Haelis's page

74 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 74 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Well as far as engines go, the new Dragon Age game is supposed to come with its own module creator (on the PC version).

You wouldn't likely be able to duplicate the Pathfinder RPG rules, but you could create great modules using Golarion...

Word of mouth for great modules does spread...Not exactly a great solution, but it is an interesting one.

The Forgotten wrote:

I absolutely hate the idea of the summoner class.

First of all I don't like single pets. This isn't WoW, if something works summon more then one.

Secondly, it seems like the entire class is based around a entity other then the character. In combat the summon creature is the big deal and the PC is simply a spectator/buffer.

Let me make a suggestion. Put the summoners creature on a point based system. The summoner can either put all his points into his creature, split them among multiple creatures, or use them to summon "imps" who basically pop into existence, cast a spell from the summoner and leave. Maybe throw in a system where the Imp needs to do a will save against the summoner each round, or it sticks around and can be commanded again on the next round.

See, you may hate it, but I love it :)

And I don't play Wow, but I do love Final Fantasy games. I could live with the idea of one pet per character, but I would much rather the character has an arsenal of "Pets".

Synchronicity wrote:
Add another Amazon email to the list. My ship date was 19th, arrival date 21st (prime member). I place my order in mid February.

And another...They just told me it wouldn't be released until the 2nd of September. Disgusting since I pre-ordered in May (not as early as you but you would think that was early enough...)

philip mcmahon wrote:

Lesson learned on my part. Should have ordered it from my local game store or the paizo subscription service and took the $19 hit in return for decent customer service. This is the last time I ever pre-order anything from amazon.

Hello from Amazon.com.

We're still trying to obtain the following item[s] you ordered on July 25 2009 (Order# xxx).

Jason Bulmahn "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Core Rulebook"

Still want it? We'll keep on trying. To keep your order for this item open, please click the link below. Otherwise, we'll cancel your order on September 19 2009, if we haven't located it by then.


Argh, if I get that email from Amazon as well, no more pre-orders for them from me or my wife. As it stands, I may never pre-order from them anyway for the above disgusting customer service.

I had a gift card as well which is how I financed my book purchase. Didn't have a local store either until two weeks ago (just moved).
At least I have the pdf...

ruemere wrote:

Examples of classes which made us go "Wow":
- Arcana Unearthed (AU) Witch


There were great classes in AE. The Witch was fantastic but I also loved the Totem Warrior, Unfettered (my wife and myself's favorite) and the Runecaster (can't remember the real name and I lost all my books on my flash drive two days ago :( ).

My 2 cents (euro) as well.
A great change, not from a power perspective but from a flavor one.
- Not all cleric concepts needed heavy armor
- Makes heavy armor more special
- Easy to make backwards compatible because of the feats
- Not a nerf since Clerics now have a free weapon prof (deity weapon)

I am sorry this upsets certain people, but it is really easy to house rule back in if needed. It doesn't get much easier than this.

Had to create a damn twitter account for Paizo!

Hate this thing but hmmm 7 flurries you say? Nice! I wonder if there is a greater chance of Paizo letting stuff like this slip thanks to twitter...

One more vote in favor of dropping the charisma penalty for tieflings :)

Man, I love the art for tieflings in the Planewalkers handbook and in the Planescape box set. And Annah was such a wonderful character.

I believe 2e tieflings had -1 to STR, +1 to Int, and +1 to charisma. Their favored class was rogue, and they had the ability to resist some elements. Can't remember which however. They also had darkness and infravision. This is only the CORE tiefling rules however.

The Planewalker's handbook (thank you Mr. Cook) had awesome tables to generate very. very different tieflings.

A few exerpts:
Tiefling appearance table

Tiefling Appearance
 01-04   Small horns on forehead
7  Single horn on forehead
10  Fangs in mouth
12  Forked tongue
15  Fan-like ears
17  Very small (almost unnoticeable) nose
63-65  Spiny ridges all over body
88-89  Special side effect (roll on table below)
.... up to 100. I think you were supposed to roll 3 times on this table.

Tiefling Abilities
01-03   Blur one time per day
13-15  Darkness, 10' radius once per day
40-42  Suggestion one time per week
25-27  Invisibility two times per week
31-33  Mirror Image one time per day
.... up to 100. You were supposed to roll 4 times on this table. Some abilities are much better than other and some can only be used once a week.

And my favorite table:
Tiefling special side effects:
34-40  Susceptible to spells such as Spirit Wrack and Cacofiend
93  Exposure to direct sunlight inflicts 1 point of damage per round
91  Cannot reproduce
95  Harmed only by magical or silver weapons
92  Holy water inflicts 1d6 damage
94  Cannot enter "holy" areas
41-45  Tanar'ri react toward tiefling as though baatezu
51-60  Presence causes unease in animals
66-70  Prolonged touch withers normal plants
76-80  Touch inflicts 1 point of damage due to high body heat

Prime Evil wrote:

Great Fortitude

Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on all Fortitude saving throws. This bonus increases by +1 for every four levels of experience that you possess.
So what do folks think?

Agred. This is akin to what I have tried in my own games. The feats themselves are not bad...but most of my characters never take them because there are things out there that I need to get to meet prestige Class requirements or even other feats.

I tried giving them a +4 bonus in a previous game I dmed, and I did consider a progression not unlike yours.

I would also like the idea of improved versions of these feats allowing perhaps a reroll or 2d20 "keep the best one".

Anyway, I agree that these base feats could use a little polish.

Druids are very, very powerful in 3.5...

Are either of you familiar with the Order of the Stick? Here is a very good example of Druid power:
One of my favorite quotes: Foolish girl! I am a druid, I have special abilities that are more powerful than your entire class!

Anyway, if something is too powerful, it needs to be fixed. A druid shouldn't be able to become more powerful in melee than a Fighter or a Barbarian. Not when he can also cast dozens of spells.

Mike McArtor wrote:
Evil Genius wrote:
Does she have pigtails?

I have been forcefully instructed to never again include pigtails in an art order.

That doesn't prevent one of the other editors from doing it, I guess, but Sarah is pretty adamant. :\

I don't know about that: sure, it might not work with other races (please never make a drow dominatrix with pigtails and a frilly dress), but gnomes?

From the iconic art + your description, it seems like weird and unusual by human standard haircuts would fit in fine. Gnomes with pigtails, ponitails and Elvis haircuts please.

Putain de merde!
Yes! Very impressive I agree. I may have critisized George Lucas before, but he is still the reason we have SW and Indiana Jones (and Willow).
I don't have money (sniff) anymore but this is really tempting me.

Paizo, you are doing an excellent job with Planet Stories. Every new blog post about it is another step at convincing me to go into debt. Congratulations on the tremendous work you guys accomplish. Your efforts are showing right here.

Perhaps in a couple of years you will be doing pathfinder scifi adventures...Would be neat!

Jess Door wrote:

Looking at Matt's post that you're responding to here, as well as some of his other system analysis posts in this thread...
The issue, if you look at Matt's post, isn't actually about the fighter not being able to do his job at...

VERY interesting post and a very persuasive one...It also explains the 4e system a little too. d20+half your level now makes more sense...

I have seen in at least one other game system the ability at the start of each round to decide how offensive / defensive you wish to be. Iron Heroes and COPS both did this and it worked pretty well. I think I will try this in my next campaign thanks to your explanations.

Great ideas all around and I like a lot of them.
African Jungle sounds good.
Invasion of the Undead sounds cool.
Red Dragon army sounds fun as well.

Here are a couple of ideas that just popped into my head:
- Instead of questing to save the world, perhaps the Heroes are question for something more personal? For example, Druss the axe (Legend) spent many years searching for his wife across the lands and living adventures as he found clues. Something like this could be fun: the players should all be connected by a major NPC (wife, cousin, son, master, connected through honor system, vast reward, guilt...). Each adventure is centered around finding this NPC or at least finding clues as to where he or she is, but this is just a goal. The real adventures each could explore a particular theme, sin or backstory of a PC.
Might be a little difficult to make into a connected story as an AP, but I think it could make for a nice change. An Epic travel across lands filled with foreign elements (at least for the PCs). As a different take, the NPC could be a villain responsible for a war, treason, death, murder...and the PCs are after him for revenge. Still, the core idea does not change.

- Second idea and also stolen from David Gemmell: a siege. Each AP centers on one part of the City / Fortress / Country falling into the hands of the enemy. The PCs cannot stop this from happening but if they accomplish their objectives in each adventure, they delay / minimize the damage. By the last adventure, they will have done enough good to rout the armies / make them give up / allow for enough time for allies to show up / killed the enemy general / created terms for peace / resolved a misunderstanding (the drow / mindflayers / demons created the conditions for war).
Some ideas from the Battle of Helm's Deep, Hoth planet, Legend (By David Gemmell again) could be cool.

ghettowedge wrote:

It's a lot easier than in 3.x where I spent 3 hours the other night statting out a 10th level kobold druid. In 4e I could've just picked a few things I wanted it to be able to do and measured him up against the DM's chart. I wouldn't have had to pick dozens of spells, buy magic items, stat out his wild shapes, stat his animal companion, pick skills and feats....

I suppose this comes down to a matter of DMing taste then? That was really something I enjoyed. As for the choice of kobolds, I was running the first official adventure. That might be a cause of my dissatisfaction. As others have said in this thread, it is not of the highest quality and its encounters may have contributed to my feelings of using robots.

ProsSteve wrote:

I gotto say, I cannot agree with this statement!!! Any creature,NPC, enemy soldiers or DM run character in ANY game can be a lifeless, number orientated, video game drone if you don't put life into them. What your describing is poor DM'ing not a poor game.

If I did those kind of things, then yes, I agree it would be my fault as a DM. But I am more inclined to the types of descriptions which you just used.

I am trying to discern why myself and the OP feel that being a DM is less fun than in 3e, and for me I believe it is the monsters.

I think the way monsters were in 3e allowed me to use more imagination when creating encounters whereas when I DMed a 4e encounter involving kobolds, I felt as if they had to do exactly what they could.

Hmm that might not be clear, let me try again. If I look at a kobold in 3e, I can design him to be anything. Two identical kobolds can do entirely different things. They will be as useless in melee as they are at ranged combat.

But when I choose a kobold in 4e, I feel as if I am DMing a robot instead of a real race. Sure I can have him yell, scream, do stupid stuff, but he is still going to be doing pretty much the same thing in combat that he was designed to do: engage with shield, throw stuff with a sling, use magical orbs, be a minion and die...

The game is great for my kids however, and they are having a blast, so I thank WotC for that. Perhaps as I continue to DM, I will start to enjoy it again, but for now, I will grit my teeth and continue to DM so that my kids can have fun (they reached third level and have not stopped all week asking me when we can play next :))

TheNewGuy wrote:

It was my least favorite gaming experience, ever. I didn't enjoy being in the DMs chair (I DMed two 3.5 campaigns and LOVED DMing).

I'll give them that. They had a great time. I did not.

Just my two cents, but I have had a similar experience. I love to be the DM usually, but so far my Dm experiences with 4e have been terribly borring. My one experience as a player was a blast though (even though I died twice in one afternoon).

For me, it was the video game nature of the monsters and NPCs. Everything is just so regimented, so oriented towards being a game and not "reality" translated into a game, that I just can't be interested in the combat. And I love combat usually...
I suppose I just had a lot of fun stating up monsters and NPCs in 3.0/3.5/AE/Iron Heroes. I cared about the encounters and I imagined the NPCs and monsters. When I DM 4e now, I just feel like I am running lifeless series of numbers with no personalities.

But anyway, I think you will have more fun as a player so don't give up on 4e. I would also prefer to be a player in this edition.

One last thing: 4e and 3e are so different that they might as well be two seperate games. It therefore makes sense that you may not have as much fun being the DM in one as in the other. To illustrate my point, I have had a lot of fun being a DM for 3rd edition games, and for Feng Shui, but I never want to DM Shadowrun or Vampire or Gurps because of the game system.

I think different systems have different appeals not just for the players, but also for DMs.

Charles Wang (Feng Shui RPG)

He was initially just supposed to be a mid-boss type character who was supposed to steal an artifact that the players were protecting.

As they crossed the sea seperating Hong kong from the mainland on a toursit barge, they were attacked.

Charles failed to steal the artifact before it was stollen and ended up taking hostages. So far, nothing special. But when the players ordered him to drop his weapons and surrender, he very calmly pointed his gun at a woman and shot her in the head. That was his only answer. The players realized they would not win this round and gave up the artifact which he escaped with.

This may not seem like much, but because of how it played out at the table (acting, atmosphere, caught the players by surprise...), it turned out to be a very memorable moment and the players often talked about him and tried to hunt him down.

Good times.

Would love to hear more on this from an official as well as fan point of view.
Interesting descriptions of art, customs, eatings habits, fashion are the type of things where Robert Jordan excelled at in his Wheel of Time series and it was what made me love it.

Ie: the Ebou Dari marriage knife and the different stones, the way marriage works within the Aiel, the Shienar view of men and women (and their baths)...

Details such as these make the worlds come to life in my opinion and it is something that Eberron lacks (Five nations being extremely dissapointing in that sense).

Count Buggula wrote:

Wow...I think you have completely mixed up the definitions of realist and idealist. In my mind, it's the idealist who thinks that if somehow we could all talk to each other we'd be able to work things out and all sit down next to the fire and sing Kum-ba-ya. Obama is most certainly an idealist in this regard. The realist understands that there are horrible people in this world who simply can't...

By that do you think America should go after all the bad people? Ok, so how many wars do you want McCain to initiate? North Korea, Iran, Algeria, Syria, China (?), Russia, Venezuela + current wars ?

There is a time for talk, and a time for war. I think I would like a taste of talk please. I am sick of war.

I agree that there are some countries like Iran where talks will lead us nowhere, but sometimes, threats will lead you nowhere as well. As an example, McCain's and Bush's threats to Russia during the recent conflict with Geogia were pointless wastes of breath and showed that they were once more thinking with their brawn instead of their brains.

I have been very dissapointed with McCain.

Another thumbs up for Arcana Unearthed (evolved). Bought the game at the same time as 3.5 and I must say that I was blown away by the quality.

It fixed many of my issues with DnD (light melee warrior class, sorceror, mage fighter...) in general and I also happened to like the fluff. Not a huge fan of the lithorians and Sibeccai, but I do adore faen, abalast, hu-charrad, runechildren, mojh...

I have already decided to keep some of the races for Golarion and I will continue to use AE in the future. The classes are a little more powerful than 3.5, so they may not be far behind the Pathfinder RPG classes in power level at all.

F. Wesley Schneider wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
Harpies have been reenvisioned/Golarionized already?
Yeah, they're less monstrous. There's a pic of a few in Pathfinder #4 (with blindfolds, but you get the general idea). The idea is that they're less monstrous and more hot bird gals. But that's it: one piece of cool but semi-weird art and a few ideas bumping around our heads. I'm sure there will be more coming down the line though.

You wouldn't be inclined to do the same for Medusas would you? I love Tony Di'terlizzi's drawing of one (google tony diterlizzi medusa if you don't know what I mean; it is not a recent piece of art).

More tiefling art period please.
I love the art in the Planewalker's handbook and I would buy a book that had some cool tieflings in it any day.

Hell, I bought a second copy of Planescape Torment just so I could enjoy the voices in English (rather than French).

Goat legs, horse legs, various tails, skin color, types of horns, lack of shadow, eyes, teeth...

Btw, the art for Lavender that was posted on the blog made my day. Great stuff! Male or female, I just want tieflings that are not WotC (I just don't like the 4e tieflings).

2e tiefling stats for Pathfinder would be cool too!

*embarassed cause he is a tiefling fanboy*

Gailbraithe wrote:

I like the mechanics that Monte Cook has created, and I've always enjoyed his perspective on DMing, but I'd rather he remain in an advisory role than actually write for the setting, as his creative fluff tends to leave me cold. Arcana Evolved has sat on my shelf unopened for the last five years, as an example. I read through it once, thought it had some interesting ideas, but I never put any of it to use. While I enjoy his changes to the existing D&D system (from 2E to 3E), his new races, classes and monsters have never done anything for me.

I'll agree with you on the campaign setting, but I must say that I adore many of his races, and most of his classes. They always felt so much more rich in flavor compared to the DnD core classes. Warmain over Fighter, Totem Warrior over ranger, champion over paladin, witch over sorcerer...And then you had some nice unique classes like the Runethane and the racial levels (that WOTC friends of his adapted to core races in Unearthed Arcana).

Like the poster above said, perhaps if you read some of the fiction or even played some of these races, you would see the great roleplaying posibilities of the hu-charrad and their need to nurture, preserve and lead or the Faen and their divine inspirations and flighty natures. For the Mojh who are people who abandoned their humanity and their gender in exchange for knowledge and much, much longer lives, you have a wealth of roleplaying possibilities: what reasons could push a man to do such a change?

Anyway, I ramble on, but I think you should give his fluff a second look. His races and classes in addition to the races in the Eberron campaign setting are the only ones I have used in addition to Core in all of the third edition.

Love Monte's work as well. I adored his Arcana Unearthed. I used its rules to DM my first D20 campaign.

The Diamond Throne is a great setting and I hope he uses it as a novelist more.

What I would like from Paizo and Monte, is the inclusion of some of his already published material:
- Hu-Charrad (race)
- Mojh (race)
- Faen (all three subraces please)
- Runechildren (acquired template)
- Witch (class)
- Unfeterred (class)
- Greenbond (class)
- Ptolus (city)
- ...

I already plan on using them, but them being part of the setting and being featured in adventures would be cool :)

fray wrote:


Willow remains one of my fav movies. I love the Madmartigan theme by James Horner.

But yeah, its not good :)

Haven't tried RotRL yet with Iron Heroes, but I play in the SCap with Iron Heroes, and Dm for STap with Iron Heroes and both are working out great.
I personaly reccommend allowing non-humans and allowing each race to get 2 traits in addition to racial stats btw. It works fine in play.
As a word of caution, be wary of save or die effects. Try to limit them or make them partial (ie: paralysis or petrification work on one body part at a time, give a save each round...). Other than that, enjoy :)

tribeof1 wrote:
I wonder if Monte Cook's giant PC race from Arcana Unearthed is OGL? Mechanically, they'd tread on the half-orcs toes a bit, but could be a fun "civilized strong guy" race, maybe with a background as titan spawn or something.

I would LOVe to see some AE races in Golarion! Hu-Charrad (the giant payable race), and Mojh in particular would be fantastic, but the Faen would be great too!

I have already decided to allow Hu-Charrad in Golarion, but I have no idea where they come from yet :s

Btw, would Paizo have the rights to use Tieflings or Aassimar? I would love to see them as a core race but without the ECL. Staying closer to 2e stats would be nice too :)

All or nothing skills:
Man, I love having a fe ranks in a skill here and there just for flavor and background. Or to simulate that my character is slowly learning something new but that he isn't a master at it yet.

As a DM, I will never allow this in my games, and as a player, I would absolutly hate this.

Wicht wrote:

My players have always looked forward to getting their iterative attacks and the math has never seemed that difficult.

It isn't the math for me so much as that it requires a full attack and therefore that means a very immobile action scene. Making the game mobile is very important to me. But why move when I can stand still and do twice or three times as much damage?

SWSE and 4e have made the right move in kaing the game more mobile. That is one thing I do like. I hope that Paizo also encourages this style of game.

I would love the Online Retail Coordinator job and I even exceed the qualifications, but unless Paizo can lend me a 10th level assassin to do away with my wife's ex, child custody issues will keep me in South Carolina.

If the job is still open by the time our kids hit 18 though, I will definitely apply ;)

Haelis wrote:

1) Do you plan to convert to the new edition of D&D?

I plan on using 4e and will buy the products as soon as they come out. I plan on ignoring the fluff (yuck to most of it; long live the blood war) and mining the mechanics for ideas.
I still plan on converting Iron Heroes to 4e as much as I can.

2) If Paizo converts its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products?

Very little since I already plan on converting them to Iron Heroes. I don't need Paizo to adopt 4e tieflings or 4e fluff though. Just the rules.

3) If Paizo does not convert its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products?

It will make running 4e games a little harder I suppose and require more conversions. I would prefer Paizo use 4e while adapting it to their view of Golarion.

After seeing the Rogue preview and being bitterly disappointed by the themes and design decisions, I can say for certainty that if Paizo decides to stick with 3.5 (or 3.75), I will be fine with that.

If you go the path of 4e, then I will be forced to like it I guess :(

1) Do you plan to convert to the new edition of D&D?

I plan on using 4e and will buy the products as soon as they come out. I plan on ignoring the fluff (yuck to most of it; long live the blood war) and mining the mechanics for ideas.
I still plan on converting Iron Heroes to 4e as much as I can.

2) If Paizo converts its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products?

Very little since I already plan on converting them to Iron Heroes. I don't need Paizo to adopt 4e tieflings or 4e fluff though. Just the rules.

3) If Paizo does not convert its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products?

It will make running 4e games a little harder I suppose and require more conversions. I would prefer Paizo use 4e while adapting it to their view of Golarion.

Difficult question :s
I will be using Iron Heroes regardless of 3.5 or 4th edition, but I am interested in changes to the base combat system (number of attacks, grapples, racial abilities...)
I am looking forward to the 4th edition and will likely plunder it for ideas and rules but I also wish to continue to run Paizo adventure paths. It would be simpler for me that you create your adventures in the most current edition of the rules.

Zaruthustran wrote:

Much (all?) of the thrill of being in the middle of the ocean, on the Isle of effing-Dread, is that you're cut off from safety. You're cut off from authority. You've only got yourself, and your companions. You can't just snap your fingers (or snap your fingers twice; whatever) and be home in luxury and comfort.

Very much in agreement with you there. I am looking forward to running the isle of dread with the Iron Heroes rules. The whole idea of teleporting that easilly distresses me in dnd. While I don't think those spells should be completly removed, I think you could agree to make them higher level. That way they are not arround until your players are more epic in scope. 8th level for the basic teleport and 6th level for the basic fly sounds good to me.

If Rowyn was captured and imprisoned while waiting for her trial, where would she be kept, and what kind of security would there be?
I really am not sure on where to put the Sasserine prison.

James Jacobs wrote:

Humans are more numerous because its humans who are playing the game. They're the easiest to relate to, and the least difficult to write stories about. Even when you get to close-to-human races, like elves or halflings, things change dramatically. I want demi-humans (and demi-human nations) to feel inhuman in a way, otherwise they're just humans who are different heights. Elves, for example, don't sleep. Does that mean that an elven in doesn't have any beds? How is the nightlife in an elven city? And halflings are super short; their realms should be equally sized for little guys, which raises all sorts of implcations.

All of that makes things more fantastic, which ironically makes the fantasic elements of the game more mundane. By focusing on humanocentric regions, we keep things like elves and halflings more special. They certainly don't shy away from human regions, though, and humans are certainly used to having them around in most cases.

Greyhawk's a good example of how we'll be handling the whole thing, though.

In any event, we will have in-game reasons for why humans are more prelavent and the demi-human races aren't in most regions. Those reasons are too lengthy and still being worked out thoguh, and are beyond the scope of an email post, especailly when I need to get back to working on Dungeon #150...

Thank you for your very detailed answer James. It is things like this that are quickly making me into a loyal paizoist.

The in-game justifications are what interest me the most but I love your reasoning behind it. I find the designer thought process very interesting.

James Jacobs wrote:
Although elves, gnomes, and the rest of the demi-human crew are not in retreat in our world... Varisia is very much a humanocentric region. Humans are the primary race in the area, and while there are elves and dwarves and halflings and gnomes and half-elves and half-orcs... there aren't many of them. (Although there's certainly enough of them that if a player makes a character from these races, they won't really turn heads or be considered a "freak" if he does.) The racial mix will certainly change up in other regions of the world.

Thank you for the information James, but if you do not mind me asking, what was yours and Team Paizo's reasoning behind the decision to make non humans less numerous? Was it simply to stay close to Greyhawk or FR?

Also, why are humans more numerous? Could it just be explained by a better reproductive system? Due to wars where Human nations were either not attacked (no human deaths) or where the attackers (killed non humans)?

If non-humans are not as numerous, does this mean that they prefer to stay in their own lands (xenophobia, protection, other reasons)? Also, does this mean most humans are not used to having non-humans around (which could lead to racism)?

Having DMed on and off for AU/AE since the book came out in 2003, it is my belief that most of these classes can fit in any campaign and can replace or add to the base DnD classes.

Fighter versus Warmain: loss of feats versus higher HD and more damage output. I believe there is still room for the fighter and even for the knight from PH2 here. I like to use fighters as NPCs most of the time, but I prefer to play a Warmain/Knight or Unfettered myself (more specialized).

Unfettered versus swashbuckler (complete Fighter): vastly superior class in its defensive capacity, it lacks a few of the cool abilities of the swashbuckler. That said, I would never take more than three levels in the swashbuckler class.

Greenbond versus druid: I love having both of these options. The Druid focusses more on animals and summons, while the greenbond is specialized in nature spirits; he has the power of the Green, which always makes me think of King Arthur and his ties to the land. Healing power is very powerful too. Lastly, the greenbond has access to certain exotic spells that are very nice and handy.

Totem Warrior and Ranger: TW are more focussed on their animal companions but they remain weak at high levels I feel (the animals, not the character). A lot more variety than for the ranger and I believe, less likely to die.

Runethane make great trap masters. They excel at both laying traps and at finding them. They are also good buffers and decent spellcasters. Great class for dwarves from a thematic point of view I believe.

Witches have a lot of favor but I also find them on the weak side. Still, they are an excellent replacement for the Sorceror. They also fit in well with the Warlock class from complete arcane.

Wizards - magisters: not much difference here. Good matches.

Rogues - Akashics - bards: they are all quite different and I see no problem with having them all in the same game.

Overall, I believe I will continue to include these classes in my DnD games and I will be introducing them to the new pathfinder books :)

Eberron for the noir feel of Sharn, and the political opportunities as well as for the races.

Diamond Throne for the cool races and backstory (mohj & giants in particular).

New Paizo setting looks wonderful. Can't wait to explore it and DM for it.

Non fantasy would be starwars of course :)

Stedd Grimwold wrote:

There are enough "signs" in these published adventures of Good creatures (angels) becoming evil...why not the opposite?

You know, stories including fallen angels/celestials are common, but I have heard of only one redeemed Demon (fall from grace).

I can't even imagine how one could manage to change its nature so much :o

How DO you redeem a Demon? "Imagines Demogorgon helping a little old lady across the road"

Eric Boyd wrote:
damnitall22 wrote:
Well I just finished reading issue 148 and overall I was pleased. My favorite adventure was The Automatic Hound lots of good stuff in there. Spinecastle was good too but mainly because of the background stuff. Mainly however I loved Wells of Darkness and was surprised in a good way by the reference to Fall-From-Grace. I would never have thought to see that name again but in was a special treat to see it. Torment was a great game and I miss the days of Black Isle giving us some great roleplaying games. Thanks Paizo for a little nostalgia of the good times.

Glad you liked Wells of Darkness and the Fall-From-Grace reference. Once I decided to include a visit to Red Shroud (who's probably the most heavily referenced Planescape NPC who's not a demon lord), it made sense to include a reference to her daughter.


Very much appreciated :D

I only wish there was more. If Dungeon was not about to die, I would beg for more, perhaps even have her as an NPC herself in an adventure.
Well of darkness is a cool adventure and I look forward to running it :)

damnitall22 wrote:
Mainly however I loved Wells of Darkness and was surprised in a good way by the reference to Fall-From-Grace. I would never have thought to see that name again but in was a special treat to see it. Torment was a great game and I miss the days of Black Isle giving us some great roleplaying games. Thanks Paizo for a little nostalgia of the good times.

Yes, my thoughts exactly :)

Made me load up the Monster Manual, Savage Species, Player's handbook my character creation spreadsheet, and then stat up Fall From Grace :)

Perhaps I should look up the book of exalted deeds though too. Vow of chastity I guess should be appropriate.

Fall From Grace is by far one of my favorite characters ever :D
I tried to read her journal quite a few times to no avail (in the video game that is for those who haven't played).

Don't get your hopes up too high though since she is only mentionned as part of an NPC's description. That is why I wanted to know if she had made appearances or stated up in Dungeon/Dragon before :)
I would actually back-order any mag that had her in it for old times sake (I bought two copies of the video game: French and then English so I could enjoy the game with the original voices)

Having her be part of the Savage Tide might also make some sense too. She is strongly related to the main protagonists, she is powerful, she has access to a lot of information via her 'brothel' in Sigil, and since she is Lawful Good aligned (can't remember for sure, but she sure acted as if she were good so I always perceived her that way) she has a vested interest in helping the PCs.

Sorry if I took it the wrong way Fake Healer. Sometimes humor is hard to come across over messageboards when you do not know the poster. As it was, I was unsure if you being funny or mocking because of the subject matter :)

It seems like I will have to get these fiendish codexes. I wasn't sure of their value since I own the book of vile darkness and the CR ratings of the major demons and devils have been reduced in Fiendish Codex.

As far as lacking anatomy, I wonder if spells can remedy that?
As far as powerful demons, well Red Shroud, Malcanthet and Pazuzu are all massively powerful so I don't suppose they have a problem. Although really, I don't see why a demon lord like Malcanthet would want a child. Seems like demon kids just want to kill their parents...

Fake Healer wrote:

Ok, here we go again....

When 2 demons love each other... try not to cry to learn more.


I'll take that as teasing. I guess you consider my musings useless?

The question appeared in my mind when I read somewhere that Red Shroud had had hundreds of children and sold many such as Fall from Grace into slavery.

Oh well, focus on the questions about Fall from Grace then :)

Tatterdemalion wrote:
Haelis wrote:
Last thing, I am really curious to know if there is anything official on how demons like succubi reproduce? Like human pregnancies?? And demons being immortal, is there such a thing as childhood? Some demons seem to be born directly into adults such as the Slaad in the Sea Wyvern's wake, but for more human type demons, I am curious...

Fiendish Codex II explains demonic origins pretty extensively. The offspring of a demon would be a half-fiend (and not another demon).

Unless you wanted it otherwise in your campaign :)

Good point. I should of thought of that. But what happens when it is two demons who mate (Pazuzu and the queen of Succubi got Red Shroud for instance). I am curious whether that is anything like it is for mortals (humans, dwarves). Does Fiendish codex go into that?

After seeing Fall From Grace mentionned both in the last Dungeon magazine and also in the Dragon issue with Malcanthet (wow by the way! Great writting!), I was curious if there were any official stats for 3e for her, or if there was anything written about her in a previous issue of Dragon? Or Dungeon?
She was a very striking and terribly interesting character and I always regreted we didn't learn more about her.

I was even wondering if there was any way to integrate Fall From Grace into the Savage Tide campaign as an ally (or perhaps for an evil party, as a present to Red Shroud or Malcanthet).

Last thing, I am really curious to know if there is anything official on how demons like succubi reproduce? Like human pregnancies?? And demons being immortal, is there such a thing as childhood? Some demons seem to be born directly into adults such as the Slaad in the Sea Wyvern's wake, but for more human type demons, I am curious.
I was thinking that is one way for Malcanthet to get the PCs to do her bidding. Mate with one of them, then show them their nice, new, evil succubus daughter. :p

Mike McArtor wrote:
Monte's stuff is really good (naturally), but his classes and races are so intimately tied to his campaign setting that incorporating them would be difficult. That's not to say you, as the GM, can't do include all the AE goodness you want, but we'll likely mostly stick with what we create. (I say mostly because we'll probably use monsters from Tome of Horrors... eventually...)

More than a fair answer and I thank you for it. I will likely try to keep some of Monte's stuff, but I agree that integrating them is very difficult because of the flavor. Hence why it would have been wonderful if you at Paizo did that hard work for me ;)

That said, Paizo is the only company that is making roleplaying supplements I have interest in. Thank you.

Since Monte Cook has more or less retired from publishing gaming material (at least for now), I was wondering if there was any interest from Paizo in using some of his material just as the Iron Heroes rights were purchased by a third party.
Arcana Evolved gave us some great material, and while I am sure paizo can craft just as good stuff, I think it would be a pity to not see any more use of the Monte Cook creations. The Hu-Charrad (Giants) and Mojh are some of my favorite fantasy races, and I love the Greenbond and Runethane classes.
I will adopt your new campaign setting without a second thought, and I will likely include some of Monte's stuff in my own games, but I prefer it of course when it is done flawlessly by professionals such as you. :)
Just simple mussings as I look impatiently forward to Paizo's future.

1 to 50 of 74 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>