Deadrender's page

If you want a high fantasy game with non-traditional races, try Talislanta. Their primary tag line was "25 years, STILL no elves". A game based more on Jack Vance than on Tolkien. Played it constantly through 5 editions and can honestly say it is easily one of my favorite games of all time. Seems to me to be the perfect proof that dwarves, elves, and orcs are definitely NOT required for a good high fantasy experience. Not that I don't like them, because I very much do, but they are far from necessary.

Just my 2 copper. Your mileage may vary.

Have a nice day.

Paper books, all the way.

It's not that I don't understand the appeal of Ebooks. It's not that I don't appreciate the convenience of them. It's more basic than that.

Call me old school, but I just prefer paper books over digital ones. PDFs are clunky. They can be difficult to navigate, and, on certain devices, don't even work right. Ebooks just don't feel right to me. Nothing will ever eclipse the feel of a good, solid, paper book in my hands. Does that make me old fashioned? Maybe. Does that make me wrong? Of course not. Does that mean I think less of people who use digital books? Absolutely not. To each their own, and digital books definitely have their uses. Do I intend on changing any time soon? Not one little bit. I have never purchased an Ebook or PDF and I doubt I ever will. Only if paper books completely die out within my lifetime (not likely) will I make the switch. I don't even care if digital books are cheaper (which they sometimes are), I will pay the extra money for the paper ones. Again, this is just personal preference. Digital is not wrong. It's just that, to me, paper feels better. Add to that the fact that I can find specific pages and entries in a paper book fairly quickly. I can find stuff in a print book just as fast, and in some cases faster, than somebody using an ebook. Certainly faster than someone using a PDF. Maybe that's why I prefer them. Maybe I'm just a victim of classical thinking. Maybe it comes from having been gaming for 30 years now. I dunno. I guess I just like 'em.

You can have your ebooks. I'll stick with REAL books.

In a 3.5 Forgotten Realms game I ran, one of my players decided to play a goblin. I warned him that a goblin would be persecuted by civilized society and he would be unable to enter towns. He promptly declared his goblin to be a paladin of Torm and clad him in full plate armor, complete with helmet. He then stated that, when going into town, he would keep his visor down and pretend to be a gnome. He even took gnome as one of his starting languages to complete the process.

This was all from a player who had never role-played before in his life taking part in his first game ever. It was so bloody brilliant I allowed it, and even helped him round it out. He played it to the hilt, and it was easily one of the most entertaining characters I have ever seen.

Dhampir Paladin.

That is all.

I have serious issues with the Cavalier and the Summoner.

Cavalier is simply far to limited. The complete over-reliance on a mount to make the class viable turns me right off. There are also space issues with cavaliers. In outdoor environments, with room to maneuver, they work fine. Try taking one into a dungeon. The mount is often too large to fit down certain corridors and there is very rarely going to be maneuvering space in an underground setting. Halfling/Gnome cavaliers with medium mounts can offset this, but that just proves the restrictive nature of the class, that only certain races are truly viable in all situations.

Summoners just aggravate me. Eidolons are confusing, overly complicated, and, if done right, horrendously overpowered. Add to that, the summoning-focused spell selection, and the battlefield gets cluttered and chaotic to an extreme. It gets even worse if someone takes the Master Summoner archetype, and I'm speaking from experience there. I'm never letting him play one of those again.

I'm not overly fond of preparation casters. Wizards, Clerics, and Druids give me headaches purely due to the spell mechanic. A Wizard with full access to crafting and metamagic feats is mighty indeed, and I won't say I've never tried it, but I didn't really like it. Clerics and Druids are a little easier for me, because when I play one I usually act as the party healer, which makes spell selection pretty easy.

Beyond that, I've played a little bit of everything. My personal preferences tend towards the big bruisers. I like fighters and barbarians above all else, with sorcerers and oracles coming in a very close second. Straight forward combat monsters are just plain fun for me to play. I can always seem to get into character with one. I love spontaneous casters as well. There's just a certain freedom there that you can't get with the prepared casters. I'm not going to get into the whole "wizard vs. sorcerer" debate, because that could go on for years, and I will simply state a preference for spontaneous casting.

Everything else is about even for me. It's more a matter of what I am good at and what I suck at.

Rogues, Ninjas, Bards, Inquisitors, Witches. I like them, but honestly suck at playing them. I'm always willing to try, they just don't fall within my skill set. I like to think I'm a pretty good player, but playing to one's strengths is always going to work out better in the long run.

Gunslinger, Samurai, Alchemist, Monk, Paladin, Ranger are all middle of the road for me. I can play any of them every bit as well as I play my favorites, I just tend not to enjoy them quite as much. They're just a little harder for me to get into character-wise. The one exception to this was a very specific character I made just to see how it would work, which was a Damphir Paladin, and that one was really fun. Mainly because it seems completely contradictory, and, honestly, it was. Drove my GM nuts.

That's my 2 copper. Take it for what it's worth.

Here's an honorable mention for you. Technically it had a second season, but it was only half a season and never really got a fair shake.

Special Unit 2.

Love that show.

1982. Tunnels and Trolls
1983. D&D red box.

Been hooked ever since.

Wouldn't have it any other way.

Deadrender,

Everything looks good on our end. Are you still having problems?

I just now checked and it seems to be working again.

Cool! Thank you!

Enjoy your holidays!

The "My Pathfinder Society" page is completely blank. I go into my account, scroll down to my PFS, and click on "make changes". This should bring up all my characters and their sessions, etc. The page is totally blank. Not a thing on it. Like all my PFS information just disappeared and went up in smoke. I know this is just a bug and I am not panicking or anything, I just thought you guys should know about it, assuming you don't already.

Jus' tryin' to help.

Thanks Paizo!

GWAR.

That is all.

First, I pick my race. To me, this is the most important mechanical aspect of my character. I base a lot of other factors of character creation directly on my racial choice.

Second, I pick my class. Usually, I pick a class that goes right along with my racial stat bonuses. I pick a class that will benefit the most from that racial choice. Sometimes, however, I pick the opposite of what I should for any given race, just because it makes people crazy. Like my Dhampir paladin. I got stuff thrown at me for that one.

Third, I make all the other mechanical decisions that can be made at 1st level. I choose feats, skills, spells, etc. I don't base this on any accepted "normal" idea, or by what I am "supposed" to do. I've never really gone in for building conventions. I don't like being told "If you're gonna play this race/class, you have to do it this way, and with these feats/skills/spells, or you're doing it wrong". I don't believe in a "wrong" or "right" way to build a character. Just build what's fun for you. The hell with anyone who tells you that you're "wrong" for doing it.

Fourth, I create my background, personal history, and personality profile. This is the part of character that I put the most work into. I often end up disappointed, because this is the part of my character that typically see the least amount of use. Especially in PFS. In my home games, it depends entirely on who's running. Some of my friends absolutely love bringing character backgrounds/histories into the campaign. I also have one or two that despise character backgrounds and get mad at people for even coming up with one. It's a diverse group. In PFS, it's a different story. In PFS, I usually don't even bother with a background or history because it will never get used in any way, at all, ever. That's only a minor complaint, mainly because I understand that organized play just works that way. I wish it were different, but I know why it isn't, so I can deal.

Finally, I then proceed to make some decisions about the characters development in advance. I don't plan the entire character from 1-20 or anything like that, but I do at least look ahead a few levels for stuff that might make for a good direction for the character to go. I very rarely plan out definite development in advance though. I may look around at stuff, but I don't want to lock myself in to a specific path. I like to keep my options open, I simply do enough research to know what the options even are.

That's the way I do it. Thank you for starting this thread, actually. It definitely gives an insight into the mentality of the whole thing. It's all quite interesting.

Have a nice day.

Kinevon. Thank you. I had forgotten about the 2nd level rule and the pregen rule.

I hate finding out I'm not perfect. Kills the buzz. :)

I'm playing my first, and almost certainly my last, fighter.

Fighters are awesome because you get 21 feats and can plan your entire build focus around a fighting style, and be fantastic at it.

Fighters are horrifically boring because once you've chosen those feats (probably on character creation), there's no room to 'grow'. Even my two-hander barbarian is more interesting and more fun to play than my two-hander fighter, because the barbarian's rage powers seem far more interesting and versatile than the limited ladder of combat feats my fighter has to stick with to achieve similar levels of damage. At every level I feel like I'm adjusting my barbarian's rages to match what we're facing, while the fighter just 'follows the straight and true path' of the original feats I chose.

I like characters that grow, develop, and change over time. I find that with a fighter you plan the whole thing out during creation, and rarely (if ever) have a need to adjust on the fly. In other words, I am not Hannibal, and I don't love it when a plan comes together. (And yes, I'm old enough to have watched the original, yet young enough to have enjoyed it.)

I would say that any character, fighter or otherwise, that you plan out in its entirety at character creation, would wind up boring. I've tried it before. I've pre-planned fighters, sorcerers, monks, druids, and one bard (that I ended up never playing) from creation all the way to 20. I end up hating myself because I've now pigeon-holed myself into a very linear and specific progression. What you are describing, is completely self-inflicted and not the fault of the class itself.

That being said, I'm not saying you are doing it wrong or anything like that. Some people prefer to set their progression up in advance. Maybe they like to know what's coming. Maybe they are planning things out based on a theme. Maybe they're just OCD. Doesn't matter, that's the way they play, and there's nothing wrong with that. I am absolutely NOT trying to disparage anyone's play style.

I just happen to think that what you're complaining about with fighters, is in no way exclusive to them. Any class planned out 10, 15 or even 20 levels in advance is going to feel a little predictable and boring because you already know what's coming and the mystery is gone.

For my own opinion, I love fighters. Fighters are the quintessential fantasy character. Fighters are a classic staple of the genre. I love the idea of the mighty warrior, his heavy plate armor gleaming in the sun, his mighty shield on his arm, likely emblazoned with a symbol of some importance, swinging his sword to cleave the enemy in half with a single blow. The imagery, the style, the very idea of it is part and parcel to all things fantasy, and fantasy would not be the came without them. I love fighters because I can look beyond the numbers. I can ignore the stat-crunching and the pre-planning and the linear thinking and play the fighter for the flavor. I can play them for the image and what they represent. I can play them for the story and the glory. I can see them for what they, at their core, will always be.

The true heart of fantasy.

Thank you. Enjoy the rest of your day.

Ok, let's clarify a few things. There are 2 different types of basic adventures run through PFS, scenarios and modules. Scenarios run about 3-5 hours and award 1 xp. Modules tend to take all day, (sometimes 2 days depending on the gm and the event), and award 3 xp.

The only scenarios that can be run multiple times are the 3 first steps scenarios. These can be run as many times as you want, but each one can only give credit to any given character once.
Example : Bob the fighter is level 1. He runs the 3 first steps scenarios and reaches level 2. Bob has now received the only credit he will ever get from these scenarios. Bob's player, however, can get credit for all 3 scenarios a second time, but only if he uses a new 1st level character.

All 1-3 modules (and most modules in general) reward 3 xps upon completion. Again, these can be run as many times as you want for full credit, but you have to use a different character each time.
Example : Our stalwart Bob the fighter runs through Murder's Mark, a 1-2 level module. At the end, he gets 3 xps and reaches the next level. Bob has now received the only credit he will ever get for this module. Bob's player can run the module as many times as he likes, but he has to use a new character of the appropriate level each time.

All other scenarios can be run exactly twice by any player. Once as a player, and once as a GM. That's it. Doesn't matter how many different characters you have, you can only get credit twice. Period.
Example : Bob the fighter plays a tier 1-5 module. He completes it and gets credit for 1 xp. Bob's player later GMs the same scenario, and gets an additional chronicle sheet, this one (usually, but not always) specialized with some GM only rewards. This is all the credit that Bob's player can ever get for this scenario. Ever. He can run it as many times with as many different characters as he wants, but he will never get more than 2 chronicle sheets for it.

These are the chronicle rules as they were explained to me when I joined up. I have verified these rules from several sources including the Guide to Organized Play, the website for my local PFS chapter, and a number of venture lieutenants, venture captains, and even a dev or 2, right here on these boards, so I'm pretty sure I've got them correct.

Hope that helps. Good luck to you and welcome to the Pathfinder Society.

Have a nice day.

With Aasimar, Tiefling, and Tengu recently made universally available, I do believe that other races will eventually receive the same treatment. Not all of them of course, but maybe a few here or there. I might be lying to myself about that, but I hope not. If these 3 can be made universal, why not others?

That being said, they will never make all of them legal for exactly the reasons stated. It has nothing to do with races being broken or overpowered. It's both a flavor thing, and a boon thing. As Jiggy said, some races are either rare enough, or unlikely to join the pathfinders, to where their inclusion as playable would make no sense. Others, that might be worthy of joining, are given out as boons. These convention-only (and sometimes GM only) boons are designed to be a special reward for those who spend the time and money to go to a convention. Also, some races, such as drow, orcs, gnolls, etc., are typically considered evil races and will likely NEVER be made available, even as a boon, because their inclusion in the Pathfinders would simply never happen.

You also have to understand that PFS is not running Paizo. It is simply connected to, and supported by, Paizo. PFS does not dictate what Paizo publishes or what content is contained in the books. Paizo does whatever it wants, and PFS decides what does or does not work for its own use. The ARG has a ton of stuff you can use in your home games. For me, personally, in my home games, any race is allowed and playable. We use everything. This allows for some really strange combinations. We are a group that regularly ends up with the "traveling zoo", and we're ok with that. This does not work for PFS, and I completely understand and appreciate why, but there is no reason you can't use it at home.

You just have to remember that PFS is not dictating all things Pathfinder. Some of the posters (not just in this thread, I have seen others on the subject) make it sound like every game that anyone ever plays is subject to PFS rules, as if they somehow dictate how everything is used. They don't. They have their rules, Paizo has theirs, and home games can mix and match however they want. If your point is that every race in the ARG should be legal for PFS play, that's just never going to happen. I'm okay with that. That's what home games are for.

If anyone is familiar with my posting history, you will note that this is a turn-around from my previous position on the subject. I seem to have learned the error of my ways. Hopefully for the better.

Just my 2 copper.

Have a nice day.

I only have one basic problem with there being so many feats. I actually like that there are a ton of them because it gives you options. I don't mind that some of those options are actually restrictions because it makes the choice that much more important. My only issue is that you simply don't get enough of them as you level. With all the hundreds of feats out there, the fact that even a human fighter, with all the bonus feats that grants, never gets more than 20-25 of them, depending on the feats that are chosen and any possible archetype.

That's really my only complaint. For there to be so many feats available, there should be more available during the leveling process. In my home game, we have a house rule regarding feats. The feat players get every odd level is doubled. This gives the average player 25-35 feats, dependent on class, and fighters get 40+. I like that better. I understand why the RAW doesn't allow this, I realize some might think this is an excessive amount of feats, and it would never work for PFS, but it works for us.

I like that there are so many feats, I just wish we got more of them for our characters.

And by Cons, do you mean GenCon ending? Because that's the only important convention besides PaizoCon, which I'll never go to due to being on the other side of the country most likely.

You forget Dragon Con, which is labor day weekend. Dragon Con is as big as Gen Con these days and definitely counts as a major and important event.

Just Sayin.

Sweet! That's how I was hoping it would work. You guys just made my day. Thank you.

Enjoy the rest of your day.

I really don't understand why anyone is against the inclusion of additional races. How is more variety a bad thing?

I get that some GMs might get a little upset about having their specialness taken away when races previously only available as GM boons are added for everybody. I get that completely. I still want them to add more. GMs with race boons need to simply take solace in the fact that they had access before anyone else. If that's not good enough, I guess I don't know what else to say.

I eventually want to see even more races added to the list of universally available for play. I will never understand how anyone can think that more options is somehow detrimental to the game.

Just my opinion of course. Feel free to disagree.

Have a nice day.

I have my own question about swordtrained. Does the proficiency that this gives you with bastard swords allow one-handed use of them? Or does it merely count as the martial feat requiring you to use them 2-handed?

I love the inclusion of new playable races. I hope they add more in the future.

I would like nothing better than to see books the size of the Inner Sea World Guide for the other continents and areas of the world. Bring one out for Tian Xia, Southern Garund, Arcadia, Casmaron, Sarusan, and the Crown of the World. And don't make them little paperback deals either. Go for full-size hardcovers. I love the Inner Sea World Guide, it's one of my favorite gaming books I've ever read, and I want the other continents to get the same treatment.

Just my 2 copper.

And I would hate to have to eat a scenario. Paper cuts hurt bad enough without getting them internally.

/shakes fist

Darn you kids and your music, and your dancing, and your drinking, and your sex, and your video games, and your . . . . . .

. . . . . .Actually, that sounds like fun.

What was I saying again?

Thank you all for the great responses! I guess I'm still adjusting to the organized play dynamic. I've been playing pen & paper games in one form or another for almost 30 years and the idea of limited replay is still new to me. I've only ever played home games with various groups of friends, and the current group has been together for almost 15 years now. We play a VERY casual style and I guess the switch to organized play is causing a bit of culture shock. I've only been involved with PFS for a couple of months now and I am still getting used to the new environment.

Thank you all for being patient with me. Despite my age (I'll admit it, I'm 37), I can still be a bit of a baby when I don't understand something. Hope I wasn't too whiny.

Thanks again guys! This is why I love this stuff, everybody (well, almost) at least attempts to be helpful when they can.

Have a nice day!

If I am reading that wrong, (and I have every reason to believe that I am), doesn't that make having additional characters a little problematic? I mean, what happens if you have run through every scenario? Are there enough scenarios out there to make this unlikely? If I have multiple characters, sooner or later, I'm going to get to a point where one or more of them can no longer advance in level because I have played every currently existing scenario. This would basically mean that I would be virtually unable to play until the new season comes out. This system seems to encourage players to only run a very limited number of characters, and discourages variety in character selection. What happens if I come up with a cool new character idea, but I am totally unable to use it because the only scenarios available are ones I already played? Am I just screwed? Do I have to quit until a new season starts?

All I'm saying, is that the current replay rule seems to be unfairly limiting for, to use an online gaming term, "altaholics". Maybe that's intentional, and if it is, I would love to understand the reasoning for it.

I know this seems like a ranting complaint, but I honestly want to know the philosophy behind this. I'm not trying to be difficult, I just really want to understand.

Thanks again for listening.

Hi Deadrender,

I'll just quote the Guide (v. 4.2). Even though it technically doesn't go into effect until Aug 15th, these particular rules haven't changed since the last edition.

Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play v.4.2, p. 21 wrote:

• You cannot receive more than 1 player Chronicle and 1 GM Chronicle for the same scenario, regardless of how many times you GM or play the scenario. You are free to replay a scenario in order to meet the minimum legal table size (see Chapter 7), but once you have reached that limit, you do not earn any additional rewards beyond having a good time.
  
• If you have already played a scenario and wish to replay it for any reason, you must inform the GM that you have already played the scenario. Some GMs may not be comfortable running an adventure for players who have foreknowledge of what is to come. If your GM is not comfortable with you replaying a scenario, you must find another GM who is. GMs have the right to deny players the opportunity to replay a scenario for any reason, but all GMs are encouraged to be as flexible as possible when replay is the only option that allows them to seat the minimum legal number of players at a game table.
  
• If you spoil the plot for the table, the GM has the right to ask you to leave the table and is under no obligation to award you a Chronicle sheet. Be very careful about character knowledge versus player knowledge. If you’re concerned about possibly spoiling something during the course of play, take the GM aside and ask how she would like it handled. Remember: the goal of replay is to make sure fun gaming happens, not to remove the fun from gaming.
  There is one exception to these rules: All Tier 1 scenarios and Tier 1–2 sanctioned modules are available for unlimited replay with a 1st-level character for credit. The sanctioned modules can also be played with a 2nd- level character once for credit. You may continue to replay the sanctioned modules with 1st-level characters after playing through them with a 2nd-level

...

See, that last bullet point is the one that confuses me. "If you spoil the plot for the table, the GM has the right to ask you to leave the table and is under no obligation to AWARD YOU A CHRONICLE SHEET."

If you have already played the scenario, you wouldn't be getting a chronicle sheet anyway, so why is this an issue. This seems to indicate that you CAN get one for scenarios you already played, but that the GM can refuse you.

Or am I reading that wrong.

I wanted to get some clarification on something I read in the PFS game guide regarding replaying scenarios.

Let's say I have the opportunity to play a particular scenario, we'll call it "scenario A".

I play through Scenario A with my level 5 character, Random Dude the Fighter. At the end of the session, Random Dude gets 1 xp and 2 prestige points. I also get some gold and the chance to purchase magic items.

Some months later, Random Dude is retired, and I have a new character, Random Lady the Wizard. If I run Random Lady through the aforementioned Scenario A, does she get the 1 xp and 2 prestige points? Does she get access to the gold and purchasable items? Or does she get absolutely nothing, making there be no other reason to run her Through Scenario A other than fun?

The PFS rulebook seems to contradict itself a little on this point and I would love to know how it actually works. I understand not being allowed to get the gold or the magic items. I don't like it much, but I understand it. I totally understand if I don't get prestige points for it, but it would be nice if you did. I'm mostly wondering about the xp. If you can only get xp for a scenario the first time you play it, period, that kind of gimps the idea of having multiple characters. There are only so many scenarios to go around, and eventually you would run out, removing any reason to keep playing.

Anyone know how this works? Direct answers from PFS officials would be great, but anyone who knows the answer will be eternally appreciated.

Thank you in advance.

I used to use "For the Cheeeeeze!!!" as my battle cry.

I also used to love "Butt kicking for justice!" from Baldur's Gate.

Other people I have played with have used...

"I'm gonna kill 'im to death!"
"Me am kill you!"
"By all that is stupid!"
"Kill, kill, kill, eat babies!"

That's all I can think of right now.

In a 3.5 game we had a goblin paladin. You read that right. A goblin paladin. That wasn't even the best part. The best part was how he kept from getting killed by guards every time he entered a town. He wore full plate armor, complete with helmet. When he was around anyone he did not know or trust, he kept the visor down, and pretended to be a gnome. He even took gnome as one of his starting languages to complete the disguise. I thought that was great. The player was a total newbie, but he had some really good ideas that even veteran players might not have thought of.

The ones I most hate.

The Down-Timer : Player who wants to play out every last second of down time. Going to the local tavern, stabling the horses, shopping for stuff, everything has to be played out with well-developed NPC's for every single thing anyone could possibly want to do during a visit to a town.

The Sex Fiend : Also Known as the Girl-chaser, the Womanizer, the Hound, and many others. Basically, the player who wants to make every visit to any town into a never-ending search for sex. The kind of player who, whenever encountering any female NPC of any kind, asks "Is she hot?". If the answer is ever, "yes", he immediately tries to seduce them.

The Carbon Copier : The player who plays the same character in multiple games, changing only the name and the story, the actual character itself is the same. An example, a player plays a half-elf fighter in a game. That game ends and someone else takes over to run. Same player plays another half-elf fighter. That game ends, etc., etc.

The Munchkin : Also known as the Min-Maxer and the Power Gamer. This is the player who tried to make a character that is absolutely godlike at level one. The kind of player that is not happy until they can kill Great Wyrms at level 3. Story and character development be damned, they just want power.

The Rules-Lawyer : Does anyone actually need me to explain this one?

The Metagamer : This one tries to use out-of-game information for in-game situations. Things his character could not possibly know, he somehow knows because the player knows. He then gets mad when you call him on it.

The Teleporter : I'm guilty of this one myself. This is when a player seem to be everywhere at once. No matter where he is or what he is doing, he somehow always makes sure he is right up front wherever the action is as soon as it happens. He could be clear on the other side of town, as soon as anything interesting happens, there he is, right in the middle of it. They throw things at me when I do that.

The Smoker : This one has been mentioned several times. Constantly stepping away form the game to smoke. Truly obnoxious.

And Lastly, but quite possibly most annoying....

The Inconsistent Player : Doesn't understand what a schedule is. Drops in and out of the game at a whim. Couldn't achieve regular attendance if you put a gun to their head. Despite this, Insists that they no be kicked, and, when they don't show, they get mad if we play without them. Despite the explanation of "Well, you weren't here", they can't understand how we played without them. They take it as an insult and a betrayal and refuse to ever come back. This lasts for about 2 sessions, then they go right back to the previous pattern. I've had an entire group of these at one point. I don't game with them anymore.

That's all I can think of right now. Oh, and a Necro only needs to be apologized for if it is a bad necro. This is a pretty cool thread (argument notwithstanding), and the necro is therefore forgivable.

"I fly straight up and then - stop."

Said by me right before falling to my death because I said "stop" instead of "hover".

Silly me.