Farastu's page

169 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists.



1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've played a lot of Rifts and (old) World of Darkness (Vampire and Werewolf mainly) as well as Pathfinder/3e. Mainly this was because, those are the three that have been the most popular in my area. Recently however Savage Worlds has taken off in popularity around where I live so I tried that one. 5e is gaining popularity too, but isn't honestly a priority for me to try right now.
So far I've also played Numenera, Fudge, Hero System and Shadowrun, and (though it was a long time ago) D&D 2e.

I'm going to try Fate as well. I own Burning Wheel so maybe I'll actually get a chance to try that at some point.

So, I want to try more RPGs, I love PF but, need a break from it and want to branch out.

But, what I'm wondering is, what other RPGs would you recommend I look into? Ideally I want to try ones that are very different than what I've all ready listed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wheldrake wrote:

Why cater to requests for a specail snowflake race that is even more special than the existing special snowflakes?

A player character that is a goblin-slash-octopus??? Really? You really want this dude hanging out down at Joe's Bar & Grill looking for a new quest? I mean, most savvy folks would shoot that critter on sight. Not to be racist, or anything, but monsters are monsters and this "octoblin" or "goblipus" looks like a squirming abberation if ever I saw one.

We've already got a few aquatic races in PF, let him play one of those, if he must (merfolk, gillmen, undines). We've also got loads of Lovecraftian horrors, let him play a deep one throwback - human for starters, but that fishman transformation is just waiting to happen.

Or just make him a deformed gnome. That alone is curse enough to slake anyone's thirst for a special snowflake race. <g>

I rather dislike the whole way special-snowflake gets used on these boards in such a negative way. The the one exceptionally weird character amongst a group of otherwise probably mostly human (or some other relatively common-place for the setting race) characters is a trope which certainly has a valid place in fiction, and I think in gaming too... for that matter so do parties full of oddballs (X-Men and Inhumans immediately come to mind here).

As you mentioned the other PCs in some sense are "existing special snowflakes" anyhow.

Anyhow, I actually like the deformed gnome idea... because it immediately makes me think gnome alchemist whom had a alchemical mishap happen. Playing the result of that could be fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

New version for PC is working well for me so far.

Any plan to update the one for Ipad? Being able to sort monsters by class would be super helpful.
It also crashes a lot on Ipad since the OS update. I did try deleting redownloading and reinstalling it, twice actually, but it still crashes often.
I love the program so am really hoping for an ipad update soon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CrimsonVixen wrote:


House Rule:Succubus killing a target via level drain will cause the victim to awaken as a succubus the next evening.

Oh boy, I better not suggest this houserule to my players, I give them a session or two at most until at the very least one of them decides to seek out a succubus.

I did have a PC that let a succubus grapple him last game though... and he accepted her gift. Fun fun fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm thinking (and not the only one who has mentioned this) that Unchained probably will address a lot of concerns.

A little part of me is wanting a PF 2.0, but a bigger part of me is not. Why? Because, if I'm going to use new rules, I'd rather it not come down to investing more money in getting new versions of what are essentially the same D&D books that I all ready have multiple editions of. Now, if 2.0 is somehow backwards compatible with the original PF, than, I'm more tempted, because, I can:
A: use the wealth of material I all ready have and not have to wait around for it all maybe to one day be released in the new edition
B: Not have to spend more money getting what is essentially the same books I all ready spent money to have in multiple editions of D&D.

I'd rather spend money on something much more dramatically different than a whole new edition on PF. There are a wide variety of other very different settings and rule systems out there that I think are interesting. I would rather invest in them at this point than in starting to collect yet another new edition of PF, or a new edition of D&D for that matter.

I love the idea of unchained though, because, if done well, it can add new rules to the game/maybe improve old ones, without me needing to buy another Bestiary one, Player's Guide, and so on and so forth... I can just use the ones I all ready have.

Now, eventually PF may need to update to an entirely new edition to stay viable, but, considering their sales, I'm pretty skeptical they are near that point.

I do find myself wishing PF were more... hmm, rules light is tempting to say, but I think it's less that, than, just certain things need to be somehow streamlined.

For example, spells. I love the concept of magic, but the classes drive me nuts, because, a lot of people, even if they can play any other class just fine, and don't bog down combat with a fighter, barbarian, or other magic free or magic light class, will take forever digging through spells, trying to figure out what exactly what spell does, and what they want to do... I am terribly tempted to start using a timer during combat because of this. That this is such a common issue says to me, somehow magic needs to be streamlined.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For Golarion, I think the current ones work fine. If I were to add, maybe a few, maybe goblins, full-blooded orcs. They fit in well amongst the other core races, granted they are the more villainous side of the equation, unlike any of those.

There are plenty of games I love where the core are different though (such as Planescape where races such as tieflings, aasimar, githzerai and rogue modron are). My own homebrew games don't use the standard core Pathfinder races either (aside from humans) but, that doesn't mean I think Golarion needs to branch out more than it all ready has when it comes to what the core races are.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't know that I'd ever run a long run PF game with no magic items (though refluffing them as advanced technology I could see). However I am curious how to make such a game work, and certainly, having characters rely less on gaining magic items would be rather nice.

So, it occurs to me, if no or few magic items around, then there's different ways it could be handled, and one of them would be to simply have characters all rely on innate bonuses.

Now, I've ran low magic games where there was maybe one or two magic items available (though these have been short run games), and they honestly can run pretty smoothly, maybe with just very minor tweaking, especially if you have players whom like to be more tactical and think outside the box as far as how they handle things. If you give monsters with certain things like high dr, something mundane as a vulnerability that also helps.... however, lately I've been pondering how a game where there no magic items (or even just ones that are very different) could be handled with innate bonuses granted to characters as they level instead.

I mean things like AC that don't normally scale with level particularly. Has anyone used a system where AC increases with level before? Maybe at really high levels did you start giving them some sort of automatic miss chance instead?

Not having magic items also opens up maybe allowing characters to choose from some more bonus feats, or other things which would grant them additional bonuses, or special abilities... it seems to me, that mythic tiers actually could maybe serve this purpose, instead of outright raising the character's effective level simply helping them keep pace with how powerful they would be if they were fully outfitted, though I think at higher tiers mythic is way more powerful than Paizo gives it credit for.

The other alternative I can think of is somehow giving a certain amount of "gold" as "xp" which characters can invest in special ability... but that would be a little bit trickier (maybe even a huge pain, don't know), as it essentially would create a whole new point buy system. There's RPGs that do this, plenty, and would be interesting to see with PF, or another d20 system, but has anyone actually tried something like that?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really think the main issue is that Paizo treats character level as affected by mythic tiers as just adding 1/2 of their mythic tiers to effective level, when really from what I've found each tier really is like gaining a whole new level.

The AP itself is based on the mythic tier = to 1/2 character level equivalent that's why it suffers.

In my homebrew game I treat each mythic tier as being equal to a character level, and determine what CR would challenge them to what degree considering that.

I also find mythic rules can be great ways to create interesting variants of monsters for the PCs to have to deal with even in games where the PCs aren't mythic, but it's best to treat MR as each being roughly equal to a 1 point boost in CR with them.

Aside from that issue, I think mythic rules are tons of fun, and great conceptually, but I wouldn't run the AP as is. However I might take elements from it here and there at some point and use them (personally I never straight up run APs, just not my cup of tea, however I do own some of the PDFs for this one).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cap. Darling wrote:
JRutterbush wrote:
Cap. Darling wrote:
Sorry not impressed. This is still a rules driven class and that is a sad direction for the game.

"My intellectual knowledge of magic combined with a natural affinity for magical energy means I am the master of shaping raw magic. I don't 'cast spells', I wield the very essence of magic itself as my power!"

Yeah, no, you're right... that's not flavorful at all.

It is only flavor full because your perspective on magic is from the game. Spells and spell levels and all that stuff is a way the rules make magic bound to the rules.

arcanist( some one that study magic to do fantastic stuff)
wizard(some one that study magic to do fantastic stuff)
How will you discribe the Arcanist witout talking about the rules?
Yes you can throw in new things like raw magic but that is nonsense, because until the day before this one that was what sorceres used.

I am sure this will be a great class in the end. But the current concept can go in and be, the wizard of every gaming world because it flavorwise IS wizard.

Easy:

Arcanist: One whom takes existing magic and deconstructs it so that they might use it for their own purposes

Concept wise they make me think of a spell-thief.

In fact.. I can see someone playing up a character like this as a sort of magic-hungry "leech", and maybe even wizards taking issues with them for their feeding upon magical energies (I can see a wizard claiming an arcanist has no right to the magic they take and deconstruct to harness, and a aracanist having a very very different perspective on it).