Weight Seller

Danny F's page

33 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS


I also prefer 3.5 over Pathfinder. But, you are looking at the situation as an all-or-nothing scenario.

My group actually plays a house-ruled mish-mash of 3.5, Unearthed Arcana, Pathfinder, Trailblazer, and Book of Experimental Might. I love how interchangeable the OGL-derived rule systems are with one another. As DM/GM, I can craft the game that is the most fun for my group to play.

And, we play in Eberron. I adapt Paizo's modules and adventure paths to conform to my group's campaign setting of choice.

We have a blast.


The CRB is intimidating to new players, because of the rule density and the cost. If there were a smaller, more affordable players-only rule book, I believe I could recruit more players.


Change it to Pirate, instead. Because I want a multiclass Ninja/Pirate!


flash_cxxi wrote:
Studpuffin wrote:
There is a Wars RPG, where!?

So you're a WARS fan too?

I loved that game and colected all of the Short Stories/Music/RPG/anything else affiliated with it.
I was quite sad when they cancelled it.

Then you might be interested in this.

I'm a fan, too.


W E Ray wrote:
Crimson Jester wrote:
I went to a local Barnes and Noble just last week. .... I took the Pathfinder book out and put it into the display holder so it was on top.

LOL

I did the same thing at the Books A Million.

They had a full shelf of the WotC game (the top shelf) and, like I mentioned earlier, a bottom shelf of tons of 3E compatable products piled in like junk. I took all the Pathfinder stuff out, a Bestiary, one AP volume, 3 Companion books, a Module and a few GameMastery maps, and spread them out on the first shelf, making the top shelf a nice Paizo display, hiding all the WotC product.

It's probably the most immature, silly thing I've done in years and I felt really cheesy but I gotta admit, it felt a little good, too.

Vive le resistance!


VedicDragon wrote:
So what do you all think? I found it definite food for thought about deeper ramifications on our genre and subculture and the impact these things have on the market as a whole ...

I think the author has hit the nail on the head regarding the reasons for the extreme disappointment that is still being expressed by a segment of WotC's former customers. I was actually looking forward to a revised 4th edition of D&D, but I was outraged when I discovered how different the game that I loved had been changed.

I wonder if the influx of new customers generated by the release of their newest edition of D&D has justified the amount of customers lost by WotC's decision to change the game so radically. If it has, then I suppose this discussion is moot. But if it hasn't, perhaps WotC should be paying attention to their former customers. I suspect that there was a short-term benefit to the release of 4E--at the expense of disenfranchising a segment of their customer base, but I don't see a lot of long-term benefits from that decision.

I also wonder what impact Pathfinder will have in the current environment. How much longer will WotC be the "900-pound gorilla" if Pathfinder continues with its success?


James Jacobs wrote:
The entire Advanced Player's Guide (or the vast majority, at the very least) will be open content.

I'm sold. Save a copy for me!

BTW, does the upcoming Gamemastery Guide also have open content?


CourtFool wrote:
Mairkurion {tm} wrote:
Maybe in the future I can get a pair with the Paizo Golem on them.
They will be $50, the art will be 10 times better and you will not have to buy all new socks to wear them.

Teehee! My laugh for the day. Thanks for it.


joela wrote:
What about y'all?

I bought a new book shelf.


Long live Pathfinder! Long live Paizo!


Rob McCreary wrote:
This may seem like a dumb question, but can a caster cast a touch spell on himself?

Yes, but there is a 50% chance he will go blind.


If nothing else, think of Pathfinder RPG as "Unearthed Arcana II". Use the changes that you like and ignore the rest. My group has adopted some of the alternate rules from Unearthed Arcana (skill points and turning undead). I'm not sure that we will switch to the final PF skill points/turn undead versions or not (I still like the UA rules), but we will probably use most of the rest.


Disciple of Sakura wrote:
Psionics relies upon Concentration for their Psionic Focus mechanic, a back-bone of the system.

Many people do not use psionics in their games. But for those of us that do, Concentration must be available in order for psionic focus to work IMO.


I will be purchasing both the Beta rules and the final version.


It's a shame that companies like Necromancer and Goodman Games are being left in the dark for so long--wondering if there is going to be a GSL or not. I'm glad Paizo decided to go ahead and give the green light to Pathfinder RPG. At least the other companies know that there is now another option in case the WotC powers-that-be decide to do away with the GSL altogether.


Will the print books be hardcover?


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I am currently thinking of a feat that allows you to treat a skill as a class skill.

Thoughts?

Great idea! You could adapt the Skill Knowledge feat from Unearthed Arcana.


I really like the PF-Alpha "Races" section. Like KaeYoss, I think the new Weapon Familiarity abilities and the new ability names are great ideas. I do have one question: Why the change to the gnome's caster level for his spell-like abilities? By making this change, the gnome would be the only race that has an ability that improves as levels are gained. Just curious.


Joshua J. Frost wrote:

The tiniest amount of Google-searching will reveal that he's a WotC messageboard poster.

Which does not, in any way, diminish his concerns as I happen to agree with most of them.

/conspiracytheory

Assuming that the OP is the Barely Coherent from the Gleemax messageboards, I don’t believe he’s a WotC employee. But, he definitely has a pro-4E agenda. For instance, in this post, he states, “I'm going to add my voice to Darth Cyric's on the Fighter and give a few reasons.” In Darth Cyric’s post, earlier in the thread, Darth Cyric basically accused someone of not being able to read (among other things). Ironically, I found another post where Barely Coherent accuses someone of being thin-skinned. (Links may require login to Gleemax.) Apparently, Barely Coherent has no problem with personal attacks, as long as they support his point to view. I certainly don't see him making any kind of appeal to the WotC moderators to impose civility on the Gleemax messageboards.

I know this info won’t (and shouldn’t) affect Paizo’s recent stand against personal attacks. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy.


Joshua J. Frost wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
I think I can understand why you might be snarky. No worries.

Joshua J. Frost wrote:
I can't understand how the rules of this sub-forum are at all confusing.

I was just seeking clarification on what I could or couldn't post. You certainly clarified for me. Thanks?


Joshua J. Frost wrote:
I'm also sticking by the fact that if you can't talk about 4E without personally attacking other members or insulting other companies in the industry, then this probably isn't your board.

Respectfully, how does one insult a company? Is all criticism of WOTC now prohibited?


GVDammerung wrote:

A really strong trend emerges. Witness:

Dwarf - Warlord
Elf - Archer
Gnoll - Clawfighter, Demonic Scourge, Huntmaster, Marauder
Goblin - Picador, Sharpshooter
Hobgoblin - Archer, Warcaster, Soldier
Human - Bandit, Mage, Berserker, Guard
Kobold - Archer, Dragonshield, Skirmisher, Minion, Slinger, Wyrmpriest

It sounds like a deck list for Magic the Gathering!


Lich-Loved wrote:
What is this place becoming?

A forum full of self-appointed moderators?

Oops..was that an insult? I'm not sure anymore.


bugleyman wrote:
Is there a complication here I'm missing?

No one here is advocating ad hominem attacks. Expressing disdain for 4E and WOTC does not equal ad hominem attacks.


Is this board really how Paizo wants to be represented?

I'm hoping that Paizo says "YES!"


I have the (highly recommended) Gygax Fantasy Worlds series from Troll Lord Games, which is pretty much what you've described. Someone would have to exceed the quality of these books in order for me to have any interest. Good luck!


The group that I DM will not be switching to 4E. Therefore, I would only consider purchasing products designed for use with the 3.5/OGL D&D system.


I agree that we can already “build whatever sort of PC you want to roleplay” using the 3.5 system. I also agree that D&D can be improved with regard to this aspect of the game. However, I disagree that throwing out the 3.5 system and replacing it with 4E is the best way to improve this (or any other) aspect of the game.


Lara Cobb wrote:
crosswiredmind wrote:

This is what I do not get. WotC took an imaginary being and made it a different type of imaginary being and so people hate them for it as if you cannot simply say - in my campaign they are still demons.

A year after releasing the most expansive explanation of these types of imaginary beings they proudly begin crowing that a new system is being developed and it will be so much better than anything else written in the past. Folks like me have invested our own money on those imaginary beings with the expectation further material may be developed such as FCIII, Yugoloths. That can't be too difficult to grasp?

This is the heart of the matter as I see it. WOTC (and Paizo) has produced some great stuff for the 3.5 version of D&D. Now, WOTC is withdrawing all support for it. I can see reasons for revising 3.5. What I don't see is the need to completely replace it with non-compatible rules and a re-vamped mythology. The consequence of doing this is to make all of the previous awesome 3.5 material obsolete. And yes, I do realize that I can still play 3.5 (and I plan to). But, I'm still disappointed that WOTC has decided to exclude the numerous 3.5 books that I've purchased over the last few years from their newest version of D&D.

We hate 4E because we love 3.5.


I won't be drinking the 4E Kool-Aid. My current plans are to collect the 3.5 books that I didn't buy the first time around (the Complete series, Players Handbook II, Rules Compendium, some FR books). I would definitely be interested in purchasing any new quality 3.5 or 3.75 products that Paizo (or any other third party publisher) wants to sell me.


Dungeon Grrrl wrote:
Plus, the racial power worries me. It's very sparese, and very mechanical. I can't see it ever feeling like anything but a game mechanic, not something that models part of a realistic and fantastical world.

To me, the descriptions for Elven Accuracy, Group Awareness, and Wild Step sound like game mechanics for a Hero Clix or Mage Knight miniature. Group Awareness, in particular, is a poorly designed mechanic because it so easily meta-gamed by players ("I stand by the elf and listen.", or parties with just one non-elf). And, that is not even mentioning the fact that it has no in-game justification (standing by an elf enhances perception?). Based on this Elf preview, I don't see how WOTC can support their claim that 4E will be better than 3.5.


How is a 4E Elf better than a 3.5 Elf? I personally like 3.5 Elves better. I think giving each race strengths along with weaknesses makes character creation more interesting. And, re-rolling an attack roll per encounter seems less "elf-like" than immunity to sleep. Whatever.