Inferon's page

I do not want to come across like I don’t want Paizo to write this book in my small rant. They will, and that’s fine. It is not for me, but I understand that some players will love it, and I am glad for them. My idea of the perfect RPG is going to be vastly different from many people, and I expect and accept that.

So, I don’t really understand why anyone would really want to play Mythic. As Pathfinder stands, all Player Characters are already borderline superheroes from first level onward already. For example, it used to be that 18 was the maximum any character could hope for in any given stat ever, and now it’s common to have first level characters to start with a 20 in their main stat. Magic items are everywhere. Furthermore, I don’t see what these rules can be used to represent that cannot already be represented with higher level characters. Why do we need to be even more godlike in a game where we are already so above the regular humanoid norm? Why does our high magic high fantasy game need to be even more so? I love Pathfinder, but this just seems like a bit much.

I think that this book to me is what Ultimate Combat was for many people. Some dislike firearms in their fantasy game, and others dislike eastern influences on their western setting. I don’t like being given more than what my race, class, and feats give me. So I’m just going to deal with it.

If anything, this seems to me the opposite direction they should have taken. I personally would like to see a source book that deals with lower magic campaigns. A campaign where magic items are very very rare. A campaign where casters may not be able to cast as often or as reliably or only at a great personal cost.

So, to conclude, I’d like to say again that I’m not against this book coming out. I’m glad for the people who are going to like this book, I just never see myself playing a Mythic game. To the people are psyched for Mythic, can you tell me what has you most excited? And to the people at Paizo, do you think we will ever see a lower magic, gritty source book?

The best thing to come out of this thread was Bomanz's first post. All other posts are unneeded. Especially this one.

So, umm....

How's about City of Sin seeing the light of day? That would be cool...

As a GM who allows alternate alignment paladins, I think it's strange that paladins can still only be LG while sorcerers can cast using any mental stat and orc witch doctors can cast using their Con!

Ashiel wrote:

Cannibis is not addicting.

I know plenty of past addicts that disagree with you. That's the problem with anecdotal evidence -- it's anecdotal. If you were to say for some people cannibis isn't addictive then you would be right, but as an universal statement about the qualities of cannibis you are not.

Cannabis isn't physically addictive. It's mentaly addictive, like everything else you can ever do, inclueding Pathfinder.

I've had problems balancing casters in my games as well. The path I took was simply banning Sorcerers and Wizards, and replacing them with the Beholder Mage.

It sounds like you played your paladin as a paladin.

I'd like to see Paizo's take on the Artificer and Factotom base classes.