Organized Play Member. 13 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.
Leon Aquilla wrote:
Isn't Pathfinder 2e and Starfinder (definitely not Pathfinder 1e) mostly using the OGL as a formality and safety net for homebrewers and 3pps at this point? You can't really copyright game mechanics themselves, but some things might need to be renamed (drow (only d&d to my knowledge associated drow with elves as they are otherwise a type of troll) and Tarrasque (it uses two r's instead of one r like the mythical creature)) and redesigned (the Pf Tarrasque looks pretty similar to the D&D Tarrasque). In theory they might need to also rename ability scores (strength, dexterity, constitution, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma) but they can go for similar names and even some repeating ones (strength, agility, endurance, logic, intuition, and charisma). But for the most part they should be in the clear, yeah? Sure they'd need to reprint things and wouldn't be able to...
Michael Sayre said that PF2e mostly has the OGL 1.0a so it has access to 'traditional' names (e.g. magic missile) and in case freelancers or other parties inadvertently inject 3.0 SRD material into Pathfinder 2e but that otherwise PF2e uses no SRD content.
Starfinder however copy-pastes rules from the SRD in several sections.
Well that definitely sucks for Starfinder then. Also sucks because that's the one my IRL group plays the most between the two. Well, thanks for the info and fingers crossed the revoking of 1.0a doesn't go through at the very least.
Dancing Wind wrote:
This was just posted by a person named Noah Adams, "a licensed attorney with a focus on business, and intellectual property issues in the tabletop and digital gaming industries" on medium.com.
Let’s Take A Minute To Talk About D&D’s Open Gaming License (OGL).
This guy is not only an IP lawyer, he also specializes in tabletop gaming.
His conclusion is pretty stark.
The key point is that OGL 1.0a never says that it is irrevokeable. Therefor, Hasbro can revoke it at any time.
There are cascading effects, which are as dire as you might expect: once revoked, no one can produce or SELL anything based on that license.
So everything in the warehouse, and everything paid for but not yet delivered is illegal to sell. Eating those inventory costs will be deadly.
And, in the future, no one can produce any materials that use the 1.1 license without giving Hasbro an unlimited, royalty-free license to do whatever they like with your material.
Isn't Pathfinder 2e and Starfinder (definitely not Pathfinder 1e) mostly using the OGL as a formality and safety net for homebrewers and 3pps at this point? You can't really copyright game mechanics themselves, but some things might need to be renamed (drow (only d&d to my knowledge associated drow with elves as they are otherwise a type of troll) and Tarrasque (it uses two r's instead of one r like the mythical creature)) and redesigned (the Pf Tarrasque looks pretty similar to the D&D Tarrasque). In theory they might need to also rename ability scores (strength, dexterity, constitution, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma) but they can go for similar names and even some repeating ones (strength, agility, endurance, logic, intuition, and charisma). But for the most part they should be in the clear, yeah? Sure they'd need to reprint things and wouldn't be able to sell until those names are changed (if they even have to go that far).
Maybe I'm just being hopeful that this won't hurt Paizo as much as WotC hopes it will. I'm nervous but honestly looking forward to the 13th because then we can finally see what the damage will be as opposed to having to speculate.
Dancing Wind wrote:
Philo Pharynx wrote:
From RollForCombat's video: there is now a site taking signatures against this. opendnd.games Link doesn't work. And I can't find the site via a Google or Bing search.
If you click the link, it'll add an extra start on it that tries to link it to Paizo for some reason (likely a quirk of the forums). Highlight it, copy, then paste. If the URL changes at all, remove anything that isn't exactly as the link that is posted here. Had the same thing happen.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Philo Pharynx wrote:
From RollForCombat's video: there is now a site taking signatures against this. opendnd.games I would definitely add your name to this. If there's enough backlash, hopefully this can be changed before this gets into a big legal battle.
Spreading that around like peanut butter on bread.
4 people marked this as a favorite.
I've heard a lot of contradictory things over the past week on how this will affect Paizo, Pathfinder, and Starfinder, but one common thing I see is the possibility of Paizo making its own OGL, with that being a pricey endeavor to undertake. I don't work at Paizo and none of the people who I've talked to about this work at Paizo, so obviously take this with the smallest grain of salt, but if they do decide to try and create their own OGL I'm curious what we, as fans of their product and wanting to help them succeed, can do to help. Would buying more of their product help? Or would there be somewhere to donate? Both? I'm not rich, but I'd still want to help in any way I could.
So, I recently picked up the Interstellar Species book and after reading through it, a thought popped into my head. What would a Sepulchral niche Evolutionist Quarlu look like? Quarlu got some lovely new art in this book and, judging by the description they probably don't have bones in their limbs, at least not in the traditional sense. They're also a silicone based lifeform which further muddles things.
One idea is that they're replacing parts of them with parts of corpses, becoming like something of a flesh golem, rather than their own body slowly decaying in the process, so they might swap out the large rock that is their back/body for an enormous skull or swap out their legs for skeletal carbon based legs.
Another is that perhaps they have a fluidity to their bones where they can move them around with ease, maybe hardening or softening them as they please, which is what allows them to create fingers and toes for their hands and feet, and maybe that, as they become more engrossed in Necrografts is what starts to shine through their body?
We could also take full advantage of the strangeness of the Evolutionist and have the Quarlu's body slowly morph into skeletal like structures while maintaining its silicone basing?
What do you guys think? I find thinking of these sorts of things to be a lot of fun and I love hearing other people's opinions.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kinda mixed on it myself.
As a lore book I think it's amazing and getting some updated art is really nice (I'd actually love to play a Quorlu now).
Mechanics wise I was a bit disappointeted.
The Evolutionist's base I actually like a lot, but the niches and the adaptations, imo, leave a lot to be desired which kinda sucks when that's the big thing of the evolutionist--being weird and morphing in alien ways. The Eldritch niche specifically strikes me as one that was an interesting idea but executed poorly as it is entirely dependent on having a caster in the party.
A lot of the new class options felt kinda meh to me. A lot of them felt less like they fit the book and more like "well these ideas are finished so we'll put them in here" with some exceptions like the new Mechanic options.
The race builder is quick and easy to use and I think works well, but giving a lot of stuff tables felt like an odd take.
The race options I'm mixed on because on one hand, most of them are really cool and interesting, but on the other hand I was hoping for more alternate racial traits since that's always a nice way to make a species feel like your own.
I haven't taken much of a look at the added npcs. I like the art, but the npcs weren't what I grabbed the book for.
Hope this helps.
Oh I love NoNat1s (not biased at all being a discord mod, nope).
Really glad he enjoyed it. And he pointed out all the stuff that really makes me love Starfinder. It did take me a bit to get into the game myself, mostly because I found feats lack luster (for the most part) and character options to be kinda overwhelming. Like Solarian at this point has something like 20 character options at level 1.
But I've sketched out a few characters and, after finally playing it a few months ago I really like the setting. Hoping my gm starts another game soon (and that it lasts more than one or two sessions because of scheduling suddenly going south).
Mr. Bonkers wrote:
Luckily there is a Errata for this specific ability:
Tech Revolution Errata wrote:
Page 29: Add the following sentence at the end of the first paragraph of the Sniper alternate class feature.
This ability counts as a trick attack for the purpose of other operative abilities, such as debilitating trick.
Errata can be found here
Unfortunately, while they did do this for the Sniper alternative class feature, Paizo hasn't made such a statement yet for Stunt and Strike. That one is still out there. But the Sniper thing is clarified as "it works".
Ah thank you! Should have checked the errata first then haha. The things that slip your mind.
Hi everyone. I'm making a Shirren operative sniper and am thinking of taking the Sniper alternate class feature from Tech Revolution, but I'm running into a bit of confusion with it. Does the new Sniper ability that replaces Trick Attack count as trick attack for the purpose of other abilities, such as Debilitating Trick? It doesn't specifically state that it does, but I also haven't been playing Starfinder long enough to know if it has those kinds of clauses added to abilities.
I could see arguments for it both working and not working, such as if Debilitating Trick didn't work with it, then shouldn't it get a replacement ability to make up for that fact? But also the fact that it doesn't state that it does count as Trick Attack for all purposes.
Hoping we get a reference to the OG summoner in some way shape or form in the official release. I'd say his Eidolon is definitely a Beast Eidolon.
I love our gnome boi~
Nicolas Paradise wrote:
It should list Primal Focus as the prerequisite. It is probably just a typo.
Just realized that now. Made the edit. Thanks a bunch!
1 person marked this as a favorite.
As the title says. The druid has an 18th level feat called "Primal Wellspring" that requires something called "Wild Focus". The thing is, after looking through the book and scanning all of druid (I also have the PDF version, so did a ctrl+f on Wild Focus) and the only time it's ever mentioned is in this ability. Am I missing something?
There is Wild Order and Wild Shape, but even then that doesn't make too much sense because the Wild Order only ever gets 1 Focus Point and the entire feat is based around spending 3 focus points.
"Primal Wellspring Feat 18
Prerequisites: Wild Focus
Your reserve of Focus Points is a deep wellspring. If you have spent at least 3 Focus Points since the last time you Refocused, you recover 3 Focus Points when you Refocus instead of 1."
Edit: after looking through the abilities again, I realized that the most likely solution is that they were actually referring to 'Primal Focus', but had a misprint and said 'Wild Focus' instead.
"Primal Focus Feat 12
Your connection to nature is particularly strong, and the spirits of nature flock around you, helping you replenish your focus. If you have spent at least 2 Focus Points since the last time you Refocused, you recover 2 Focus Points when you Refocus instead of 1."