Doctor Carrion's page

I recently learned that in the BETA for pathfinder, Half-Orcs had the following ability scores: +2 STR, +2 Wis, -2 Int. For me, that was much much more true to the nature of what an Half-Orc is than The CRB will ever be. Abnormal Strength, bestial senses and a dim wit. Because PFO won't be a direct translation of rules, I'm really hoping to get my beloved orcs back.

I want to see Half-Orcs portrayed as strong and stupid with generous helpings of ugly. I'd like to get a discussion going to see where the community stands on this.

Forgive me, but I was recently inspired by warhammer 40,000.

In 40k there are certain troops that teleport or are summoned into battle. Different armies address this in different ways, but it is often delt with in a manner like this:

-You have your guy who has the power of teleportation. He can let a bunch of men onto the field.

-You take this guy, and others like him (in case he gets killed en route), you put him in a vehicle (or in PFO maybe a horse!) and you RUN him up the field as quickly as possible

-This guy drops his payload and teleports summoned creatures or teleported allies onto the field.

I think that teleportation ought to be relevent in PFO. There are just too many cool tactical uses for it.

Different player organizations should have the right to ban certain archetypes and races as they see fit: After all, a clan of elf hunters should be free of elves. A clan of evil Necromancers should be free of paladins and positive energy clerics. A tree hugger faction should be able to function by using druids in favor of other casters and primitive barbarians in place of their cosmopolitan and well armored fighter counterparts.

I don't think anyone will disagree with me that this type of selection may happen, but I'm here to argue that it shouldn't be penalized in game- In other words, this sort of "selective" clan style shouldn't be inherently weaker than a clan where everyone's invited.

My fear is that every (or virtually every) class will be NEEDED by a clan: Good clerics and paladins for healing, paladins for killing evil opponents, wizards and sorcerers for save or suck spells.

This kind of system reminds me of world of warcraft, and I really don't like it. I believe a clan should be able to function without every class role covered.

In short, I guess I'm issuing a plea to goblinworks: Please keep any one class from monopolizing any ubiquitous and oft needed role. A druid should be able to heal fairly well in a village that has banned traditional clerics. A heavily armored company that bans squishy cloth casters and monks should be able to overcome their weakness with potent cleric magic and good old fashioned sword fighting. A game where all 11 classes are needed by every company is a game that misses the point: Heroes and villains, city dwellers and country folk, skirmishers and heavy infantry, these different peoples look differently and fight differently from each other.

For as long as I can remember, there's been a strong link between the furry fandom and computer/tabletop RPG's. I'm not surprised that the furry culture has gravitated towards these things- I AM surprised that they are almost universally catered to by games and their worlds: For example, Galorion includes the cannon races of cat, rat, monkey, fox people, etc.

I simply want to know if I'm the only one who is annoyed by this.

Did underpowered monster races like goblins and kobolds get beefed up in the ARG? I really like the idea of playing a lot of these bestiary races but they seem so profoundly underpowered!

So I have a couple of friends, and together the three of us have been playing pathfinder on and off for about two years. The sessions have always been impeded because my friend's clingy girlfriend calls constantly (average once every 5 minutes: She is actually clingy to the point of it being a disease). Sometimes, he just ditches us for her.

All those problems paled in comparison to what happened next: She wanted to play!

So her boyfriend was DMing (You can't DM for your girlfriend ever)and as she started playing, the vibe was absolutely devastated. It went from three dudes telling foul jokes and being cruel/funny to two of us watching as the now censored dm coddled his girlfriend in and out of game. She knew nothing about the rules. Her barbarians rage rounds per day were never kept track of. And at one point she requested "a cute baby kitty my character can have around."

I wanted to kill myself.

Has anyone here ever had a woman or S/O in general destroy a game?

I was considering rolling a ranger, rogue or alchemist and going crazy with poisoning my weapons. Is poison effective? Is it better on melee or ranged weapons? Is it worth sacrificing full attack actions to coat a weapon in poison and launch a single attack?

Discuss.

Where do I find preparation H?

So far we know that there will be 11 archetypes to correspond with the 11 core classes, as well as other archetypes to fill other roles, such as crafting.

I want to know how many of these "other" archetypes there will be and how they will function

I want to see what the developers have in store for the 11 core archetypes- even just a few cool ideas or sneak peaks.

By now we know how time works, we know how contracts work, we've been following the middle ware drama, we know kickstarter is over. I'd like to see more big picture blogs and less small detail stuff- which is also great, but I feel like the fans are totally in the dark about such important things as what combat will be like.

Dear Goblinworks & Paizo,

You asked for 50,000 dollars. Tall order. We gave you something closer to 300,000 dollars. The fans were VERY good to you. And as a fan, I don't think we should have to "pay to play" as they say.

I'll buy the game. I'll buy expansions. Game companies did business like this for a long time, even with the costs of maintaining the game- And they profited.

I think in the wake of such generosity you should lay off our wallets, we have enough bills to pay. Charge whatever you want for the game, but after this I don't think we should pay a cent more.

My two cents.

I'm deeply confused. I thought the tentacle discovery was used to get more attacks, but here in the SRD description it states that "the tentacle does not give the alchemist extra attacks."

Tentacle (Ex)

Benefit: The alchemist gains a prehensile, arm-length tentacle on his body. The tentacle is fully under his control and cannot be concealed except with magic or bulky clothing. The tentacle does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round, though he can use it to make a tentacle attack (1d4 damage for a Medium alchemist, 1d3 damage for a Small one) with the grab ability. The tentacle can manipulate or hold items as well as the alchemist’s original arms can (for example, allowing the alchemist to use one hand to wield a weapon, the tentacle to hold a potion, and the third hand to throw a bomb). Unlike an arm, the tentacle has no magic item slots.

I was pondering about PFO battles just now, and one thing that frightened me was the thought of a hectic, ugly mesh of men jumping in circles around each other like in WoW. One thing that I realized would ensure large, intellectually stimulating battles is NPC warriors. Let me explain:

Years ago I used to play the Star Wars: Battlefront games. What was fun about those was that while NPC troops, vehicles, etc. flooded the battlefield and acquired the bulk of kills, it was the actual players that made all the difference. For example, as a sniper you could sit back and let the NPC's try to take a fort. By hiding and taking out key targets (guys on turrets, heavy weapons platforms, etc.), you could drastically influence the outcome of the battle.

Battles like this would be even more orderly in a medieval fantasy setting, because of the regimental, slow motion of foot troops who will make up the bulk of most battlefields- as opposed to the speedy, vehicle centric model of scifi combat.

This way of doing things will provide for much more cohesive, believable armies. The heroic player characters can do their part in various ways, by buffing/debuffing troops, healing them, or just rampaging through them.

These soldiers could potentially be very customizable, especially if there is some sort of point system used to regulate troop power. There could be archers/missile troops, pikemen, cavalry, siege crews, etc. and elite versus swarmy versions of all of them.

Fore example:

Human Peasant Pikemen: 4 points each

Light armor proficiency: 1 point per man
Proficiency with some martial reach weapon: 3 Points per man

Elite Elven Archers: 7 points each

Light armor proficiency: 1 point per man
Longbow Proficiency: 3 Points per man
Improved longbow training: 3 points per man

Each point could represent 1 gold or something similar: Leaders of kingdoms could pump out troops to their specifications, raising and training them on base and paying for them based off their numbers and skill. This would make large scale battles very RTS like, which I think would be a fun dimension to add to the game.

My two cents on battle.

Am I the only one?

I was extremely disappointed when I heard that this game was going to try for a kid friendly angle and avoid a mature rating like it was the f++!ing plague. I have a whole heap of issues with this, and I'd like to make them clear, in the hopes that others will agree and push for a more mature game.

Problem #1: I don't want to pay PFO only for them to tell me what I can and can't say. I want to be part of a game based on free expression. Sure, words like F%$@ and S%!% take me out of the fantasy world a little bit, but there will surely be Out of Character chat channels and the like. The age written on my state issued ID suggests that I'm a grown man, and I don't want to be treated like a child.

Problem #2: Young children have little to offer in terms of storytelling. I think if you want people to set up kingdoms and forge epic dramas and the like, you should have a game full of mature, creative people.

Problem #3: Young children are not the target demographic of PFO. Old timers who know about eve want in on this game. Tabletop RPG enthusiasts (who are usually at least in their teens) want in on this game. I'm sure there are plenty of kids who want in, but this isn't their game. This isn't WoW or TOR. Sure, I have no problem with them playing, but Goblinworks shouldn't sacrifice the freedoms of mature players to allow for more immature players.

Let me start by saying how relieved and happy I am to have found this game. Not only does it look like something revolutionary, but the player/fan input and staff responses have been awesome. I get the feeling that when you say something on these messageboards, someone in charge of development sees it. To me, this is definitely the right way to build a game.

I wanted to fire up a discussion about the ranger: How it's class abilities should be implemented, changed, etc.

Combat Styles:

I really fear that at launch, there will only be the two weapon fighting and archer styles. Since my first encounter with the ranger in neverwinter nights, I thought "This guy is awesome. But if only I could give him a greataxe!" We shouldn't have to wait for an expansion to have the option of a real TWF ranger.

Animal Companions:

I admire the diversity of companions allotted to druids in PF (and rangers with the beast master archetype), but I think that options should be open for everybody. The limit on rangers' companions to a small list of creatures seems unfair. It's not about balance, it's about individuality.

I would also much prefer a game where I have real options. In some D&D computer games I've played, there is always a relatively tiny list of companions, most of which mammals. I think some unconventional options would be cool. For example:

-Giant Spider (This one was in the neverwinter games and was a load of fun, and pretty to look at.)
-Dire Bat
-Monitor Lizard
-Giant Frilled Lizard (Which exists in the bestiary I, is large enough to be a mount, but sadly has no companion rules).
-Giant Beetle
-Axe Beak (As far as I know, this is a paizo creation, and I like it. Also, ridable!)
-Giant Crab (Because you know, crazy people play computer games too).
-Goblin Dog
-Megalania or some other large sized reptile mount
-A snake of some sort

Stealth:

It seems paizo is taking the stance that stealth should be an invisibility buff. I argue that rangers should be capable of stealth just like rogues, although I would understand if it wasn't as efficient (longer cooldown times to go into stealth, etc.) or if wearing medium armor made it impossible to hide. I definitely think stealth is an important part of the class, but also an OPTIONAL part of the class.

With so many flat out awesome non-core classes out there, can't you put something else in the initial launch in place of the bard?

Bards are despised all over the world for the fact that they sing in battle. This is pretty much the lamest thing ever and I think a lot of people will get behind me on that.

How about an alchemist or magus?!

I've been following the development blogs and I've been lurking on the messageboards for some time, so I'd like to introduce my idea for a chartered company.

The Black Lotus Consortium

The Black Lotus Consortium is an association of elves (and half elves) held together by a common set of beliefs, as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------
-Elves are the master race: While killing an innocent dwarf, human or gnome for no reason is unnecessary and tactless, the well being of other peoples is an after-thought at best. However, diplomatic relations with other races should be maintained when it is beneficial for the Black Lotus.

-Nature is a tool to be exploited by elven kind: While a woodland elf might see a tree as a divine giver of life, the consortium sees a pile of potential lumber waiting to be turned into something useful, like a balista or a castle door.

-Battle is a game of speed and cunning: Elves do not perform well in lengthy toe to toe fights. The key to victory for such a people is not to lumber about in cumbersome armor, but to strike from the shadows. Among our ranks, full plate wearing combatants are allowed, but only if they demonstrate remarkable speed and agility while armored. Deception, stealth, hit and run tactics, and fast, focused assaults are the bread and butter of BLC warfare.

-Blessed be the unnatural: The Consortium admires the arts of necromancy and alchemy with equal zeal. Both represent power over nature, and even life itself. A frail people, elves suffer from a relative lack of toughness that can be overcome by allowing the dead to fight for them, or even by horrific self induced surgeries and mutations that turn weak individuals into tentacle ridden monstrosities perfected for war.

-Poison is sacred: The use and creation of poisons is of great importance to the Consortium. Crafting poisons is an important business for the group, and a powerful weapon of war.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Alignment: The BLC isn’t “evil”, although it is fundamentally racist. With little regard for the law and fueled by a sense of elven superiority and selfishness, most members would fall somewhere near Chaotic Neutral.

Government:

-The Consortium’s government is a monarchy in which the king has ultimate authority. The king of the Consortium is called the Overlord.

Objectives:

-The establishment of a kingdom.
- To become a major player in the weapons, armor, and magical/alchemical items market as well as in construction
-To act as mercenaries or assassins for anyone who can afford us

Your Character:

Race: Only elf or half elf

Class: The BLC has nothing but scorn for the lawful codes of monks and paladins. Druids seek harmony with nature and so they are unwelcome. Bards will probably be excluded as well, because playing music in battle is an act of high cowardice. That aside, any cleric, fighter, barbarian, ranger, rogue, wizard or sorcerer is more than welcome.