I believe that the paid mods move may be a way to grandfather in popular mods that Sony has otherwise banned due to requiring external assets, such as vampire reskins and story mods.
I am not going to say that it is a completely altruistic move, because it clearly isn't.
But as a person with a recently perished desktop, I can definitely appreciate more mods coming to console, as a replacement computer would be in the ballpark of $3,000, something I just can't bring myself to fork over.
I forgot to clear my cache after Paizo reset after the login problems everyone had a few days ago, so sorry about ghosting for a few days. It only occurred to me today to clear the cache.
Saurian Shaman falls under first-party material without a technological slant, so it is greenlit.
Regarding illumination, the only item-based illumination early on comes from non-magical torches, lanterns, etc. Magic items that provide illumination may be a part of some treasure that you find. Magic spells that provide illumination are not banned, but keep in mind that is a spell slot gone that could have been used for something else.
Has anyone seen the theory about Preston Garvey being the real mastermind behind all the raiders in Fallout 4? It's a spoof obviously, but it actually makes a small bit of sense: pretend that he is out for the good of the Commonwealth, send raiders to make him profit, and, when their usefulness runs out, send the General after them. Best of all, his dupe never knows any different, because who would suspect that the shining do-gooder who always rats out raiders is actually a criminal mastermind?
Brew Potion is fine. As I said, the crafting ban was for more expensive, powerful, and time-consuming to craft.
The High Sword, Low Axe feat is greenlit for player use.
Fighters get Stamina free, as per Pathfinder Unchained. It helps make them more viable and more on-par with other martials.
Aasimar subtypes are greenlit. You still must remember my stipulation on how they are portrayed and the trait that they all must take.
No drawbacks for bonus traits. My experience is people take drawbacks that do not pose even the slightest detriment, such as an arcane detriment for a martial.
What specifically from the table? Some of the options, such as +2 CHA, are worth way more than a mediocre spell-like ability.
I should have more up later. If I missed something, please message me. Just got up a while ago, so I'm in a half-sleep state.
I would rule that all Favored Class Bonuses are fair game for characters.
Just letting everyone know that I will be absent from the boards Thursday EST due to my grandmother having open heart surgery scheduled for that day. Just keeping everyone informed in case I do not respond to questions on that day or the day after.
Don't worry about clearing the maneuvers. Combat is going to be fairly brutal in this game, drawing inspiration from both Darkest Dungeon and megadungeons like Rappan Athuk and Slumbering Tsar.
I see your point, but are sequels actually bad?
After looking over the E3 information, I have one thing that I am not pleased about: some Skyrim and Fallout 4 mods being sold out to Bethesda, who in turn will be selling them to consumers. As a person who uses quite a few mods, I am definitely not happy about this change.
It is actually possible to go back and say, "Hey, I did not know that word really meant that." without continuing to use the word. People just had an anyeurism because the word was said in the first place despite being in an innocent context and he was trying to explain his take on what the word meant.
People calling you appellations like "Hitler", "fascist", or "bigot" usually prompt a desire to explain that you are not, in fact, a racist and did not know whatever you did was truly racist/whatever. That's part of the very natural human desire to try and calm down a volatile situation and exonerate oneself of any perceived social misalignment.
To not allow a person to explain that they meant something else when the context made it clear that they did not intend whatever they said as racist is just toxic behavior. People have a right to defend their intentions when people are intent on metaphorically raking them over the coals. It is not defending the word itself as much as their innocence as to what the word meant to others.
A measured approach is necessary to not come off as an ***hole, histrionic, preachy, etc. People who make mistakes react far better to honest discourse meant to correct said behavior instead of wild accusations and terrible false parallels born from a kneejerk reaction. There is, after all, a person on the other end of the screen and it pays to remember that not everyone knows what you know.
In my opinion, people getting irrational about someone making an honest mistake like that is almost as bad as if someone intentionally made a racist remark. Both are born from a closed mind and an unwillingness to view the world through any lens other than one's own.
EDIT: Seeing the new posts that cropped up while I posted this one, Miss Price has a wonderful way of handling it that matches the point I am making here. It benefits no one going off about unintentional misuse of words or acting on false information. Sane, reasonable discourse can often make a person see far more then name-calling, shaming, or banning can.
My character is almost level 200 without any sort of glitches.
Do I play this game too much? Hell no!
Anyone here ever roleplay a character that honestly and truly confirmed that what DiMA was hypothesizing about the Sole Survivor being a synth? How did you roleplay them? Did that knowledge change them? Who did you side with?
My favorite character ever was a Preacher-style... preacher. Nothing like roleplaying a pastor with a .45 taking down those evil Legionnaires and being a goodie two-shoes! Well, apart from playing as a chainsaw-wielding, chem-dropping maniac that just caused chaos for the fun of it. Or my Elvis-impersonator who spent most of the game talking his way out of problems or else letting Veronica punch stuff to death.
I have a question though: which is your favorite DLC? Gunrunner's Arsenal and the gear packs do not count!
I know I definitely was hyped yesterday when I witnessed all of those reveals. I am going to list all the ones that really make me squee.
1. Crash Bandicoot Nsane Trilogy: I was already psyched about it coming out at the end of the month, but when I saw that Coco Bandicoot was playable... MY GOD. She was definitely one of my favorite characters from back in the day and having her be a swappable protagonist with Crash is amazing.
2. The Evil Within 2: I know that the first game was not as popular to most as it was to my circle of friends, but I personally loved it. Dark, gritty atmosphere, meatgrinder difficulty, intelligent enemies, psychological terror, and a Resident Evil-style system made it all amazing. Seeing the second game being revealed that ties up some loose plot elements is just awesome!
3. Assassins Creed Empire: I have been getting tired of Assassin's Creed in recent years, but this may very well renew my interest in it. Skyrim-esque RPG elements blended in with a more fantastic depiction of ancient Egypt is a huge plus. Plus it looks like the protagonist somehow goes to the Roman Coliseum, so that should prove a fun jaunt.
4. Dishonored Death of the Outsider: First off, Dishonored combats stealth and fantasy gameplay, steampunk and occult themes, and a distinct Batman vs The Punisher juxtaposing of genres. I love how there is the option to be a silent ghost, moving your way through the cities of the series undetected and bringing the villains down without blood or, if you are the type that likes violence, go full-on rampage-mode vigilante on your enemies. Playing as Billy and/or Daud and working to bring down the Outsider, who I have come to despise for causing human suffering and chaos for mere amusement, is going to probably be an amazing experience.
5. Wolfenstein 2 The New Colossus It's a Wolfenstein game, you get to kill Nazis in an alternate future where they took over the world, and you can ride on a fire-breathing, metal-covered dog the size of a bus. Need I say anymore?
6. Skull and Crossbones: The folks behind Assassin's Creed Black Flag are finally making a real pirate game! That in itself is enough to look forward to.
7. Beyond Good and Evil 2: It's the sequel to Beyond Good and Evil. If you need more of a reason to be ready for the game to release 30 minutes ago, just watch the trailer.
8. South Park The Fractured But Whole: South Park as a turn-based superhero RPG. Your superpower is your ability to create a variety of farts and Wendy is now a superhero known as 'The Callgirl'. Need I really list any other reasons?
9. Kingdom Hearts 3: It's Kingdom Hearts, people! Why would you not be psyched?
Rysky, the guy in my example did not know anything about the word beyond the fact that it is used extensively today to refer to that nomadic lifestyle. It's not common parlance even in the usage he used it in. Not everyone is aware of every trigger word for every individual group. That's why, instead of jumping into a full-on flame war over stuff like that, it is best to just simply mention that certain groups may find it offensive and offer evidence as to why.
To offer an example of how far that can go if we consider word misuse or other, unintentionally offsensitive things to be actually racism, consider this hypothetical scenario. Someone from Europe calls me a cracker as some sort of strange cultural joke. Being from Europe, they don't understand the fact that it is a slur when spoken to a white person here in America because, in Europe, it actually means something else. Would it be right or fair for me to then say that they are actually an evil racist and that they need to be banned? If not, why is it different? Intent is everything in these sorts of scenarios.
To the reply about my friend, saying that he was just trying to have an excuse to be racist, that is quite disingenuous. He was simply responding that he did not know that the word itself had any racial connotations and that he was not using it in that context. He ended up getting banned simply because he was trying to relate why he used the word after the thread blew up with the typical internet insults of 'you must literally be Hitler to say that' and accusations that he was secretly some dumb, uneducated redneck that spent his days wearing a pillow case on his head.
Regarding my personal anecdote about Romani not knowing or caring about the word, I have never heard anything about it before that incident. I have crawled internet forums for years and have even had the displeasure of being on 4chan for quite some time and I never heard of it being used as a racial slur before my friend was the subject of that witch hunt. In my experience, if you cannot find it some way on a website like 4chan used as an insult, then it must not be widely known.
Indeed, that incident is one of the reasons why I left GiantitP years ago. A hyperaggressive community willing to grill someone for something that was completely unintentional and mods willing to ban the person for simply stating that's not how they meant it is not a community that I can honestly get behind. That, thankfully, doesn't seem to be the case here, but if it ever becomes as such, I will excuse myself from it.
Such behavior is almost as toxic to a community as actual trolling, because it pares down communities into cliques where everyone needs to know every single thing and never make any sort of social faux pax. It creates a gated community of sorts. It kills off constructive dialogue rather than helping facilitate it.
There are plenty of people who mean nothing racist at all when they use words like the example that I stated earlier. Taking a standoffish attitude with them as a kneejerk reaction does nothing to help them realize their words may have been offensive. As a matter of fact, it just cements the idea in their head that it must not be a big deal if the only people that it could possibly offend fly into histrionics over it.
All that said, I will leave this thread with this one piece of advice: try to understand people's motivations behind saying certain things instead of automatically assuming that they racist ***holes. Try to internalize that, at some point, you have made some sort of mistake of your own, a mistake that no one had any right denigrating you as a person over. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
A squamous mass of eye-studded tentacles that silently shriek blasphemies towards all living things as it moves in a reality 3 dimensions too small to accommodate it. The beast's lair is there and not there, a crumbling palace in the space between song and silence filled with radiant, everblooming darkness. In other words, a Great Old One!
Based on the forum rules, people should just flag and move on. Railing against racist posts is, at least from my understanding of the website rules from about two weeks ago, against the general forum rules. Flagging racists posts is not, in my estimation, silently supporting them. It's a more efficient way of undermining them, one that keeps the drama down to a minimum. All calling people out on the internet does when you have a 'flag post' option is just facilitate an argument.
This isn't even addressing what each individual person defines as racism. While I think we can all agree that saying 'all of X race are bad people/criminals/genetically inferior/whatever' is racism, there are some definite grey areas and more personalized (And sometimes ridiculous,) interpretations about racism.
I know at the college I used to go to, it was considered a racist microaggression that could get you suspended if you asked where someone was from, because it supposedly disenfranchised minorities from lower income neighborhoods.
So, before saying that all racist posters need to be banned, you need to consider the implications of that. In my aforementioned college experience, nearly anything can be considered racist if we take into account microaggressions or things that people are not even conscious of that they say.
To use an example, I remember a situation on GiantitP where a person once used the term 'g***y' (Censoring in case of sensitive people,) to refer to the Vistani character he played and their lifestyle. Now, to most people, that is not even remotely racist. It refers to a certain type of nomadic lifestyle, often replete with mysticism and romantic notions. Many people nowadays view it as being a positive term, something synonymous with a Bohemian lifestyle. Someone took offense at the word because of the word's origins in being a slang term for the Romani people in the 1600s, something that many actual Romani nowadays neither know nor care about. The poster ended up getting banned despite not using the word offensively. Someone just read way too much into what he said and took offense with it. I knew the guy pretty well. He didn't have a racist bone in his body. He just, like most people, did not know about the word's origins and did not consider that it could even remotely be racist. When confronted with hyperaggressive people about it, he tried to defend his position and was banned.
Using the above example, saying that racist posters need to be banned is a slippery slope to get on. Nearly anything can be interpreted as racist if you scrutinize it too much. I remember a controversial blog a while back about Paizo itself being racist because 'oh they just had to put talking monkeys into the Not-Africa continent, the dirty racists'.
See my point on why banning anyone saying remotely racist is problematic? You should look at the intent people are posting with, not just say 'hey, it's racist to me, so ban them'. I am not sure what thread prompted this thread, so I can't say for sure whether it was, in my opinion, a ban-worthy instance, but it's important to realize that not everyone who says racist things are cross-burning, sieg heiling bigots. Some people are just misinformed or possibly are not the most delicate people at wording things.
Dotting for interest. I will probably submit some sort of arcane spellcaster. I might go the crazy route and make my signature blade mage. Or try out the Mute Musician bard archetype that was recently added from Strange Aeons.
I am new to the site, but I can link some of my past play experience if you so desire, GM Snowheart. I think Giantitp only deletes unused recruitment, leaving the actual games intact.
It's almost 5:00 A.M. here, so sorry for not being more verbose. Just wanted to declare interest.
I do have a few questions I would like to ask.
What is your general post rate? I plan on posting at least once a day at the very least.
What levels of PC competency are you okay with? I have been a DM for most of my Pathfinder career, so I know how to build powerful characters. I deliberately avoid cheese, but my builds are usually on the upper tier while still holding true to the fluff that I use as the base.
Last, but not least, will making it about 3 rooms into the prison from a previous game spoil my chances of joining your campaign? I would hope not, but I believe in being upfront about my limited experience with the AP.
Yep. As It stands, I would probably be better off having prescription glasses. Can't really do much apart from read with reading glasses.
Have you tamed a cyber tyrannosaurus rex yet? Or encountered a death worm in the Scorched Earth DLC? It's things like that which make Ark so good. You can do basically anything.
If you were on PS4, I would invite you to join our nice little Conan-esque roleplay/tribal PvP server we have. I tend to give people free jerboa companions and usually help my clanmates tame a wyvern of their color preference.
*Tells IHIYC that he is obviously uneducated and should clean his ears out with industrial-strength acid so I don't have to repeat the obvious truth so many times*
*Moves on to list how everyone on this thread are secretly working for the lizard people who put gave the reins of power over to that abomination Justin Beiber*
If keeping the soul from moving on past a mortal lifetime is evil, why are alchemists with that wonderful elixir of immortality or wizards with the Immortality discovery not evil? Those may only affect the self, but how is it different?
If it is specifically the souls of others, a strange distinction to make in universal law, why not then make Trap the Soul an evil spell? It explicitly keeps the entire soul from moving on, whereas Animate Dead only uses small fragments left behind in the body that seem to be going nowhere.
Why not petrification effects? Those keep the subject in a limbo between life and death until they are cured, assuming they ever are. Pretty sure eternity as a statue is denying Pharasma her due of the mortal in question.
In a setting where even demon lords can be redeemed and many believe there is a moral imperative to not wipe out goblin babies because reasons, why is it that taking a hunk of fallow flesh and making it useful is so bad? Why is it that you can enslave minds, bind outsiders and keep them from their duties until Groetus goes all Majora's Mask on everyone, and burn people to death, but you can't use a teensie piece of semi-soulstuff that is doing nothing else and that is not actually part of the soul that moves on to the afterlife to animate a corpse? How is animating undead bringing more negative energy into the world by dint of creating mindless puppets any worse than the gods themselves choosing to 'punish' murderers by giving them immortality and greatly enhanced prowess to continue their sprees?
'Big Grey Goddess Says So' is not a logical answer. It makes Pharasma look hypocritical to allow gods to punish mortals by keeping their souls in eternal torment on Golarion, but not allowing mortals to simply harvest the remains of someone whose soul has already passed on for a constructive purpose.
Pathfinder is not alone in making claims of 'undead are icky, so let's drum up reasons why they are evil and flag them accordingly'. As much as I like The Elder Scrolls, creating undead is considered evil there as well. That doesn't make the base argument any more reasonable, however. It is, thankfully, kept in the purview of mortal perception of morality, as opposed to hard moral truths in The Elder Scrolls universe.
Greenlit Path of War books.
Dreamscarred Press Psionics are banned, not Paizo psychic classes. Again, this is mostly a flavor issue. I have conflated Psionics with vividly-colored crystals with quirky personalities too much over my years of roleplaying and so would rather keep that out of this campaign. If I choose to open a less dark game or a more high fantasy one at some point, I will probably include Psionics then.
Great Crossbow is greenlighted for player use.
Alchemists can craft alchemical items. My crafting rule was set in place to cut out the 'start off with 150% GP in magic items' shenanigans I have seen a lot of on other forums.
Gunslingers can also craft firearms related stuff as normal.
Familiarity with the Darkest Dungeon world is not a necessity, but you should definitely watch some YouTube videos if you are not acquainted with the vibe of the game. I definitely wouldn't consider the setting in the Renaissance period.
The Stress rules that will be used in the game are of my own design. They borrow elements from Horror adventures, but are not exactly the same.
To give some perspective on the range of mental illnesses, afflictions, and injuries characters can sustain, let me list some numbers below.
Number of Mental Illnesses: d100
So the sheer amount of variance your character can have in terms of afflictions they can have is staggering. You might end up being a lame schizophrenic with only one eye. Or you might be a pyromaniac masochist covered in burn scars. Really, your character will get hurt badly at some point unless luck is on your side and you make some good rolls.