Axebeak

MMCJawa's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 7,122 posts. 1 review. No lists. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 7,122 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If I were to single out two issues with the current set of dieties, it would probably be the following:

1) The deities in general seem rather disconnected to each other. I am fine if say, the Elf gods maybe don't have much connection to the human gods, and so forth, but in general all of the gods seem to be sort of removed from the majority of gods, except for one or two relationships. Versus mythology, where they tend to cluster into families with more complex relationships with one another

2) I admit I really the underlying cosmology of petitioners and quintessence and how outsiders are made. I think more compelling stories are possible if the dead retain their memories after judgement: They know why and how they are being punished or rewarded, they can reunite with loved ones or even enemies, and there is a potential that they can go on and become an outsider to aid or directly challenge the PCs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So the current buzz is that Endgame is going to be THREE HOURS LONG

Going to have to skip the soda on my first viewing, for the sake of my bladder...


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
KahnyaGnorc wrote:
I don't agree that she would be in hiding and the others not aware of her. They were fighting JUST outside the city and would have returned there right after the battle. It would likely be Okoye, who saw T'Challa get dusted, who would have told Shuri, had she survived. And Okoye would have likely returned to the city alongside the remaining Avengers. So, they would know.

Offering someone exile isn't the same as letting someone stay in charge. One of M'Baku's main reasons for challenging the throne was he hates technology and didn't approve of a teenager effectively running the tech division.

So it's hard for me to imagine him being okay with her taking the throne. Respecting T'Challa doesn't translate as being cool with a teenager running your country

(Also, this effectively takes Wakanda's tech out of the picture for Endgame)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
KahnyaGnorc wrote:

Really good trailer.

** spoiler omitted **

Alternatively, said character is currently in hiding given that the likely new leader of Wakanda, as established in Black Panther, is not exactly her biggest fan.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Eoghnved wrote:
If they never introduce any Ancestries except those in the initial book, there won't be any problem. I've seen a lot of posts over the existence of Pathfinder 1 wishing for a game that didn't have bloat. Making one rulebook and calling it done will satisfy those wishes.

I don't think there is any chance of this happening. Pathfinder is set in a world where aasimar, tieflings, kitsune, changelings, summoners, gunslingers, psychics, and oracles canonically exist. If they want to maintain continuity of the setting (which exists in books, and comics, and video games etc.) they're going to need to eventually print rules for all of those things.

"All the things which used to exist in the world no longer exist" is unsatisfying and saying "they exist but you won't get rules for them" isn't better.

Something like "all the Ratfolk and Catfolk and Merfolk are all dead and gone now" would be the sort of major cataclysmic setting change they explicitly said they would not do.

More importantly, Paizo's business model is book production. They are not WotC which can in part afford to skate by with a more limited release schedule, because their game is much more simplified and they have Magic the Gathering to help pay the bills. I can't see Paizo going to a 5E publication schedule without a lot of lay offs and scaling down of the company.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
And eating cheetos with a giant belly. :p

kind of yeah...


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bellona wrote:

Please note that my own version of Xanderghul surviving does not allow for him to be a runelord. Instead, he's trapped in the mythic path to divine ascension, forced to continue the religion which he had invented for (mythic) power purposes. When Alaznist "killed" him, he lost runelord status and could only survive by clinging to divine status. After the party's visit, any remaining runelord power is gone and only the divine remains. The illusion has become the reality for him, wanted or not, and his former reality is gone along with any related power. There might be a subtle insanity (self-delusion) included in this version.

.
.
.

Okay, I'll admit it - I love the cult's dress code. I just want them to stick around without looking like idiots for worshipping a dead deity.

My own ideas that when the PC's encountered Xanderghul, they would actually be facing off against an earlier and still evil clone created to run the temple. The actual Xanderghul, between Earthfall shattering his realm and getting murdered by Alaznist, would be a broken man kept as a prisoner, spending most of his days on the couch in a bathrobe drunk


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Planpanther wrote:


Im trying to think of why gunslinger would be even a good archetype? It just allows a guy to be good with guns. That seems like it should just be a feat package and not even an archetype. What am I missing?

I suspect that guns, which are relatively rare in Golarion, are going to have specific costs and limitations that might make them less easily accessible as say...a crossbow or sword. So I could see a dedicated class being perhaps required to pull off a gunslinger character from level one.

Of course all of this depends on gun rules, and who knows what they are going to be like. If they take guns in a completely different direction from PF1 than maybe a simple archetype will work after all.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I suspect it's more important for conversion to be the other way around. Paizo produces so much content and has such a large backlog of content that I can't imagine, other than nostalgia for beholders or something similar, much need to be able to convert 5E adventures to PF2. But with a slower release schedule I can definitely see folks maybe wanting to do the reverse


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ssalarn wrote:


Is it really though? I'm genuinely curious because you're the first person I've ever heard express that opinion. My understanding has always been more that partial casting was more about mechanical balance than theme; i.e. magus doesn't have a 6-level spell-list because there's something inherently attractive about having fewer spells, it has a 6-level spell list because the balancing mechanisms of the PF1 system mean a character with that much combat ability would be imbalanced with a full 9-level spell list. Now that all the classes are rebalanced so that e.g. clerics and wizards have more class features and fewer spells per day, there's not really a reason to have "partial casters" from a mechanical perspective anymore. With the bard being a 9-level caster I'd expect that the main variances we'd see in casters would be:

1) Casters who only get focus powers/spells, like monks and paladins.

2) Casters who only get a 9-level spell progression but not focus powers/spells (I'm not sure if there actually are any of these...

Bards do have a somewhat different progression than other 9 level casters (getting one less spell per level, correct?), so that is another way to differentiate casters. I could see some of the other 6th level casters following suite.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ssalarn wrote:
rooneg wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
Arcanist- This was a class that existed for purely mechanical reasons. I don't see it having much place in the new edition.
That feels like it's making some unwarranted assumptions. Arcanist style casting isn't available in any class we've seen so far, so unless it's the sort of thing you can switch the Wizard over to via an archetype or something I'd hate to see it go.

A casting method isn't really a class, it's a single mechanic. The arcanist primarily existed as a training-wheels caster with fairly weak fluff that largely worked due to mechanical paradigms that no longer exist (like sorcerers and wizards having different casting progressions). Its function and ability to exist in a balanced state were due to existing imbalances in the system that created a niche for it to occupy; I don't know that that niche exists in the new system. If they wanted to do Arcanist-style casting, they probably would have needed that to be the new baseline rather than something that would be introduced later, since the wizard already does a lot of what the arcanist did from a spell-prep and rotation angle and the sorcerer has a much more distinct niche that doesn't penalize it with a slower progression and fewer spells.

To each their own of course, I just don't see the arcanist as having any place at all in the new edition since it wasn't really a class with a distinct identity to begin with, more of a mish-mash of mechanics from two other classes to make spellcasting more forgiving. I could see the potential for an arcanist archetype that any caster can take to give them more slot flexibility.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I feel like Spiritualists and Summoners should probably be merged into a single class, possibly throw the Hunter in there.

Like "you are a pet class, pick your flavor- Arcane (Summoner), Occult (Spiritualist), Primal (Hunter), Divine (something new)."

Having all the pet classes use the same rules for pets whether they are outsiders

...

hhhmm...I might be a minority here, but conceptually these feel like classes with very different themes, and I would personally see new versions that rework their mechanics to make them stand out more than to have a very generic class with water downed themes.

I mean just in the upcoming core book, you have Ranger, Barbarian, Fighter, and Paladin. At some level I am sure you could just rework all of those into a generic fighting class that folks could just pick and choose there features from. Paizo decided to keep them distinct and give them different stuff, so I don't really see any difference here with many of the existing classes that we haven't gotten updates on yet.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
I actually see Witch as the prepared occult caster myself. Conceptually, Witch makes a lot more sense tied to the occult.
I just don't see why a witch would be an occult caster if their patron was an angel, a devil, a powerful fae, or a nature spirit (all of which are options for patrons in PF1). Pathfinder's witch is defined more by "pact magic" than anything else.

I know James Jacobs has, IIRC, commented on the idea that using the term patron was a mistake or misleading, as it implied a specific entity granting spells, which wasn't the intention. I would not remotely be surprised if that element somewhat goes away, and that witches just derive their power from some other equivalent source.

I just think Occult is a better match thematically, since it ties more into a lot of horror fiction including Mythos work, and Occult is the "spooky" spell list. Witches to me make more sense for Occult to me then even bards.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I actually see Witch as the prepared occult caster myself. Conceptually, Witch makes a lot more sense tied to the occult.

As far as classes, I think there are two ways to think of future directions.

Does a current/potential class have a unique conceptual niche or flavor that is broad enough to design around? Even if the mechanics might need heavy overhaul, it might be best to to design the class around that theme. To me this is the domain of classes like Shamans, Investigators, and Inquisitors.

Does a current/potential class have a unique mechanical niche or concept? If so, double downing on that might be a good idea. A lot of the occult classes fit in here, as do different casting methods. But also stuff like the swashbuckler, which has an interesting gimmick that you could focus on (and maybe merge with gunslinger).

I think mechanically, a lot of new design space has opened up, that just wasn't present before, some of which probably even isn't evident yet to us. I wouldn't at all be shocked if we didn't eventually get the same profusion of classes as we do in PF1, just representing completely new material.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Elfteiroh wrote:
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Elfteiroh wrote:
[...]

Really? I haven't seen that, at least not form an official source, just a lot of speculation to that extent from people on the forum. I think that would be a mistake. There is room for a few other spell lists, without getting into the list overload of PF1. Especially with the idea of spell lists being a combo of two of the four essences, and then ignoring two of the combinations (Material + Spiritual and Mental + Vital if I recall). Material + Spiritual might be a Shamanistic list, while Mental + Vital might be Psychic.

I also still think that some classes might be ok with using more than one list at once, but limited to a couple of schools. A Summoner with Occult and Arcane but only Conjuration, Transmutation and Abjuration spells for example.

I generally like the essences. But there is a danger in what Voss said. It can be an arbitrary and after-the-fact limitation of spell lists. And there is the question of how to explain the spells that seemingly violate the essences of a given spell list, but still go there for reasons of balance, history or something else. So it's something to keep in mind to try to avoid.

I thing it was a drive-by post by Mark in some thread. I'll try to remember to look for a source tonight when I get home from work.

I have the feeling they'll go around the spell list limitation using focus spells. I guess we'll see.

I suspect this will be true until the developers come up with some idea or theme that makes sense to introduce two new spell lists in a players splat. I have no doubt that everything currently in development, even stuff that is only sketched out and not announced, at the moment falls into those Four lists. But it does leave an out should they in the future want to do something with them.

And assuming that PF2E catches on with third party and the essence idea isn't pure IP, YOU KNOW someone else is going to fill those gaps.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I have enjoyed pretty much all of the Whedon shows, even if I do think some of his later works (Dollhouse and yes...Firefly) were not as strong as Buffy or Angel.

I'll certainly watch this, although I generally only subscribe to HBO for a couple of months per year, then binge everything I am interested. Personally more interested in the Lovecraft Country adaptation by Peele than anything else listed there.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Some of these really seem overpowered only in niche settings/campaigns

For instance, sure, some races might have a swim speed. But how often does swimming really come up? and a lot of the aquatic races have limitations on land locomotion or need to return to water regularly

And Kitsune have shapeshifting, but without feats they can pretty much just shift from a fox-like humanoid to one specific humanoid form.

Honestly the best thing would be to give them an okay (not great) version of their current ability (that they could improve with feats), but also pair them with some sort of drawback. Strix for instance are suppose to be highly xenophobic, so maybe by default give them some sort of significant penalty to social interactions or something.

I have concerns over ancestries/heritages, but I admit that this isn't my biggest concern.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I left pretty conflicted.

I get some of what they did and appreciate it, but one of the twists to me just didn't work at all and undermined the rest of the movie, and overall it had a bit more of a bummer ending than I hoped for or wanted.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Phillip Gastone wrote:
A reset/mindwipe is no doubt going to happen so there are not mass amounts of people suffering from mental trauma from IW/EG

My guess is time travel, which was already alluded to in Antman and Wasp. Don't need to do a mindwipe if you start something from every happening!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:

Yeah, I don't think Ol' Bubblehead suddenly has superpowers or is a hero. My guess is he has access to (or has built) some special effects technologies ("hard light"/photonic molecules and hologram projectors) to stage villain emergencies so that he can rush in to save the day. Some sort of long con to get him greater fortune and fame to feed a likely massive ego. Maybe even set Mysterio up thematically like the Vulture & Wizard Tinkerer from S:HC as a warning of the evil side of technology-wielders as a counterpoint to Pete & Tony Stark's use, and get Pete thinking along those lines to plant seeds toward his own Parker Industries some day.

Yeah this is my take as well, although the Elementals could be real entities he has somehow figured out how to manipulate.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

the forums in general are not being shutdown, just the playtest forums will be shuffled off hang out with all the other playtest forums.

As far as the timeline for the playtest, I always saw that as being pretty clearly set up from the beginning.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Related to Channel Zero, they have had a propensity of creating really great and original monsters. Do you have a favorite?

I admit, I would love to see constructs based around the Tooth Child and Meat Servant in Pathfinder


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm currently getting caught up on Channel Zero (Finished Butcher's Block last night). What do you think of the show, and do you have a favorite season?

If you haven't watched it, I think you would really enjoy it. It leans a lot more heavily into cosmic horror and lovecraftian tones than say...American Horror Story.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Daredevil was my "Whelp, all of these are getting cancelled" moment.

I mean Iron Fist was the least loved, so not a surprise. And I know people have had various issues with both seasons of Luke Cage. So surprising but maybe understandable. Daredevil? That was at one point one of netflix' flagship shows and the flagship for all of the Netflix MCU.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
I find it incredibly relaxing to do water changes on my 3 fish tanks, often with aquarium podcasts going on in the background
I used to have recurring dreams that I owned a basement that had dozens of aquariums (aquaria?) that I had had to let someone else care for while I was away. I had this dream for years and suddenly I just stopped having it. I wonder what it meant.

Based on youtube fishroom tours, there are plenty of folks who have made that sort of dream a reality. I have a one bedroom apartment on a fourth floor...but man when I get a house, you can expect some larger aquariums to go in.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
quibblemuch wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:

I love baking at Christmas time, which always seems to surprise folks because I am a single dude with no kids.

One of the favorite parts of my job is watching the reactions of the undergrads in my human anatomy class to some painful sounding anatomy factoid or medical condition (the cringes from the male students as I explain what "testicular torsion" is often especially satisfying)

Hopefully you explain this using appropriately-shaped Christmas cookies as visual aids...

I suspect bringing cookies with those shapes to class might be crossing a line....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

anything that inflicts mind control/control of your body. Nothing is more horrifying to me than the idea of someone body jacking you and making you do horrible things with you helpless to object


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I find it incredibly relaxing to do water changes on my 3 fish tanks, often with aquarium podcasts going on in the background.

I love baking at Christmas time, which always seems to surprise folks because I am a single dude with no kids.

One of the favorite parts of my job is watching the reactions of the undergrads in my human anatomy class to some painful sounding anatomy factoid or medical condition (the cringes from the male students as I explain what "testicular torsion" is often especially satisfying)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

uh...I think that fact-checking a universe that includes Superman is a bit silly....


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Before the PF2E announcement, I was generally in the camp of folks who wanted a 1.5 style minor revision. Since the playtest I have come to see the merits of a greater revision.

Why?

Well, say prior to the playtest, if you polled a ton of folks who were actively playing PF at the time (or only recently went away from the game), some of those folks would say no to ANY revision, but I think most of them would see the merit of a 1.5. However, if you were to ask them WHAT A 1.5 REVISION actually entails, I don't think you would get absolutely any agreement.

Just look at the topics endlessly debated in PF 1E

Caster-Martial Discrepancy
Alignment
Setting versus Setting neutral
Vancian vs other systems
Role of GM
Paladins
High Level Play
Magic

etc

some people may only see revisions to a couple or even none of those things as necessary. Some people may agree there are problems with these specific areas, but then have WIDELY different ideas of how to fix them or what degree of change is needed. Caster-Martial discrepancy is a great one to point out. I think most folks acknowledge an issue here, but some don't find it significant, and some consider it a plus. Other folks find it a major problem and want to nerf spell casters, while other folks find it a problem and think it requires a major buff to martials. Any decision you make on how to address these changes is going to alienate some core group of the existing audience, while at the same time losing the folks who want NO CHANGES IN ANYTHING.

So really, any revision at all is going to cause problems with your existing customer base. You might as well go for broke and do a more substantial edition change, and hope that any loss of existing consumers is made up by bringing back former players and attracting new players, either from 5E or folks who are completely new to the game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I didn't use the sidebar, but I do find the forums harder to navigate in general.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am neutral to positive on the changes

Resonance I am not surprised to see gone...I felt every iteration or attempt at fixing it solved one problem, while producing a problem somewhere else. Elements I like, and I would still rather see a resonance system basically be used to control for charges or something, but it going away I think will be fine.

Loss of Level for untrained I am mixed on. It does solve some weirdness, but hopefully it won't return the game to a situation where some folks are autofail and some folks are autosuceed. I think Paizo doesn't want to go back to this, so I suspect there will be something built into the proficiency ranks to prevent this from happening. Something like Master prof allowing a character to allow another character to roll as if they were trained, or Legendary allowing the same but for the entire group.

Magic needs to be improved a bit, especially some things like durations. I always figured they intentionally went with the most extreme version to see how it went with folks. As long as Magic is kept toned down from PF1 it should be fine.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anguish wrote:


Makes sense.

On the one hand, PF1 conversation just tanked abruptly because there's really no point discussion/debating rules, or speculating about future classes, features, or products in general. It's like washing your sports car every weekend by hand when you know you're trading it in two weeks from now.

On the other hand, PF2 conversation is mostly pointless because the product that was playtested isn't the product that will be sold in nine months. There's nothing much to talk about because all we've got is not-PF2.

On the gripping hand, general sales volume has got to have declined, or we wouldn't be having this PF2 revolution anyway.

Personally I think this is the Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul. People smarter and more informed than I are the decision-makers, but from the outside it seems to me that this should be a period of excitement. There should be some coordinated releases of goodies like minis sets. There should be a few special, exciting PF1 modules being released to suck buyers back into Golarion. There should be some web-fiction, perhaps in the form of a Pathfinder Tale spread one chapter a week to introduce people to this world. There should be capstone products introducing unique classes / items / spells. There should be a few hours each week set aside from a designer to slam through the FAQ backlog, showcasing how engaged Paizo is, supporting their products. There should be weekly nuggets of behind-the-curtain from the PF2 design team interlaced with all of that excitement, so that everyone drawn here to read about/buy whatever also has contact with the general outlines of how the future is being shaped. There should not - in my humble opinion - be the better part of a year where our attention is allowed to wander.

To be clear, when I mention the drop off in messageboard activity, I don't refer to a recent drop off due to the PF2 announcement, but a gradual trend long proceeding that. And the drop off in messageboard use I observe was in messageboards for completely different topics with non-overlapping bases. I am sure there is also a PF2 effect, but I think a 5E effect and others are even greater.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
in◆⃟ wrote:

I wish someone could explain what's going on.

In comparison to the Pathfinder Beta playtest, the designers are disseminating information everywhere except their own website. They will get on Twitch, they will speak on podcasts, they might even engage on Facebook.

But over the past two months, there has been very little feedback from the designers, either on blogs, or on the boards. The most we see is Jason Bulmahn locking threads.

For the record, this time last decade December 2008, on one day, the 20th of December, we got more posts from the designers than we have in the whole month of December 2018 - and half of November 2018.

Search results for comparison

I think some of that is just that messageboards in general, compared to other social media, are just a less popular forum nowadays. Certainly it FEELS like activity on the boards has declined versus where it was at 5 years ago, and anectodotally I have seen conversations drop off on other messageboards. Paizo may feel they need to devote more effort facebook and twitch versus here


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I saw this a few days ago, and it really is an excellent film. I would definitely watch more "spiderverse" style films


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I feel like when they say "there's no advancing metaplot" they don't mean "things don't happen, the setting will remain static" they mean "we're not building towards anything in particular so that you need to play them all to keep track of it." We don't have any particular "Rovagug escapes and the world ends" apocalypse looming in the background, stuff just happens... sometimes it causes other stuff to happen. If the APs which are sequels to each other are any indication it's going to be less "you need to have played read the last one to make sense of this", they will just matter of factly state "this thing happened" insofar as it's necessary for setting the stage. If you played the relevant AP this might mean more to you, but you don't need the whole backstory to make sense of "So-and-So rules X now".

Presumably all sorts of places change who's in charge "offscreen" all the time. Like it's probably a biweekly occurrence in Galt.

Plus I mean ignorance of setting details is a fine thing to have in character so if you personally have them then that's super easy to RP, there's not an internet (nor telegraph system) on Golarion so if your character is unaware that Ravounel is now independent from Cheliax, that's fine unless you're literally from Ravounel (Cheliax probably suppresses the news, and "general ignorance" is probably the safest way to be in Nidal.)

But that makes it harder to write backstories for your characters conflict with the canon. I don't want to write something like "My Hell's Vengeance magus' black blade is the Hellfire Redeemer from Empire of Devils" only for someone to reply "But the Pathfinders find the Hellfire Redeemer in PFS Scenario #46!" Then I have to start all over! D:<

And I want to do a whole "expanded universe" thing where all the AP play-by-posts I'm in are all happening in the same timeline, and that means needing to know as much canon as possible so I can keep the games run by different GMs from conflicting with each other!

I don't think anyone, including the creators, expect most tables to be anywhere near as concerned as canon as you seem to be.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

that sort of already exists, since races that are abundant in certain parts of the setting are not considered as common in other parts. Starfinder might races that exist on other planets, but travel between planets is as easy as travel between nations in a science fiction game, so they deal with other races/ancestries in an equivalent way.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yeah I agree with DeathQuaker that its pretty good but also has major ups and downs. Last year I thought it was the weakest of the CW shows, while this year I would say it's the strongest.

Honestly If you are interested you could probably get away with just watching this season, and if you like it go back to earlier seasons.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I admit, with the future loss of the Netflix Marvel shows (I think it's all but certain that Jessica Jones and Punisher will be cancelled sometime after there next seasons air, given those are well along in production), plus the diminishing returns on movies which appear there, that Netflix is likely to go from "subscribe continually" to "subscribe for a month or two and binge all the shows I like, then unsubscribe. Granted Disney+ is likely to the be same thing.

Didn't the press release say that the character of Daredevil will appear again? My money is on either a reboot as a theatrical property, or a new show on Hulu.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:

Well, maybe D'Onofrio will now get his wish to show up as Fisk in a Holland/Spider-Man movie after all?

This means it's almost certain Jessica Jones and The Punisher are on their final seasons at Netflix too, as they're already filmed.

Runaways season 2 debuts December 21st on Hulu, and Cloak & Dagger season 2 is finished filming (to air on Freeform/ABC Family)... but after that ???

Runaways should be safe...With the Fox merger, Disney now has controlling interest in Hulu. Disney also owns Freeform, so Cloak and Dagger should also be safe.

This is all about Disney and Netflix, which are soon to be major rivals in the streaming wars, and neither side wanting to help the other.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I for one like AoO to be more limited. My tables always found it a fiddly rule that folks would forget about, or slow down their play. At least now really player of a couple of classes + the DM need to know it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
If players go out of their way to spoil which foes have Reactions for themselves then of course the surprise will go quickly. The same can be said for pretty much anything that was meant to be a surprise but isn't. Of course that becomes less fun.
If players don't know what Reactions foes have, then of course they won't get to make interesting strategic decisions based on this knowledge. Instead they'll just occasionally take extra 'gotcha' damage through no fault of their own. Obvious, this is less fun.

Isn't that true for any monster ability or weirdness though?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The system certainly streamlines some options down. A large chunk of the player oriented hardcovers were basically "Take x distinctive mechanic from this class, now give it to the bard as one archetype, the fighter for another, and so on.

But I think there is plenty more that still could be done. We might see "style" archetypes, like archetypes that focus on archery, mounted combat, dueling, what have you. We have prestige archetypes as well. Also, I still expect to see tons of class feats, ancestry feats, skill feats, new classes, races, items, spells, etc.

I wouldn't worry about Paizo having trouble thinking about stuff to fill books.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
thistledown wrote:

The primary function of a Paladin needs to be Smite Evil, not reactive strikes.

For all you whippersnappers who started playing the game in 2000, maybe.

That's like 18 years, which is almost half the time that RPG's have even existed as a thing. It's not like people are talking about a feature released in a class splat 2 years ago.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Igor Horvat wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Igor Horvat wrote:
They strive to get as far away from D&D 5E,
I think that is intentional, and smart in some ways, but trying too hard not to be like it, could be a detriment. I find 5th Ed closer to PF, than the Playtest, so far.

Problem is that PF2 playtest does not know what it want's to be, that is devs, do not know how to proceed?

Little like PF1?

Little like 5E?

Something new?

They took spell scaling from 5E but kept PF1/3.5e slot preparation,

They took 4E "level gives bonus to everything" and then tackled on pretty badly 5E proficiency progress -4 to +3 in comparison to 0 to +6(+12 in some cases).

They took multiclassing via feats, atleast they did it better than 4E tried that subject, so one plus there.

They don't want to be 5.5e but 5E mechanics creep in the back door.

Either do PF2 like PF1 and do a nice upgrade and pay respect to the source or do your own thing right.

Err..yeah. They are trying to make a new game, not just update an existing system. So yeah I am not surprised there are elements/similarities to all of these different systems.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Staying on topic, I think I am going to find the production schedule ahead a bit of a bummer.

Even if Paizo tries some different things for the new release schedule, or if they give us some double-size bestiaries etc, a lot of the effort for the next few years is going to have to be devoted to bringing PF 1E content into PF 2E (guns, witches, monsters,prestige archetypes, basic setting information) which means less novel classes, monsters, or other options.

I am sure we will be getting some new stuff mixed in of course, but a lot will be like the above.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think the benefits of having NPCs following PC rules would be the following:

Yes, that little weirdness of "why does it work this way for x but not y" is resolved on the GM end.

Players are not left questioning, if they are say, a goblin, why an equivalent "level" goblin is strangely so much more powerful than they are or can do weird things they can't

If a player character dies and needs to be replaced, it's easier to just hand a NPC constructed off of PC rules to them than have convert one over. Or if a NPC otherwise joins a party.

It gives a player an option to see new tactics and abilities employed against them, which might spur their own ideas or guide there character development

It broadens the potential possibility of character races, although admittably I think the Ancestry rules are basically going to already throw a wrench in this (It's going to be very hard, without a robust list of ancestry feats, to take a monster from a bestiary and make it into a playable race, even if the basic race traits are there

I will grant, none of the above are deal breakers (and I am perfectly fine with more "monstrous" beings operating by there own rules). I also acknowledge how time consuming this can be to construct a NPC with lots of levels, but to me this is resolvable via a NPC codex type book, which I tend to use for this purpose versus more customizable texts.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If you don't consider the new action economy a "new thing for the edition", than I don't think anything in the game is actually new, given that I am sure some variation of every system in the game has popped up somewhere else.

Also, regarding monsters, I am with some of the folks here. Most of the time I don't care if the monsters have different stats, but it does feel weird when things like goblins or other NPCs are playing by different rules. At the very least, design them around the equivalent level of a player character of that race, and don't give them extra bonuses not available to those characters.


18 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

There are entire fields of statistics focused on survey data...I am pretty sure there are statistical ways of factoring in changes in survey participation and their influence on end results.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Arssanguinus wrote:


With the way they seem to be talking that seems exceedingly unlikely. They seem to have made the calculation that they are willing to lose people over this. They also rather pointedly didn’t say anything about the subclasses being significantly different which you would think if they were they might have led with as it might assuage the people that are being cut out of the will so to speak. The fact that no mention...

They started making that calculation the moment they decided to do a new edition, given that their were folks who already pledged to never buy a Paizo product again if even a SLIGHTLY ERRATA'D version of Pathfinder 1E was released as a new edition. Every single change they have made, even popular ones like the 3 action economy, has been a redline for some players and a reason not to pursue the new edition.

Any decision on Paladin, or bringing down the power level of spells, and so on, will turn off some segment of the fanbase. It's a no win situation, in that you either stick with the current editions and slowly lose customers through attrition, or you make a bolder play that potentially brings in/back more customers, but may alienate existing ones.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I find the alchemist change the most interesting...I remember people being annoyed that mutagens weren't available until 4th level, which meant that playing a straight Jekyll and Hyde character from level one was impossible.

I like the subclass idea in general...that is sort of how I am seeing the Paladin variants falling out as well.

1 to 50 of 7,122 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>