humans and half races exclusively.
So glad I'm not playing in your game. You must be a pleasure to spend time with if EVERYONE here is disagreeing with you and you ignore everything they say because it's not a developer replying to you. Do you have any idea how unlikely it is that a developer will comment?
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
I get what you mean. In the book we are given very little information into Laura and her backstory. We just know her focus the entire time in the book is SHADOW. In the show she is much more of a full character because we have all this more information ... but that just makes you hate her even more. It's easy to say Shadow is a naive putz, and Laura is a cheating slut. But those labels don't define who they are or what journey they are choosing to take now that tragedy has struck their lives. In the end it is sometimes our shortcomings that makes us human. We make mistakes, hurt ourselves and the ones we love. Then the next day, after the passion is gone, we see what we have done. It's what you choose at that point, that should define you. It's easy to walk away, it's much harder to try to fix yourself.
You aren't wrong... but you are being ineffective. Obviously at this point even you agree that your system doesn't work. The problem players still haven't turned sheets in after 2 months and have no plans to. They are waiting for you to drop the issue.
If you have fun with these players and they aren't cheating (figuring values wrong to get a benefit) then I would drop it. If they are playing with under powered characters the party will call them on it. And if they don't all they care about is probably having a good time.
My advice is to stop worrying about it. As long as they aren't cheating it's not your problem.
Oh yes. Which will mean people stop working as engineers, nurses, doctors etc to pick berries. Less hassle, less responsibility and no student debts. Sounds good.
Did you know this is happening in Cuba? I saw a VOX news segment on youtube about an engineer working in a cab because the stipends the government is giving him don't cover his living expenses. So he has to do work on the side to be able to live. Its worth a view.
Fair enough, I did paint with a very broad brush with that reply. I personally couldn't see the benefit of allowing that interpretation in my game.
It makes me chuckle to see people read rules through the prism of their characters benefit, then argue about it in these forums. Nowhere in your wildest dreams would the FCB allow you 1/2 a use of a wizard power you don't have access to. That is so far off RAI that I never would have considered it myself, even if the language of the FCB is not written very well.
I really think these players need to GM for a year, if just to see the game from the other perspective. No GM in their right mind would allow that liberal of an interpretation of a FCB.
Also, why do you have to be faced with the evidence of another passage?
Why not read a passage like this with the narrowest viewpoint possible, rather than seeing what you can squeeze by with a broad interpretation of the language. Of course you can only affect a power you already posses. Why would you be able to acquire another school's power for the cost of two skill points?
Just quit the group. If you think the GM is picking on you and is unfair then don't stay in the game. It sounds like he is a nice guy (pushover) who said yes to you/others in the campaign when he should have told everyone no.
My advice would be to start a game where you let the players acquire all these templates and powers, then try to build an interesting story with unique challenges for said party. Once you see how hard, nearly impossible it is to challenge the overpowered party without killing them it will give you some sympathy for the GM who is being "unfair" to you.
Hi there, I just moved here from Washington and I would like to continue playing Pathfinder on a regular basis. I have been playing for 5 years and GM'ing for 3, so I can run is need be ore step aside if someone else prefers to run. I'm open on schedule, just dropping this thread to see what interest there is. Let me know if you are interested, and have a great day.
You seem well prepared, I wouldn't worry too much. My only advice would be don't let the game grind to a halt because there is a question about one rule. Don't be afraid to make a decision and move on, even if you find out later that it is the wrong decision. Keep the game moving forward. Nothing makes other players at the table more disinterested than the GM and 1 player arguing about the intricacies of a rule for twenty minutes.You can always do other research and discussion away from the table. The players have input, but hopefully they understand the importance of everyone else's time as well.
I have a 4th level occultist, have him built to level 11. By far one of my funnest characters to play. Others usually view him as a fighter (chain shirt with a greatsword). I play mine as a support martial dolling out spells on occasion. This is the only class besides Psychic I would consider playing out of the Occult book actually.
I went in 2016, and had a great time overall. For what its worth though... I hated the special. I don't want to play an 8th level pregen of a class I don't know, having been handed the sheet 10 minutes before I start playing. I was the "leader" of my table and was frustrated to find everyone else at the table had their own goals and didn't want to cooperate. And this is tied to an existing characters pfs number, so if I die on this special I have to pay for a resurrection for my actual character. It was 5 hours of pure stress trying to get everyone to work together and solve the story. And there was not nearly enough time to finish the special, I saw plenty of tables nowhere near finishing at midnight. I would have felt much better playing my own character. Having done the specials in 2015 and 16, I don't care about the aspis consortium. Interesting idea on paper, but these pregens are complicated. We don't understand everything our characters can do, and are instructed by the module it seems to undermine each other. I can't stress how much I hated this experience, never again.
I had a great time in 2015 with 6-97 siege of serpents. Played my own level 10 cleric and had a great time with a table full of new people. I didn't enjoy 6-98 in 2015, or the special in 2016.
I still plan on going to paizocon this year, but if the special is with pregens again I won't be participating.
Neal Litherland wrote:
I've read the blog post, which really isn't nearly as inflammatory as your post. Regardless of any other considerations, i wholeheartedly agree that understanding the mechanics and knowing how to use the resources available to you to achieve your goals is vital to every character. PC or Villain.
I have a serious problem with the notion that you shouldn't build to story. I don't care that I'm not "optimized". If I created a compelling reason to have the perform skill in my backstory, I'm not making a bad choice by putting a skill point in it every other level. If I don't spend any resources on my character's story then I am nothing but numbers. There isn't a "correct" way to use tactics on combat, or RP a low charisma, or anything else that makes your character you.
Bottom line is it isn't a wrong choice to use resources to justify a character concept. Without it I find I have an issue justifying my characters emotions and desires.
This is my main issue with PFS. Everyone is entirely too concerned with combat, and noone gives a Damn about RP. The barbarian in the blog post while optimized is fine by me because the player came up with an explanation and reason for the choices he made building the character. As a DM if i wanted to talk with his character through an NPC I could, Because there is substance there.
You dont have to hyper optimize, there is nothing wrong with a middle of the road character, or even a mediocre character. A good DM will find a chance for that player to shine, regardless of the numbers on the paper in front of you. All I care about is whether the player's character is an individual, or a concept. If all I am doing the entire session is worrying about combat I would rather play a video game.
I've been involved with pfs for close to 5 years, I've even been to paizocon twice. So i know it isn't just GM's "in my area". I've never seen a chronicle sheet filled out as you describe.
Now to discuss players "cheating" which I believe is the intent behind the rules you are quoting: If i think a player is playing beyond their ability or own items beyond their fame I ask them questions and audit them if i feel it is appropriate. Otherwise I should trust the players and respect the fact that they should be presumed honest. I know that is how I want to be treated when i play.
One idea would be to limit the use of Mythic points beyond what the book allows. Base is 3 per day per tier. A GM could either limit that to 1, or instead of Mythic points replenishing at a days rest could restore them only after leveling. This would give the players fantastic abilities, but force them to think twice when using them. I think if it was my game I would choose the latter, that would make challenging the party that much easier while still allowing them to have moments of greatness.
I am playing around with ideas for a home brew game. I like the idea at least of Mythic, but I have heard bad things about it, especially at high mythic levels. If someone wanted to use Mythic, at what point would you stop increasing their mythic level?
I just played my first session with a mythic character and I was surprised at how broken it can be even without trying. Mythic Rage (selectable at tier 1) allows you to recover 1/4 your rage rounds for one mythic point as a free action, and all attacks this round bypass DR. Very easy to abuse as you can imagine. While it was fun as hell to play a mythic character, I imagine scaling the encounters to match the party will be very difficult over time. Each mythic path has a lot of imo broken features. Though I guess to be honest that is the entire point of playing a mythic character.