For me, the new hobgoblins looks less /capable/, less "lawful", and less virile in general. I, personally, prefer an artistic portrayal of a robust, vigorous, athletic creature seeming more aligned with an organized, disciplined, militaristic culture.
The new hobgoblin, IMO, looks more feral, raw, chaotic, and liable to "go off" at any point. I think they could make fine creatures in their own right, just not what I picture being a hobgoblin.
Personally, I agree. For me, the P2E artistic portrayal of hobgoblins is probably my least favorite, going all the way back to AD&D and the 1st edition monster manual.
Am I alone in this feeling? I hope not.
You are certainly not alone, and some of us, after having evaluated 2E, are sticking with 1E. For me, I'm picking nuggets of goodness from 2E to include in my 1E play, without converting to 2E, which didn't quite get things right - despite a few improvements (yet many drawbacks) - from my perspective. Instead, if I find any scenarios or adventures I like in 2E, I'll be back-converting to 1E.
Steve Geddes wrote:
*radiates Aura of Wholehearted Agreement*
Nice overview of the Broken Lands and excellent illustrations (which I vastly prefer to the anime style). The top few especially reflect the "feel" of this region, while the topmost illustrates that beauty can yet exist amidst the scarred terrain of these lands.
Look forward to further Lost Omens blogs.
More stereotyping? For example, I know a number of individuals others would consider wealthy who have the ability to focus on higher-order activities in life, such as fighting against blatant stereotyping of historically disadvantaged minorities in the US.
Your comment may be amusing, but isn't accurate.
Another thing to add is that with the heritage update Ancestry choice isn't just about "Dwarf" or "Elf" but you also define as part of that option whether you are dwarf whose family hails from the desert, or from an important noble line. Ancestry combines both race and more specifically "who your parents/grand parents/great grand parents" were.
What would be far cooler, IMO, would be to have /both/ race and ancestry. You choose your race then choose an ancestry (ethnic and geographical background) within that race.
"Ancestry" is a "real world term" as well, so by your logic, that is equally as inaccurate.
The term "race" has been used without issue in fantasy gaming for decades and is highly recognizable. The term "race" is also used FAR more inaccurately in RL every day (tune in to CNN, MSNBC, etc.) to witness the term misused to refer to human ethnicities.
Ancestry is indeed a cool-sounding term and would be far more accurately used to refer to ancestries within distinct races or species.
Changing "race" to "ancestry" in the PF2 playtest was a solution in search of a problem.
Agreed. Through playtest, I and my various groups (30+ players) referred to "ancestry" as "race". The most common reaction to PF changing the term during the playtest was eye-rolling and head-shaking.
We all would do well to remember the differences between fantasy and reality.
Sounds like an awesome module! Can't wait.
However, equating darkness with evil is not new, is not a trend, and derives from mankind's fear of the unknown and what it cannot see. When something is shrouded in darkness or shadows, you aren't sure what could be there, and the imagination begins to race, often leading to fear.
Completely disagree. In order for success to be meaningful in an RPG, the possibility of negative outcomes needs to be possible. Finding a viable solution to a negative outcome can lead to a fun role-playing opportunity. I've seen it time and again in my games. Character is left without anything to do? Have a spare character on hand to play, or take over an NPC/retainer. Or take your lumps, cheer on your mates, and help strategize.
Threats have to truly be threats to be meaningful, and to make overcoming them rewarding.
Good rule Mark.
I'm not interested in debating the definition of a slang term that is defined differently depending on which random webpage you happen to be on. The very fact that "stripperific" contains the word "stripper" within it means that the object it refers to is related to a stripper in some form or fashion. So by the very nature of the word, stripperific accuses the object of looking like a stripper.
And no, just because some random webpage contains a definition of the term does not make it codified. I can create a webpage with a definition too. :)
By the way, multiple random webpage sources contain different definitions of the word. For instance, both Urban Dictionary and Definithing contain this definition, which is very similar to mine: "something that is equal to the feeling of watching a stripper."
I rest my case.
It's 2018 and women should be able to wear revealing clothing without being accused of looking like strippers or prostitutes. That's insulting to our collective intelligences. The fact that some here seem to want women to "cover up" smacks of prudishness and religious judgmentalism.
Seoni's outfit is nothing like that of any stripper I've ever seen, and yes, to many, it may be sexy, and is certainly revealing.
However, it is certainly not impractical as, again, a character with access to magic both high and mundane need not "cover up" or conform to the desires or stereotypes of others. As well, Seoni's outfit in the statuette is not indicative of the clothing she would wear in any circumstance, at any time. It's an extremely practical outfit, allowing Seoni comfort, breath-ability, and freedom of movement for effective somatic casting.
Seoni looks great, just the way she is, and doesn't need to change a thing.
Glenn Elliott wrote:
We went through several iterations to arrive at the final dress, and modified it to be a little more modest in the process. This is 1st edition Seoni, though, not 2nd edition, so we tried to strike a balance.
Thanks Glenn, it looks great. Hopefully, there is room at Paizo to depict individuals in Golarion who are both modest and immodest, of all genders.
Nice, but I would've preferred the new not-stripperific outfit
Not a stripperific outfit. It's the outfit of someone who is comfortable with herself and her body, seeing no need to conform to the prudish instincts of some in society, and who knows she can magically defend herself against any who would seek to take advantage.
I'm still REALLY hoping Resonance gets dropped completely. Too many pools, too much bookkeeping, and too many headaches for it to be worth my time. When I sit down at the table, I want to play a game, not do algebra.
Completely agree - resonance is a monkey on the system's back, dragging it down. It detracts from every PF2 playtest game I've participated in, and the system would be cleaner, simpler, more fun, and simply better without it in my opinion as a long time player/GM of PF1.
Zi Mishkal wrote:
This conforms with my experiences during playtest, both as DM and player. Paizo is asking for a lot of suffering on behalf of its players, many of whom were content with the game they were already playing, to slog through the playtest in order to arrive at a destination that is looking increasingly like a place they don't even want to be.
Wandering Wastrel wrote:
I agree with this, nearly whole cloth. Having both GM'd and been a player in the playtest, there's just a sense that something is off....the game just doesn't feel like Pathfinder to me or my group(s). We're hoping this changes by the time the final version is released, but are not hopeful, given comments by developers.
Captain collateral damage wrote:
The majority of America is white. That doesn't mean we can't represent other colors or a diversity of ethnicities here. Perhaps not specifying Tristian's background is a way to pique interest and get people playing the game to find out more.
Some of these posters seem to be bringing too much real world racial sensitivity into their fantasy worlds.
Whether it's a "bad choice" or not is purely a matter of opinion, but I'm guessing you wouldn't have had a problem if they had a dark-skinned character hailing from a region traditionally associated with light-skinned residents. Quite the contrary, you and others would likely be trumpeting and celebrating the "diversity" and how "progressive" the choice was.
Simple (and I think obvious) solution - do what they did in the 5E D&D Player's handbook. Use "you" and "your" as much as possible. When not possible, use "his or her" and "he or she". Much fairer and more common-sensical approach compared to using solely "her" and "she" as was done here in the PF2 Playtest rulebook.
This is a silly change and I hope in the final product they use race once again. Its so nice that this is just a playtest and we can work out what is and isn't worth changing beforehand.
Agreed, it's a solution in search of a problem.Paizo keeps telling us that real world politics played no part in this change, but that strains credulity, especially considering that their stated reason for using Ancestries (it opening up options that race didn't) doesn't seem to be the case, having read through the Playtest rulebook.
Everything has real world connotations, but this is a fantasy game. If some people playing the game are having difficulty separating fantasy from reality, I hope they are aware enough to recognize this is something that they, as individuals, need to work on, and does not mean there is a problem with the game.
In my experience with 30+ people during Playtest so far, the vast majority are still saying "race".
Danielle - thank you. Your post sums up what many of us are feeling, and says it extremely well. You are heard, and accepted, just the way you are.
Ahh, well, I prefer /his/ art then! Thanks for verifying gender.
Put me down in the vehemently anti-resonance camp. When 2E was announced, I was excited, because I felt like Pathfinder could use a refresh and a facelift. However, a number of proposed changes have caused my excitement to diminish, predominant among them, resonance.
From what I've seen, resonance seems clunky, unwieldy, fiddly, strange to justify in-world, and just un-fun. I'll keep an open mind and playtest it, as I've pre-purchased the materials, but if anything close to resonance in its current form makes it to 2E, I'll houserule it out, completely, just stick with 1E, or migrate to another system.
Cost-benefit, resonance doesn't see worth it, or even close. As a DM, if I want less magic in my campaign, I'll hand out fewer magical items. If something this big within Pathfinder is changing due to abuses within Pathfinder Society, something is wrong.
To sum, resonance just feels...off, and I'm strongly opposed to it in its current iteration.
Nobody has bothered to refute it because it's a ridiculous premise to compare a fictional evil race like goblins to any real world "race", which by the way, isn't truly a race anyway. It's just humans vs. humans, which occurs all the time in Golarion.