Back when Bestiary 4 was released, I asked if Paizo was ever going to add Greys to the mythos of Golarion. I am very happy to see that they finally are. :)
An eventual Champions of Chaos book that had a section focused on the Old Cults, with some Traits, Feats, spells, and maybe even a few Archetypes for Outer God and Great Old One worshipers, would be very, very cool. Maybe some Archetypes like a Mad Cleric of Azathoth (who deals with the magic of primal creation and destruction,) Dark Mother Druid of Shub-Niggurath (who tends groves of Dark Young and corrupts woodlands into domains of monsters and aberrations,) Gatekeeper of Yog-Sothoth Wizard (some kind of teleportation or dimensional space/time magic specialist,) Witchcultist of the Black Pharaoh (who sign their names in Nyarlathotep's black book for powers of spreading Chaos, turmoil, and forbidden knowledge) or a Shepherd of Hastur* Bard (who lead troupes/cults of insane actors that travel around putting on plays that drive more people mad, their combined actor/audience flock growing larger with each performance, and specializing in manipulating small hordes of insane followers and inflicting temporary insanity/Confusion/mind-control with their Bardic performances.) That would be rad. *Bonus points if the Bard is named Haïta the Shepherd.
I cannot wait til I have this in my hands. :) Before "speculative fiction" separated into the genres of science-fiction and fantasy, it was all one big jumble in the pulps, under the general umbrella of "weird fiction." You had things like people being magically transported to other planets, where they fought fantastic aliens with swords, firearms, and rayguns. Those authors who created our favorite genres didn't feel limited by an arbitrary line in what to put in their impossible stories. Magic and super-advanced technology were seen as equally at home in their stories of exciting things that couldn't happen in real life. And of course, HP Lovecraft is famous for have combined fantasy and science fiction with his horror. Golarion follows the tradition of those stories from the pulps, with its crazy and wonderful combinations of everything, just like the authors of old. The setting would have been incomplete WITHOUT a book like this!
Down in the Park
I wouldn't be able to stand a game that didn't have a heavy roleplaying element. Back when I was playing regularly, we would sometimes go entire sessions without combat, or even rolling any dice. Elaborate court balls and diplomatic meetings were extremely fun. Of course, we would also sometimes go entire sessions that were nothing BUT combat. And they were ALSO extremely fun. But going entirely one way or entirely the other makes the game into something very boring, very fast.
Yes, it's missing DR 50/Boat. :)
I've been reading about the Ancient Greek Hero Cults, cults dedicated to ancient heroes, based around shrines where offerings were made to the heroes in gratitude or propitiation, recognizing that the hero either achieved something great in life, or died in a spectacular way, and in either case in doing so they achieved a level above that of other men, but less than the gods. (As examples of some of the heroes who had cults built around them, we have both the mythical Achilles, and the historical Alexander the Great.) Evidence of this kind of cult can be seen in the shrines dedicated to those who attempted yet failed the Test of the Starstone, and the people who leave offerings at these shrines and those who dedicate themslves to maintaining them. These are a wonderful example of hero cults, either written that way intentionally by Paizo or just happily coincidental. The original ancient Greek idea of the Hero was someone who was more than mortal but less than a god, liminal bengs who existed in a state above the rest of humanity. This is exactly what the Mythic Rules are for, to model these kind of people, and I am very, very happy with the way the rules were handled. I've been thinking: with the Divine Source poweravailable at 3rd Tier, it is possible to have Hero Cults devoted to still living heroes, rather than being limited to the Ancient Greek model of only dead heroes. Hero Cults could build up around the greatest adventurers of Golarion, (sort of like the Hero Deities of Oerth/Greyhawk, like Kelanen.) And these cults could actually have real Clerics who gained magic fromthe heroes to whom they were dedicated, even though the levels of spells they could cast would be fairly limited until their Hero got to a high Tier. But for Paladins or Rangers dedicated to a Hero rather than a Deity, the lower levels of spell access wouldn't even really be that much of a hinderance. I just thought it would be very interesting if some of the highest level adventurers on Golarion had dedicated Hero Cults build up around them, as stories of their deeds spread throughout the world, perhaps even by way of Pathfinder Society reports. Some of these Cults could even take the form of adventuring societies dedicated to a famous adventurer, even seeking to recreate his or her exploits. The Pathfinder Society itself could almost even be seen as this type of organization, if only the Decemvirate were of Mythic rank and had the Divine Source power, in which case there could be Society Clerics who gained their power from devotion to the Pathfinder Society itself. I guess I don'treally know where I'm going with this, except to just throw it out there for discussion. I have been thinking about this ever since I got my copy of Mythic Adventures and digested the rules and realized how well they modeled the Greek Ideal of the Hero, and how well they could be used to model a Living Hero Cult. I think it would be a very interesting idea. Anyone else agree? Disagree? Or think I'm just babbling? What do you think?
No. All classes are collections of abilities. Some are just collections of abilities. No, all classes are just collections of abilities. They are mechanical constructs used in tandem with other game elements to realize a character concept. The only flavor that matters is the flavor the player gives his character. The default flavor (including name) can be modified, mutated, adjusted, or simply replaced. I wholeheartedy disagree. It is not "the only flavor that matters." Otherwise the entire concept of classes is meaningless. Classes are not just collections of mechanical abilities; they have story built into them. I despise game elements that are merely collections of rules mechanics with no story or thematic justification. Game mechanics are there to support the thematic role of a class.
OK, so the Ectoplasmic Creature undead template is straight Ghostbusters Slimer/Onionhead-style ghosts, and the Immortal Ichor is flat-out exactly the sealed Evil glowing goo in the basement of the old church (guarded by the Order of Sleep) from John Carpenter's Prince of Darkness, both references which are just BEYOND awesome. I don't know the source of the Vouivre, but it seriously reminds me of the Diplocephalus from Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. This Bestiary is easily the coolest monster book for any version of this game I have ever read. With the combination of Ghostbusters, Prince of Darkness, and Lovecraft as sources, this book almost overwhelmed me. Anyone else identify possibly obscure sources of monsters from B4? (Not that Ghostbusters is obscure, but you know what I mean...)
I loved the Babylon 5 reference. :)
I would like to see a book detailing different Cults of Golarion, from different demon cults to the Old Cults. And I mean Cults, as opposed to mainstream, accepted religious organizations. Everything from Lamashtu to Rovagug to the various Demon Lords to (ESPECIALLY) the Old Cults! Not so much dealing with the beings they worship, but the methods and madness of the cults themselves. Cults of Golarion. Or this could easily be combined with the idea of a book about the various conspiracy groups around Golarion (which I also like.) After all, aren't cults essentially religious conspiracies? But I don't like the idea of conflicting "cannon rumors;" that style was used far too much in BattleTech and got old real fast. (On the other hand, the actual BattleTech "conspiracy books" themselves, the Interstellar Players line, were some of my favorite BattleTech books ever.) Cults & Conspiracies of Golarion. Whichever, just include some information about the Old Cults! :)
Cthulhu can be cuddly...And as d20 cthulhu has shown, if it has stats, it can be killed. I'd rather not see stats for beings like this that are not suppose to be killed. Have you ever read The Call of Cthulhu? He got popped by being rammed with a boat. He reformed automatically, but Cthulhu was "killed" in the very story in which he first appeared. By a single guy ramming him with a little boat. He got better. I see no reason why the same opportunity to ram Cthulhu with a tug-boat should not be afforded to the adventurers of Golarion. This attitude that gods are omnipotent, completely incorporeal beings really annoys me, because it's a concept mostly limited to more modern, especially Abrahamic, religions, and doesn't really fit very well in a game based on ancient legends and mythology mixed with '30s pulp weird tales and fantasy literature. The gods of the ancient Greeks, Romans, Norse, and other Europeans were living, physical beings, who lived in faraway places atop mountains or in the clouds, and had bodies and ate and drank just like the humans who worshiped them. They loved and fought and killed and died just like their human worshipers, and OFTEN loved and fought and killed and died ALONGSIDE their mortal followers. They had bodies, and some of them were just BARELY more than human, and could be injured and even killed by heroes. In the Illiad, Achilles hit Aphrodite in the arm with a spear and made her run away, and later mauled ARES HIMSELF so badly that the god had to retreat from the battlefield! And in '30s pulp and fantasy literature, humans battled god-like aliens and mythical beings all the time, sometimes even recasting the ancient gods as alien entities who were mistaken for supernatural gods by ancient humanity. But when modern man encountered them, with modern (or future!) technology, we were very often more than a match for them. And THAT is the tradition in which Cthulhu firmly belongs, an ancient god who is really a powerful alien, and might be defeated and even killed (but not permanently!) by sufficiently powerful heroes with the right tools or technology (or magic.) (Now the Outer Gods, they're a different story, and they AREN'T getting stats. Trying to get into a swordfight with Azathoth would be rather futile, as would trying to stab Yog-Sothoth. His half-human Sons, on the other hand... well, one of them was killed by a guard dog.) That's one of the things about the Mythic rules that is so cool; they so wonderfully mirror the way the heroes and gods of real life mythology blended and blurred together, when sometimes you can't tell whether a character in a legend is a god or just a powerful hero or creature, with even a human hero has a cult dedicated to him, or an ancient wolf in the forest that is somehow more than mortal and walks in two worlds has it's own small group of devoted worshipers (both of which can be modeled perfectly with the Mythic rules and the Divine Source ability.) They're called Liminal Beings, between mortal and divine, with the difference between mortal hero and divine being a gradual transition of steps, with the two blending into each other, not a hard line separating them. The Mythic rules are a wonderful representation of these kinds of Liminal Beings. I mean REALLY perfect. But now I'm babbling, so I'll end here.
Playing RPGs but don't liking to read? My mind boggles. I VASTLY prefer the Nethys style of God of Magic, where he is really the god of spellcasters and the "Wizard of the Gods," and magic is a neutral force* that is not controlled by a god who grants it to mages. That turns mages into essentially arcane clerics. That's why Divine Magic is there, to be the god-granted magic; I prefer Arcane Magic to be a neutral, almost scientific supernatural manipulation of the laws of physics (like the way the ORIGINAL Vancian Magic System was, in Jack Vance's stories.) It was more of a type of super-science where Wizards were able to manipulate reality through memorizing hyper-mathematical formulae that were based on bizarre, arcane scientific principles that weren't actually understood anymore, but the Wizards knew the effects the formulae created. *(Or, preferably, multiple forces of magic and forms of magical energy, at least a different force for each school of magic, rather than one grand unified "magical energy" a la "The Force." How many natural forms of energy are there? Why shouldn't there be just as many supernatural forms of magical energy? Like the way Lazurite in the Darklands produces Necromantic radiation; the naturally occurring energy which is harnessed to produce the effects of spells of the School of Necromancy. The School of Enchantment probably uses arcane psychological principles to produce many of its' effects, using esoteric word-sounds that trigger the right reaction in the mind, backed up by a little bit of some kind of arcane energy. And similar for every other School, with each one being based on entirely different forms of energy and using different principles and methods of producing magical effects. Much more satisfying, in my opinion.)
What the Original Poster seems to be missing about 3.5 is WotC's misuse, abuse, and overuse of Prestige Classes, publishing endless *books full of countless overlapping, contradictory, and easily abusable PrCs. Prestige Classes were intended to represent unique organizations that characters could join, obtaining special skills and abilities tied to specific organizations or groups. Thus the name PRESTIGE Class, as in a Class that represents belonging to a unique, prestigious group. They were not intended to be generic roles. The only P5Cs that cover generic roles were the Eldritch Knight and Mystic Theurge, filling gaps in the rule system, and they are still useful (even if the Magus largely covers the warrior-mage concept, the EK still has room to breathe as more of a Mage that can fight, rather than the Magus's role of total armored warmage.) But those two are special cases. (For example, was a concept such as "master of whip fighting" REALLY so prevalent that it deserved an entire 10 level PrC? No, but such a thing could easily warrant an Archetype with just a few variant class abilties.) The Archetype mechanic fills the need that PrCs were used for MUCH more elegantly (as well as bringing back the concept of Kits, and doing a much better job of it,) and I am very glad that Paizo has chosen to relegate the PrC to the role it was intended for, and is using Archetypes to handle niche variant character types. Paths of Prestige was full of Prestige Classes that handled the concept in the way the they were originally intended, that of special, prestigious groups that a character needs to strive to join and can only become a member after having proved himself worthy. That is what PrCs are for; not for representing unusual roles (and game-mechanic abilities) which the base Classes don't cover. That is much better served by the Archetype. I do NOT miss the misuse of PrCs, and am very, very happy that Paizo is once more using them for their intended purpose, instead of being abused and overused like they were in 3.5. What I think Paizo should do now (and something that I think would fill the OP's need for new material) is release a book or two full of more Archetypes for every class, in a way similar to how Prestige Classes were (wrongly) handled in 3.5, but they should practice MUCH more restraint than WotC did with their flagrant OVERuse of PrCs. Perhaps *books for each broad category of Classes, something along the lines of "Archetypes of Magic," "Archetypes of Divinity," "Archetypes of Skill," "Archetypes of Nature," and "Archetypes of War," or just simply "The Book of Archetypes." Or if they wanted to go all out (and have a long-running, lucrative line of probably solid-selling products,) have a book of Archetypes for each class; I wouldn't be unhappy to see a line including "The Archetypal Fighter" and "The Archetypal Magus."
Mechalibur, once you actually see Agmazar's stats... well, kaiju might not be suitable for the Big Bad of a campaign, but judging by this one's stats, they're good for ridiculously epic fights. Not just by sheer power, but for variety and over-the-top weirdness. "It can do WHAT?!" Well, Kaiju means "strange creature," so I would bet they are humongous monstrosities caused by magical, technological, or environmental catasrophe, or are otherwordly monsters, like the Daikaiju ("giant strange creatures") they are based on; Godzilla, Mothra, King Gidorah, Hedorah (the Smog Monster,) Anguirus, Rodan, etc. Not just giant monsters, but giant monsters resulting from such a horrible warping of nature that they are almost Aberrations, or actually from other worlds entirely. At least that's my take on what a proper Kaiju should be. Godzilla was nothing but ancient dinosaur remains at the bottom of the ocean until nuclear bombs and radiation warped him into the twisted gigantic monstrosity that destroyed large sections of Japan. "History shows again and again how Nature points out the Folly of Man."
Azathoth laughed at a joke told by Nyarlathotep that briefly pierced it's eternal gibbering idiocy. Azathoth laughed, and Aroden died.
Some helpful information. Thank you very much, sir. That's what I had thought was the case regarding the Derro and the Greys. I've read the wonderful Classic Horrors Revisited and Into the Darklands, and absolutely LOVE what they've done with the Derro in Pathfinder, combining the classic Shaver Mysteries Dero with the flavor and lore of the Greys. When I read about how they are rumored to fly around in saucer-shaped craft to abduct people I knew it was a reference to the Greys, but I had still wondered if they were going to introduce actual alien Greys and the rumors were just people confusing the Derro for some other creatures. In my games, I'll just have two strains of Derro; the standard subterranean Derro with wild white hair, and the Derro who routinely crew their saucercraft, who have spread to other planets in the star system (because I want to have the Greys actually be from other planets.) I know what I'll do: I'll have the Greys be Derro who spread out to explore other planets for additional test subjects, after they reverse-engineered some scraps of starship drive components they stumbled upon in Numeria. After exploring the star system they set up a colony on Aucturn (finding the place to their liking, especially after discovering that the fungus they eat grows like wild on that twisted world.) The Aucturn Derro are bald, black-eyed, and have more of the stereotypical appearance of classic Greys because of radiation poisoning from their barely understood and poorly shielded saucercraft engines, and from some warping effects of the Dark Tapestry, as well as those of Aucturn itself.. And then that just leads into the link between the Derro and the Mi-Go that I have established in my campaign, seeming to me to be a natural fit; two groups that fly around in strange craft, abducting people to perform bizarre surgical experiments upon. That similarity, coupled with the Derro's reliance on strange mind-warping fungus as their primary food source, made me imagine there MUST be some strong connections between the two species. (I imagine that the Mi-Go are known on Golarion as The Fungi from Aucturn, rather than the Fungi from Yuggoth! ;p) But enough of that, I don't want to derail the thread. I hadn't noticed the creatures from Inner Sea Bestiary that are similar to the Slender Man. I'll look for them. I had REALLY rather hoped that the Slender Man would be treated as a unique creature, and what with Bestiary 4's already established inclusion of several unique beings, combined with the statement of it including "monsters gathered from sources across the Internet" I had REALLY hoped that they would put the Slender Man in it. Ah well, I can still hope for an official Slender Man! If not, I can still use Golden-Esque's truly EXCELLENT Tome of Slenderotica, which I just discovered yesterday on these very forums. If only I had known about it a few months ago when I started my campaign, I would have done a few things differently. I'll just have to alter a few things to incorporate it now. If anyone else ins interested in putting the Slender Man in their campaigns, check it out. Just search the forums for Tome of Slenderotica, and you'll find it (I actually found it through a Google search of Pathfinder stats for Slender Man.) Now I'll stop derailing the thread.
I bet Cthulhu has DR 100/Boat What happens if you drop a nuclear bomb on Cthulhu? He reforms in 1D10 minutes, and now he's radioactive! I cannot adequately express in human words just how much I am excited about this book (maybe I could do it in Aklo: Qwfl'gjanklc morvwafl phnglui vrf'wvl frnjk!) Lovecraftian themes, the Outer Gods and Great Old Ones, and Mythos monsters are a central element of the campaign I'm running. And Elohim! I truly hope those really are in the book, because they perfectly fit the OTHER main theme of my campaign!
If they're giving you headaches, toss the wealth by level guidelines out the window, you don't need them, and recognize that CR is nothing more than a VERY rough guide, and just eyeball what monsters you think your players and characters can defeat based on what you know of their abilities. It's what I do, after finding CR to be all-but useless and the WBL rules nothing but straitjacketing. I don't do "4 encounters per day that each use up 25% of the party's resources", instead the characters just fight whenever they encounter hostile creatures, my characters have nowhere near the WBL amount of magic items, and they routinely fight things 4 CRs above their level. And win, without any fudging on my part. I tried running a strictly by-the-book game when I first started 3E/Pathfinder, and it was a horrible mess, with nothing working. The best advice I've ever received regarding GMing was when my brother (who is one of my players) told me to ignore the CRs and WBL, use my own judgement instead, and just wing it. Just like we did back in First Edition. And as soon as I started doing that, the game became awesome for everyone involved. I haven't had a death yet (very close, but that's what it's all about, winning by the skin of your teeth) and I barely ever need to fudge the dice, and not only have I not had any complaints, my players have given me special GM experience the last two sessions because they're loving the game so much. I'm not saying the rules are useless; what I am saying is that you can alter or even throw out parts that are causing you problems or you don't like, and still run a very, very good and enjoyable game.
My houserule is you can have a maximum of one archetype, and only at character creation. (And subject to GM approval.) It's been my experience that stacking archetypes can get messy and often leads to weird corner-cases and the resulting unpleasant conversations/arguments. All Archetypes have to be taken at first level, and everything should always be subject to GM approval, but, that being said, limiting characters to just one Archetype is really just limiting your players and cutting off some very very interesting character possibilities. I don't mean to sound snarky, but my experience has been the exact opposite of yours. In fact, some Archetypes were practically designed to go together. As an example, I am like 99% certain that the Magus Kensai Archetype was designed with an eye toward keeping it open to mesh with the Bladebound Archetype, because they just blend so well, both conceptually and mechanically. And as was said earlier, there are several rad combined Archetype Monk possibilities as well. Putting arbitrary limits in place just because of limited anecdotal evidence usually isn't a very good idea, and just ends up cutting you off from interesting possibilities. Combining 4 Archetypes? Probably going to end up a mess, but MAYBE not, and I've always strongly subscribed to the idea that a good GM should allow players to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't break the rules or ruin immersion in the setting. Combining 2 Archetypes? That can create some of the most interesting characters possible in the game, such as one of the characters in the game I am currently running. If my players want to try something impossible, I say sure, go ahead, and then describe why it failed. I would never say "no, you can't do that", I let them discover that it doesn't work.
In my game, I don't have magic shops with an inventory, where customers can go in and by things "off the rack." I have brokers (or fences, or often both) who will sometimes have storefronts where they have "antiquities and curios" on hand, which perhaps will include some potions, maybe an old Wand of Cure Light Wounds, and sometimes a +1 Longsword that was made for a major military campaign a few decades ago and found it's was into the market. And not every +1 sword has a special, legendary, unique history, but, if they look into it, the characters will be able to tell that, say, it bears markings that show it was produced for the Rangers of Ostrovan about 250 years ago to fight the sudden influx of Hobgoblins from D'Chau that eventually escalated into the Black Markat Invasion. The only "magic shops" for characters to buy magic items is through these brokers, who know the market and mostly work by doing the leg-work of finding out who has what item available that they are willing to part with, and for what price or trade. Or they will find or know of a spellcaster who makes items for commission. Trade and barter is more common than an actual exchange of currency, and there is no guarantee that what a character is looking for will be available. I control what magic items come into my game. If someone opened a book and assumed they could just buy any specific magic item they wanted because it was in the book, I would first laugh, and then ask them how their character even knew such an item existed in the first place. Fortunately, my players know better than to try something like that. I think the presence of fully stocked, open-ended magical Wal-Marts is severely detrimental to maintaining any sense of wonder for magic. However, regarding stat-boosting items and other magic items beyond basic weapons and armor, I look at it this way: Vikings and knights and other ancient warriors tended to be very superstitious, and would carry all kinds of "magical" trinkets; colorful stones attached to their weapons by leather thongs, inscriptions carved on their weapons, amulets, bracelets, even slips of paper with "magical" invocations written on them, you name it, because they thought they aided them in battle, or protected them from disease, or warded off evil spirits, or for any other of a host of reasons. Maybe they didn't actually really do anything, (or maybe they did!) but the wearers BELIEVED they did, so they carried them. Regardless, they were "walking Christmas trees of magic items" in real-world history. Even now, real life warriors and soldiers carry lots of equipment, not to mention trinkets and good luck charms. So, I don't have a problem with characters in my game doing it, because warriors and adventurers did it (and continue to do it) in real life.
I run a game in which the party consist of a Magus, a Sorcerer, and a Monk, and the Monk is the most consistently dangerous front-line warrior in the group. The Magus is extremely dangerous when he gets all of his techniques, spells, arcana and attacks aligned and running in order, but, alas, the player suffers from extremely frequent poor die-rolls, and the Monk is the most consistently deadly fighter by a large margin. And he uses combat maneuvers every game, tripping people left and right (he's tripped ogres and horses!) and grappling and wrestling every combat. Last session, which was just last night, he was involved in a melee on the roof of a building, 20 feet up. The Bounty Hunter who was after the party's Sorcerer had just knocked said Sorcerer unconscious, and was holding him in his arms, about to use a magic item to teleport away. Fortunately, the Monk, even though he only had 8 hit points left (out of about 60), spent a Hero point, and made a flying tackle that carried the Bounty Hunter, the Sorcerer, and the Monk all off the roof and over the side of the building (the Bounty Hunter had been standing on the edge of the roof fighting the flying Sorcerer, who had just flown close enough to heal the Monk with a wand), wrestled himself in between the Bounty Hunter and the Sorcerer as they were falling, so that they all landed with the Bounty Hunter on the bottom of the pile. The Bounty Hunter, only having 10 hit points left himself (OUT OF 98), had no choice but to teleport away empty-handed just to save himself. It was the Showdown at the Alright Stable. It was truly beautiful. So yeah, we use CMB, CMD and Combat Maneuvers quite a lot in our game. And they work very well.
I fully agree. I wouldn't want to play in an RPG where no dice were used and there was no chance for failure. I'm not advocating some kind of "free-form roleplaying experience" where you just narrate combats and decide on successful or failure of the fight without using dice. I just want to be able to stay in character during fights, and not have my characters "switch modes" into an ultra-combat-efficient mindset with the uncanny ability to know precisely how closely I can move past someone without provoking an AoO. Or being able to calculate with digital efficiency exactly how many orcs they can envelope in a Fireball while missing their comrades by inches. Grids and minis always seem to promote this kind of mindset, with combat efficiency becoming all-important, and characterization seemingly always falling by the wayside. I want to be able to always accurately portray my character and his personality, whether in-combat or not, and I don't think that whether or not my character is in combat should affect how he is played. He's sill the same character; he doesn't suddenly become "combat mode Izar Talon" when a fight breaks out. Depending on his personality, a character should become more focused and serious (but not always) but not turn into an instant tactical genius. A webcomic I once read demonstrated my entire argument much more eloquently than I can in just a few panels. To paraphrase how it went, it showed a typical group of adventurers in a dungeon, bickering with each other, joking and bumbling around, causing a ruckus, and generally not showing very much competence as they clumsily marched through a dungeon. But as soon as a group of orcs showed up, every character's personality instantly changed into ultra-pragmatist combat expert mode as they all silently moved into optimum position for the fight, even the non-warriors and the most demonstrably incompetent of them. In the last panel the DM delivered the punchline which was "Once the miniatures come out, no matter what they were like before, everyone suddenly becomes Sun-Tzu." Just judging by the existence of this webcomic, I know that my experiences with grids and minis are far from unique. I'm all for the GAME aspect of Role-Playing Games and don't want to downplay its importance; I certainly very much enjoy the fighting and wouldn't want to play in a campaign of D&D/Pathfinder with no fighting in it, but I do value the roleplaying aspect just as much. I like planning out characters in advance and making them as combat effective as possible (but not to the exclusion of personality) to the point that my DM once called me a munckin powergamer because my character was so much better thought out than my other friend's character, because my Gold Elven Bladesinger handily demolished his Human Barbarian. So please don't think I'm against the game element of RPGs, or against combat in games.
I never meant to imply that anyone was a "crap dude" because they used minis, and I'm sorry if it came across that way. I'd gone far too long without sleep when I wrote that and it probably came across as more hostile then I intended, so I apologize to anyone I offended. :) Years ago, not too long after I started gaming, I actually used to think that using minis would be kinda neat, but my DM advised me against it, telling me that it was a bad idea because he'd previously played that way for years, and it always ended up totally pulling him out of character and out of the game, turning RPG fights into tactical wargaming exercises or games of Chess. I didn't understand what he meant until he ran a few game sessions for us using minis to show me what he meant. With the way we normally played, from 1st Edition AD&D on up, we were in character the whole game (except for the inevitable jokes, Monty Python, and Army of Darkness quotes, and Ghostbusters references - those mostly from me.) Including during the fights - but when we played using the minis, as soon as any fights started all of the personalities and all characterization suddenly fell away as we stopped focusing on roleplaying our characters and thinking about how they would act in that situation, and instead started focusing simply on winning the fight, regardless of how our characters would normally think, acting in ways which were very tactically effective but were totally out of character. As soon as a fight broke out, when the minis were on the table everyone became a combat genius, regardless of the character's actual intelligence, emotions, classes, training or history. That is my problem with miniatures. They seem to enforce wargaming thinking at the expense of roleplaying. Which is fine if that's how you like to play RPGs - I'm not calling anyone's gaming preference badwrongfun. But I and my group prefers more roleplaying focused games - we always speak in character in first person and never in third person (we would never say "my elf likes your dwarf and thinks we should have a drink together", we would address each other by our character's names and speak as if we were the characters.) This extends to the point where our characters personalities have direct impact on how they act in a fight. When we used minis the normally cowardly characters became brave, the stupid barbarian with a 7 intelligence became a Sun-Tzu level tactical genius, everyone was always totally aware of and obsessed with how many Attacks of Opportunity they would provoke when making any movement, everyone always made absolutely optimal use of their abilities... and no one said a single word in character; not one single taunt or threat or jibe or joke or any of the other things that had always been a standard part of roleplaying fights when we weren't using minis. None of the characters had any "character" anymore, but had instead become nothing but combat stats being maneuvered around a battlemat in order to win a tactical skirmish. As soon as the minis came out, we just COULDN'T HELP but start feeling and thinking like we were generals and our characters were nothing but troops under our command, instead of our usual way of feeling and thinking like we WERE the characters and actually roleplaying their individual thoughts and feelings during the fight. Using minis changed the game from us being players roleplaying a character in a fight for his life, to us being generals dispassionately commanding individual units in a battle. Sorry for the length of the post, but I wanted to explain and clarify my position - I don't think that people who like to game with minis are bad or doing anything wrong, and I wouldn't even refuse to play with a group just because they used minis (just as long as they didn't expect me to waste my money buying any! :)) I just wanted to explain how and why using miniatures royally frells with the roleplaying aspect of the game for me and the friends I game with. But even still, sometimes when fights get so big that we need to keep visual track of everyone involved in it, we'll use a piece of graph paper and sketch out a quick map of the area, put the paper inside a transparent plastic sleeve, and use dry erase markers to mark our positions during the fight. But we'll still try to keep as much as possible as a visual in our heads to keep us grounded in our characters, so we continue to see our characters as CHARACTERS and not become detached and start treating them as nothing but Monopoly tokens on a game board.
Dear James, How deeply are the Old Cults intertwined with society? Are they mostly just insane, isolated backwater rednecks (Deliverance with the Old Cults!) and gibbering ghouls and aberrations in the Darklands and in the Vaults of Orv, or are there cultists in all levels of society, from the high to the low? (as in the original "The Call of Cthulhu" story.) Are they prevalent in the higher levels of society as well, like maybe corrupted groups of nobles performing twisted ceremonies to try to ascend to the Court of Azathoth? (I'm already fairly positive that Nyarlathotep was previously extremely, possibly directly, active in ancient Osirion.) Ar we ever going to get a deeper look at the workings of the larger cells of Old Cults? I could easily envision a faction of Druids who worship Shub-Niggurath as a fertility goddess. I'd absolutely LOVE to see some things like that. Are we ever going to get any information on the origins of the Black Blades of the Bladebound Magi? Were do their intelligences come from? And just what are the Black Blades made of, anyway? Are they some kind of otherplanar creature transmuted into the form of a sword (a la` Stormbringer?) Are they formed of some kind of magical/psychic material? Or are they just normal steel infused with a whole lot of magical power? (I ask because of their immunity to being broken as long as they have some of their mojo left - at least one point left in their Arcane Pool. I figure there must be SOMETHING rather extraordinary about them, and I am assuming they share an origin since they are all black one-handed slashing weapons. There's obviously some sort of magical principle at work there; it's not just a kind of Goth fashion statement among Magi!) :) And lastly; please, pretty please, could we get some more info on the Sincomakti School of Sciences? I've been just dying to know more about Golarion's Miskatonic analogue. More Lovecraft and the Mythos in Golarion, please. :) Thank you in advance. :P
I agree. I hope this book has at least a handful of religious knighthoods as well as secular ones, and preferably ones we don't already know much about. A Cleric/Cavalier prestige class, or much less hopefully a Paladin/Cavalier prestige class would be fantastic for this book, too, but please, please, please avoid the Mage-Knight troupe. HECK no, that's exactly what I DO want to see! I want to see some details of actual Orders of Eldritch Knights! I want to see full Orders of Knighthood composed of Eldritch Knights, treating that Prestige Class as actual magically-skilled Knights, instead of continuing to merely use it as a generic Fighter/Mage Class, especially considering that the role of the generic Fighter/Mage is now covered by its own full Base Class, the Magus. Keeping the Eldritch Knight as just a generic Fighter/Mage instead of giving it a fully fleshed-out role in the world now that they have the Magus class, would be like having both a generic Holy Warrior-type Fighter/Cleric Prestige Class, AND having Paladins and Anti-Paladins. I'm not arguing that they get rid of Eldritch Knights... no way, they have too much potential. I'm saying that since they now have the Magus to fill the role of the generic Fighter/Mage, they shouldn't use the EK as just a generic F/M class anymore; they should tighten the focus of the Eldritch Knight, put more focus on the Knight aspect of the PrC, give the Prestige Class an actual organization or group like the PrCs in the Inner Sea World Guide or Paths of Prestige. They should make an Order, or better yet, SEVERAL Orders, of Eldritch Knights, dedicated to different causes... kind of like how they handle the Cavalier class. They should start giving Eldritch Knights some details and flavor, and I have really, REALLY been hoping that this would be the book where they'd start, considering the Knightly bent of Eldritch Knights (they DO have a Knightly flavor, after all, what with the actual NAME of the class, and having Knowledge: Nobility and Sense Motive as Class Skills... even if it hasn't been focused on very much.) As an example, here is one of my own ideas for an Order of Eldritch Knights: (one of several ideas I have but this one is my favorite) a Chaotic Good Order devoted to Desna named the Ancient and Eternal Order of the Chrysalis, who revere Desna, a Goddess older than Golarion itself, as Our Lady of Dreams, an ancient Order who has struggled against the forces of the Old Cults since the dawn of time. They are dedicated to guarding against the return of ancient Evil Gods (which is a Devotion of the followers of Desna according to Faiths of Purity.) They root out and destroy pockets of the Old Cults, working to thwart their attempts to bring about the return of the Great Old Ones and disrupt their ceremonies designed to attract the attention of Outer Gods to Golarion, as well as hunting and slaying the monsters of Lamashtu and Ghlaunder. Just imagine; an Order of Wizard-Knights and Sorcerer-Knights who hunt unholy aberrations across the Darklands, and fight against the insane Cultists of Nyarlathotep and Yog-Sothoth! Totally Lovecraft flavored; I just couldn't resist - I mean, ELDRITCH Knights? C'mon! :). Imagine playing through Carrion Hill and Wake of the Watcher as members of an Order of Knighthood dedicated to fighting exactly the forces at work in those modules. :) Anyway, that's the kind of stuff I'd love to see them do with Eldritch Knights, and the kind of details I hope to see in Knights of the Inner Sea. Sorry I rambled on for so long, but I have high hopes for this book, and really hope to see the Eldritch Knight Prestige Class given some love and a much better focus than as just a generic Fighter/Mage rules-patch PrC. |
