|
Herald's page
Organized Play Member. 1,693 posts (1,909 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 3 Organized Play characters.
|
Imnotgoodwithnames wrote: Thanks. I was trying to leave it vague so that the GM could decide what surfaces the portals would work on rather than say "the portals only work on surfaces made of moon dust" and then have to work those surfaces into a game. What do you think? I'm really not sure. I have to think about it.
Could some spells just scale back to lower level versions of spells like polar ray for example, it doesn't really that powerful? Seems like it could be capped lower and work as a 5th to 6th level spell very easily, or broken into a spell chain.
How do you handle the fact that portals don't open on certain surfaces like in the game. (BTW, I like what you have here)
I have to admit, I'd like to have a character that was more based on the Arcanist, as an alternative to the Technomancer. But I'm not so sure that I really need 7-9 levels of spells. Nut it would sure be cool if there was certain ways to replicate certain 7-9 level spells under specific circumstances, like rituals and the like.
Personal Rant: Personally I think that simulacrum should have been done away as a spell and just have been a construct type template that was something a character could build. The rules are just so wonky and a kludge from the 1st edition of the game.
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Xenocrat wrote: Gorbacz wrote: nighttree wrote: For the most part everyone has. Those that are disappointed (the majority as near as I can tell) have actually been more civil in their comments than those speaking out against the disappointment. You mean the people who advocated for Paizo employees to be fired or the ones who threatened physical violence against the company? :) There's nothing uncivil about advocating (not demanding) that an employee who shamed and embarrassed a company be let go to demonstrate a commitment to better values (e.g. Weintsteingate) or work product (Shiftergate) going forward. WOW...the conflating of issues here is quite out of spectrum here. To compare the creators of the shifter class whom some posters believe have performed sub par to someone who has been accused (and in my personal opinion rightfully so) of multiple felonies is outrageous.
Even the concept of calling it "Shiftergate" is beyond the pale. The concept of adding "gate" to something is to indicate that a conspiracy has happened and someone tried to cover it up. I really don't see how Paizo did anything that rises to that level.
You may be disappointed in the work that was done, you can point to what you see as flaws in the class, but claiming that Paizo has done something criminal here is IMHO way beyond the pale.
Edit: Sorry for coming to the thread late. I see the apology, and accept it. I'm leaving my comments as I stand by what I said, but I piled on and should have read farther.
Well, maybe I can hope for a class that has a construct "pet" as part of this book.
In the past 24 hours I have gotten four emails to let me know that my Order for Night in Nightarch is pending. Seems like something is sticking in the notifications system. Not a big deal, but I thought it was worth mentioning.
FiddlersGreen wrote: The collective entity known as Guidance will be revealed to be dominated by one of its personalities - represented by an emerald projection of a heavily-scarred human who calls himself "Torch". HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Steve Geddes wrote: I don’t understand the distinction you’re making. It seems to me that it’s correct to say the CUP does specify who can use certain content and who can’t (in addition to spelling out obligations you have if you wish to do so).
It seems to me that that clause is important precisely for that reason - your eligibility to use some of Paizo’s IP is not just about the product you’re producing but also about who you are. I can produce an adventure under the CUP even though Legendary Games would be prohibited from producing the exact same text.
There are some legality issues that if you would like to discuss offline, I would be more than happy to discuss. But suffice it to say, there are legal issues that you blurring with your statement and are misleading.
Further more I would suggest that anyone who is reading this post find legal representation to review the CUP if they intend to publish in this fashion, this venue is simply this discussion.
Steve Geddes wrote: Herald wrote: Gorbacz wrote: ... meaning some can use him, some can't. >.>
Um that's not how the Community licence works. You meet the obligations or you don't. The licence doesn't specify who can or cannot use content, just the methodology of how to content. It’s prohibited to use the CUP if you’re a commercial user or if Paizo considers you to be in the publishing business.
I think that’s what Gorbacz was referring to. Archives of Nethys is run by a fan, D20PFSRD can no longer use the CUP - even if they set up another site to do so. They are now a commercial user, irrespective of the content of any specific prospective publication. I understand that what he was trying to say, but it's important to be factual.
ThomasBowman wrote: How about a star drive that accesses the Elemental Plane of Time? There is an Elemental Plane of Time for every direction you wish to travel, like the Drift, you use your thrusters to move through the plane of time. Your ship passes through a gate the Time Drive creates, if you move forward in the time plane, you move forward in time buy not in space. If you move backwards in the time plane, you move backwards in time but not in space, but if you move sideways in the plane of time, you move a corresponding distance in space, but if you don't move forward in time on the time plane while doing this, no time passes in on the Prime Material Plane while you are moving across the plane of time, you can open up another gate back to the Prime, and from the perspective of anyone on the prime material plane, you will seem to have moved instantaneously. I have a head cannon thing that the "Drift" and the Elemental Plane of Time are one and the same. Triune just hasn't let any one know yet.
I'm actually wondering if there will be other star systems that will be explained as part of the Glorion diaspora to explain where all of those people who fought in the Vesk war came from.
I like this idea. I'm sort of imagining the colonists encased in a sort of rubbery cocoon to function as a sort of shock absorber in case they get knocked around.
The cocoon would have to be cut away before the person was revived otherwise it would suffocate them.
knight9910 wrote: As an aside... what is the difference between OGC and OGL? I'm pretty sure OGL is the Open Gaming License, but not sure what OGC is. OGC means Open Game Content. Generally Paizo designates all of its intellectual property as being "closed content", and the rest to be open content. There have been subtle shift over the years, but for the most part I believe this to be true.
Gorbacz wrote: ... meaning some can use him, some can't. >.>
Um that's not how the Community licence works. You meet the obligations or you don't. The licence doesn't specify who can or cannot use content, just the methodology of how to content.
Gorbacz wrote: Technicality: this issue has nothing to do with OGL (OGL itself covers only open content, which setting stuff is not). It's the Paizo Community Use License that allows you to use proper given names from the Golarion setting ... as long as your website (in this case) is non-commercial, which Archives of Nethys are and d20pfsrd isn't. Didn't claim OGL, I claimed OGC. The there is a big difference, but you already knew that.
Its a OGC version of this:
Razmiran Priest
And the flavor is exactly where they want it to be.
D20pfsrd strips out a lot of the flavor because they have to to meet obligation by the OGL licence not to use IP.
Archives of Nethys is non-profit so it gets to use the IP under community use.
Almonihah wrote: I suspect they're hard at work on things, and we're going to see some strange behavior while they're at it. Don't doubt that, just wanting to tell them what was going on my side.
Message boards aren't populating.
UnArcaneElection wrote: Hellknights are important enough that they actually do merit more page space.
They just got a whole Player's Companion guide. Do we really need that much more HellKnight material?
Micheal Smith wrote: Herald wrote: If you can't play games, please consider running games. Perhaps you can join an online game.
Moreover please take a moment to think about the tone in which your responses are being made. You have people making constructive suggestions to you . If they don't work for you that's understandable, but lashing out isn't going to get you into a new game faster.
I see your frustration, it sucks not being able to do what you love. I bet your not alone.
I will not run a Starfinder game if I have not played it. If I do that then I know what happens and I don't meta game. I hate running then playing.
Also I am tired of repeating myself because people refuse to ACTUALLY read what I posted. Also i am tired of people twisting what I said to make me look dumb/lesser or whatever you wish to call it. Everything EC Gamer Guy suggested I either answered said why I couldn't or he twisted what I stated. Hold people accountable for their actions instead of me an my tone. Never suggested that you run something you haven't played, nor do I think that your dumb or lesser. Just suggesting something that can be fun, and get you to know your fellow players. You can run Pathfinder Society games and then I'm sure you can build a rep that will allow you to run games elsewhere. It will take time, but you will have fun along the way.
We all want to help, part of the issue here is that we all see your frustration, but what we don't see (and it's the internet, it masks all speech in a strange way) is that you acknowledge people suggestions in the spirit that it was given.
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
If you can't play games, please consider running games. Perhaps you can join an online game.
Moreover please take a moment to think about the tone in which your responses are being made. You have people making constructive suggestions to you . If they don't work for you that's understandable, but lashing out isn't going to get you into a new game faster.
I see your frustration, it sucks not being able to do what you love. I bet your not alone.
I think you have a point, Rosita the Riveter
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
HWalsh wrote: nicholas storm wrote: It does have bearing, because you are comparing solarian to other classes that may be built sub-optimally for saves, but not for what their intended purpose was.
If you want to compare saves for your solarian that raises int and cha to other classes that also make choices to raise non save related stats, then it is relevant.
No, it doesn't have bearing.
It really doesn't.
You are talking about a class that is told, "Don't use one of your class abilities to the fullest."
Then another that says, "Also, don't raise your resolve stat really high. Yes, we know literally every other class does it, but you should't."
Charisma is their resolve stat, and while Charisma is problematic in general, it isn't automatically crippling as a resolve stat... See what I did with an Envoy...
You're telling people, "You don't want your primary stat to actually be your primary stat." With this class. That is the only class that has that issue.
And you may not see that as a problem, and you are welcome to believe that, but I do see it as a problem, and I think I have mechanically proved it is an issue.
I set out a clear set of expectations based on what all of the other classes *could do* and then put them against the benchmarks in the AA that Paizo created.
Only one of those isn't lining up.
And yes, you can ignore Sidreal Influence and make the Solarian work.
It is pretty much what Solarian players do actually.
As far as I am concerned my Solarian, for example, has 4 skills prior to level 15.
1. Mysticism
2. Diplomacy
3. Perception
4. Piloting
I already converted my build to avoiding any Solarian powers with saves. Save for Supernova, which I don't intend to use past level 9 anymore. So that I can go lower on Charisma. I'll have 16 Charisma until the character hits 20.
The thing is, I did that to keep up with all of the other characters, so I didn't mechanically fall behind.
I *can* make it work, but it isn't anywhere near as easy, or as... Hwalsh,
Please stop being so defensive. Other people's opinions are as valid as yours. You've made your very strong argument, they have made theirs.
4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Rysky wrote: deuxhero wrote: Is there art of Yoon as the "towering juggernaut of strength in which he gets as much strength as possible while his burn mechanic damages the environment around him" archetype? Yoon’s a lady, just a head’s up. And now I have “Yoon looks like a lady” playing in my head....
The weapons on the Daleks make no mention of the grenades, the ball like bumps on its sides.
Dαedαlus wrote:
2) I highly doubt another class that's better than Druids at one aspect of their class will make the 9th-level caster obsolete. I just want a martial class that can transform into any kind of animal they want. It's like asking if the Summoner's eidolon will make wizards obsolete because there's now someone better at summoning Outsiders in the game.
In any case, I imagine it's a great class, just not the class a lot of people were hoping for when they announced a "Shifter"
OK from my perspective, I wouldn't allow this to happen at my table. I just can't imaging allowing a class to transform they want. I just imagine a player frozen with choices. Granted, it's my opinion, but there it is.
Creature creation is the feature I want the most.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
It's designed to give you 8/8 casting. Allowing some more feats to metamagic wouldn't be OP.
I feel like it lacks feats.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Thinking back to the Alien Archive, there was a ooze that was a nanite manufacturer. I could imagine Anacites incorporating something like that into a symbiotic relationship for self repair.
Perhaps casting heal spells effects the ooze in side and allows them to heal the Anacite...
Or for that matter, allow the Anacite to reconfigure itself...
Mechanically tricky but interesting.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
whew wrote: Another major issue is how to heal them (both undead and constructs) Yep, but I'm excited to see what they can do in that design space. I presume that it will kinda be like Wyrwood race for Anacites.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
kaid wrote: Herald wrote: I have a feeling that we will see something in Pact Worlds. Nothing to back that up, just a feeling. That is sort of what I am expecting as well like the eoxians seems like they probably get added the pact world books.
Their main playing issue is going to be they are pretty designed for solar collection so curious how well you could use them elsewhere possibly designed to run off of other power sources in a pinch or something. Well, considering that we have character races that are water breathing, walking around in environment suits, I'm certain that something could be worked out. It would seem to me that those that emulate to be like the "first ones" would have solved that with some sort of battery pack.
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
I have a feeling that we will see something in Pact Worlds. Nothing to back that up, just a feeling.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Tacticslion wrote: Herald wrote: Actually there are precedence in Golarion of instilled patriarchy in Taldor. Taldor has never had a ruling queen, due to patriarchal rules and that is part of the plot in the upcoming AP line, where the party is trying to place Stavin's daughter on the throne. This is actually a really interesting thing that I hadn't considered before. Thanks, Herald!
It's worth noting as well that Taldor, in-setting (at least as of PF), isn't evil. So... that's very interesting.
Ikiry0 also makes a good point: that it's neither associated with Erastil, nor clearly indicative of a broader trend in-setting. Hm. Sorry didn't mean to invalidate a point. Merely wanted to add to the conversation.
I have to admit I was looking forward to seeing that charge on my card yesterday. (The only time I like to see that warning pop up.)
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Actually there are precedence in Golarion of instilled patriarchy in Taldor. Taldor has never had a ruling queen, due to patriarchal rules and that is part of the plot in the upcoming AP line, where the party is trying to place Stavin's daughter on the throne.
I agree with Kaid, I bet we see more types of casters in the future. (Pun not intended)
This is why we can't have nice things.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
So I went back to read the entry on the Drow planet and while it does state that they houses still control the Drow population, they are more or less broken up into city states. (I my minds eye, kinda like the Italian states were for quite a long time.) They are still Matriarchal, and all the top positions are Drow only.
But they aren't isolationist. People go to them for weapons and armaments, and they also go to them for fleshcrafting. I would imagine that there are others that go to them for other more base reasons as well.
So the Drow has a chance of becoming more relevant than the Elves in the new order of things.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Space McMan wrote: Herald wrote: Ikiry0 wrote: No, a given adventure is only as combat heavy as you make it. You can pretty conclusively work out what percentage of the rules are combat-related.
I also stand by my point that if you make a purely non-combat Starfinder adventure, you are not using the game remotely to it's strengths and will be leaving characters out of the game/non-contributing. Much like how you COULD make a combat-focused Gumshoe game but it's a waste of the system. That's your opinion. But its not up to you how to tell others how to play the game. It's not an opinion that making a Starfinder campaign without any combat is a poor use of the system. It invalidates the combat classes and Starfinder doesn't have enough social systems to do anything beyond the basics of roleplaying. That's a fact.
No one's saying you're not allowed to run that campaign, but don't act like it's somehow a subjective opinion that the rules of Starfinder support a purely social game just as well as it does a combat game. And your misquoting me to make your point. So no, your not dealing in facts. You cannot dictate what is fun to anyone. So don't pretend like your an authority on how the game is played.
Ikiry0 wrote: No, a given adventure is only as combat heavy as you make it. You can pretty conclusively work out what percentage of the rules are combat-related.
I also stand by my point that if you make a purely non-combat Starfinder adventure, you are not using the game remotely to it's strengths and will be leaving characters out of the game/non-contributing. Much like how you COULD make a combat-focused Gumshoe game but it's a waste of the system.
That's your opinion. But its not up to you how to tell others how to play the game.
Awards are given for overcoming environmental hazards and traps. They have CRs and you award accordingly.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Ikiry0 wrote: Herald wrote: That was not the thrust of your argument and your making assumptions on what is or isn't fun. The facts are that you can make adventures without combat.
Bypassing a combat encounter that you don't have to have is often worth the experience points in and of itself in most Paizo written adventures.
The facts are that there are many play styles supported by the rules. presenting your opinion as fact doesn't make it so.
The thrust of my argument? I think you are mistaking me with the other person you are talking to.
And I can very much say that Starfinder is a combat heavy game, design-wise. It can be forced into other shapes but if you have even a single Soldier in the game and you try to make it entirely non-combat it's going to be a miserable experience for them as their class is entirely combat focused. Once again the facts don't bear that out. The game is only as combat heavy as you make it.
Ring_of_Gyges wrote: Hi-tech cold blooded species might have all sorts of inventive ways of getting their temperature right. Underwear in the style of an electric blanket might be the simplest. So glad I wasn't drinking coffee when I read that.
Ikiry0 wrote: nicholas storm wrote: Comparing starfinder to pathfinder is wrong. In pathfinder, you can build someone with a 20 DPR or 300 DPR at level 12. In starfinder you will never see that kind of discrepancy in the same class. Hmm...I dunno. Plasma Pistol Soldier vs Reaction Cannon/Arty Laser soldier would be pretty close to that (The exact numbers are off but the level of difference is not too wrong.)
Herald wrote: I can write a adventure with nothing but skill checks and no combat and still give out experience points with rules as written. Your point is not borne out by the facts. Sure and I could do the same with basically any RPG BUT the majority of the mechanics and rules and classes are combat focused. That adventure you'd make with only skill checks? It wouldn't be a very good Starfinder adventure.
It might be a good Gumshoe adventure but you are going to make anyone playing a Soldier utterly miserable, as they don't even have Perception as a class skill to fall back on let alone any class features to help. That was not the thrust of your argument and your making assumptions on what is or isn't fun. The facts are that you can make adventures without combat.
Bypassing a combat encounter that you don't have to have is often worth the experience points in and of itself in most Paizo written adventures.
The facts are that there are many play styles supported by the rules. presenting your opinion as fact doesn't make it so.
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Luke Spencer wrote: Talking about combat is actually very important in terms of both Starfinder and Pathfinder because they are combat games. Yes they are called roleplaying games but there is no mechanic in the rules that rewards roleplaying, it's not part of the default reward structure. I could run two homebrew games using only the rules provided, one with 5 fully fleshed out characters with backstories and motivations, the other with just the character sheets and no story. At the end of those two sessions, even if the roleplaying was phenomenal in the first session, by the base rules of the game both parties will have the exact same amount of experience. The other aspects of the game may be valuable to certain groups, but the rules value the combat effectiveness so building effective characters is very much important. I'll add that I am someone that values roleplaying and story over mechanics and often introduces reward structures for good character moments, but if we're speaking in terms of the rules of the game, roleplaying and story has no actual effect. With all that being said, I think both builds have their own uses and a utility build can be mechanically effective provided the circumstances are right, but in most cases will lose out to a damage focused build. This will likely change in the future as more Solarian revelations are released, but as it stands the damage focused build is probably gonna feel more satisfying to play in general since CC is far more situational and there may be a lot of encounters where you just aren't useful. As for the save issues, I would like to see how it feels to play, but a buff from a revelation may be useful down the line. I can write a adventure with nothing but skill checks and no combat and still give out experience points with rules as written. Your point is not borne out by the facts.
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
While all of these concepts, (matriarchal, patriarchal and the like) are all a big thing to mine ideas, I think we do a disservice trying to compare it to much to real world concepts. Real world politics run the risk of making people uncomfortable, and I think that the thread has some very interesting ideas, I just don’t want to see it locked.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Ravingdork wrote: I was never a fan of the "NPCs can do things PCs can't, all other things being equal," method of game design. Totally kills immersion and suspension of disbelief. I'm on that other side of that argument. NPCs are a literary device to me and that's all I really want with that. YMMV.
Erk Ander wrote: HWalsh wrote: Tigrean wrote: So far from what I'm reading here in the post, I really like the Drow. I see nothing wrong with have one of the few remaining Matriarchal societies still existing in this setting. Beside some inetersting things can happen when females have such power. Now if you excuse me my Drow Mistress requests me to return to bed. It's not that they are matriarchal so much as there are no truly patriarchal societies. We have matriarchies and then equal societies. I just dislike the double standard. In a world with thousands of races, its shouldn't be weird if at least one race/culture is matriarchal/Patriarchal. And that brings me to the issue of the Lashunta uniqueness that was taken away was taken away. Though I both understand and agree with Paizos choice since they are now a Core race.
My biggest gripe with Drow is the fact that their society makes no sense. Why would anybody trust a bunch of extremely treacherous CE demon-worshippers. They might not deliver the goods after all its in their nature/culture. They would have made more sense as pirates or outlaws rather than arms-dealers or even "regular pact members. Drow are greedy opportunists that enjoy spreading chaos, that more than likely pay quite a bit of money fo public relations, so imho they can be trusted to do what is in their best interest. Add to the fact that worlds that exist outside the pact may have never had Drow of their own in their world, you can see where desperate, or equally sinister people would have no qualms in buying from them.
Scared that the Vesk, or Azlanti might come knocking at your door, the Drow might be the only ones willing to risk coming to your neighborhood to sell you what you need.
|