Please bear in mind, both "wayfinder" and "pathfinder" are real world terms that exist outside of two companies and their product, as much as they might sound like typical fantasy noun-verbing. I can't count the number of times I've searched for something related to Pathfinder and gotten the same image of that SUV or that one movie.
I've seen plenty of irritating players, and a few ridiculous DMs, but my favorite bad for both come from the same campaign. And to get to that, I need to start with another bad player. I met this first guy, let's call him Dwarf, on a recruitment thread for a roll20 RotR game. Dwarf is the kind of player that wants to be a really smart problem solver, but is more often lazy and possessing a bad understanding of the rules, and he likes to abuse other characters IC. In that campaign, he played a Dwarf bard who found a third-party spell that depantsed people--he proceeded to use this spell on everyone who even mildly slighted him. This was later upgraded to a spell that hit people in the nuts. We later found out these spells had saving throws he wasn't giving us. He also bought a pack of six hound dogs that the DM let him control effortlessly in combat. Finally, by the end of Burnt Offerings, he paid a ship captain to fire a barrage of cannons at Nualia's hideout, and was fuming mad when the results were not a giant pile of rubble and a level up; he kept swearing we'd go back and force that captain to give us a refund. Now, shortly after this, the campaign ended due to scheduling, as most do. And I thought that was the end of it. But a month or two later, Dwarf messaged me on Skype about a new game he was getting into--an Exalted game where we would play as Deathlords. At the time, I was between contracts, sitting at home and not doing very much. So I figured, it was time I'd just be wasting anyway, and accepted. This became the routine--Dwarf would invite me to a game, the game would last a few sessions before scheduling or terrible players/DMs would kill it, and then I wouldn't hear from him for another month or so. It was a bit like eating well-prepared pufferfish--no campaign lasted long enough to properly poison me. This brings me to the GM of the last game I ever played with Dwarf. This final campaign was presented as a Rogue Trader game. I initially drew up my character as an Arch-Militant, but was told I should play a character from Only War instead, so that our trade vessel could also have an army. I questioned this--cursory reading suggested that each 40K book had different starting power levels--but was brushed off. When our crew of Rogue Traders was fully assembled, the DM marveled that no one had made a Space Marine, because of how good they are. Then the campaign got started, and we were immediately shown why having a Space Marine in the party was a bad idea, because the DM had our Rogue Trader vessel immediately in the escort of a company of Space Wolves, and he added a Doom marine (?) NPC to our main cast. As a result, our navigator was constantly under threat for his life, and the rest of us under constant surveillance for signs of heresy. This was especially jarring because half of us were new to the Warhammer 40K setting, meaning that faux pas were common. We had to tread a social minefield just to get started on any missions we had, and our vessel's armanents were naturally outmatched and outperformed by the Space Wolves in ship combat and by the Doom marine in personal combat. So it goes, our party members are repeatedly threatened by either Space Wolves or by my character's Commissar, we find a derelict ship full of zombies and purge it, and we have a ship-based skirmish with some orc vessels over a planet we are trying to claim. Basic stuff. Then we are sent down to the surface to assault a compound of Chaos cultists. With the Space Wolves as "backup" of course. And that's when the Worst Player comes in. If our DM has a hard-on for the setting at the expense of the player's enjoyment, then this Player had a hard-on for his own personal fantasies over everybody else. He came to the campaign with a female, half-Eldar Space Marine of the Blood Raven chapter (specifically so he could take any gear he liked, he made no backstory justifications for anything). The fact that the DM didn't look at his character before letting the Player in is a further mark against the whole affair, because if our Navigator was constantly under threat of death for having a mutation gene, than a half-xeno was obviously not compatible with the game we were running. The first thing the new Player does upon arriving at the battle field is run up to my Imperial character and try to take control of my entire Imperial Guard. He pulled rank to do so (which the DM allowed), which was the only time in the entire game that his character paid attention to the conventions of the setting. Almost immediately, his character tried stripping down to a lighter armor set with no helmet -- the better to show off her glorious looks, I presume -- only for the DM to remind him that, yes, she was a xeno, and the Space Marines would shoot the ever-loving s*%* out of her once they found out. This started the first of MANY complaints about the Warhammer 40K setting being too restrictive, as though the Player didn't know what kind of setting he was getting into. His knowledge of setting rules and story later proved this to be incorrect, but it wouldn't stop him from complaining about how Warhammer rules wouldn't let him play an immortal elf space babe with superpowers every fifteen minutes. So the Half-Eldar drags my Imperial Sergeant's butt over to the rest of the party practically by my ear, ignoring my irritation at being figuratively manhandled by a completely new player, and our group is about ready to move into the last holdout of the cultists. By this point, Dwarf had been killed by artillery fire in a session he wasn't there for (another mark against the DM, and I believe the reason Dwarf hasn't contacted me since--blame by proxy). So this is where the game hits its melting point--the Half-Eldar character meets our Rogue Trader Captain, a sometimes addled player whose confused bumbling was half the fun. So what does the new Player do, once all the party is gathered up. He immediately tries to take command of the entire group, bossing us around like we are pawns and threatening to shoot anyone who steps out of line. Unsurprisingly, our RTC doesn't appreciate this upset (none of us did, but he was the most vocal IC). So he starts to argue with Half-Eldar about who is in charge. Now, by DM's logic, Eldar has more authority than RTC, obviously, because she is a Space Marine. But New Player also does not give a flying f@#! about heresy, and has to be frequently reminded that the party is accompanied by a very large and intimidating Doom marine with most of our heavy weapons, plus all the Space Wolves outside. Cue more complaining about New Player not being able to do whatever he wanted. But he relents. So instead of taking control, he starts very loudly planning out how his character is going to ASSASSSINATE RTC when no one is looking. In response, RTC starts loudly planning his own defenses and counter-assassinations. And New Player is also still trying to find an opportunity to take off his helmet and armor for sexier armor--and the DM keeps reminding him that he's playing a xeno and would be shot the heck up. At some point, we also killed all the cultists, but I'll be damned if I remember when or how. This three-way bickering and passive-aggressive threatening continued all the way back our Rogue Trader vessel, where New Player's assassination attempts began in earnest, while DM starting really laying on how screwed Half-Eldar was for being a Xeno on a ship surrounded by Space Wolves and how they would definitely smell her out sooner or later. It was the Unstoppable Force meeting the Immovable object. It went on for over an hour. Eventually, the New Player ragequit, and RTC also left the group. The DM took over RTC's character, and gleefully told us about how RTC totally found out half-eldar was a xeno and had her caged up as an exotic pet to show off. We never had a session after that.
I am baffled by the fluff argument that shields don't make sense in a "sci fi" setting that already has "tactical starknives." Whether the rules can accommodate additional defensive bonuses is another matter, but let's not argue a hard sci fi aesthetic in a space fantasy game. If we can allow for meteoric hammers and monowhips, we can make room fluff-wise for an arm-mounted shield that provides some form of protection.
Maybe a bit tangent but I'd enjoy some support for the Akashic races. As is they are functional but don't seem to have that much draw aside from being animal people with akashic ties. Some opportunities to flesh them out and provide additional options would do them some good.
244. Honor demands fair play. Acquire an equal number of elven babies and equip them all for a grand melee.
...Heh. Le "I'm Mad"
I am not sure an animal would bother to coup de grace, actually. I've seen images of lions eating a gazelle that was still alive, but unable to fight back. Once you're no longer a danger and cannot run away, there's no natural reason to waste energy on killing you that could be spent defending you as a meal or straight up eating you. And creatures that are eligible for a coup de grace fall pretty squarely into this category--though even an animal will think twice about making sure someone is dead the first time they suddenly get back up, I think.
Since Miracle (and similar core spells) can do anything that a 0-level spell could reasonably do, Prestidigitation has never been able to do anything. Everyone who has ever used Prestidigitation to any effect has broken RAW. You heard the man, all units inbound! *flashes RAWPD badge* You're all under arrest! We have the thread figuratively surrounded!
This is a personal peeve of mine, though I'm sure those who commit it generally have good intentions: On the forums, sometimes people ask for suggestions or advice on how to fluff something, or ask about how something should work storywise. What always grinds my gears is a common reply: "It's role-playing, just do whatever you like!" No extra input, clarification, or ideas, just a rebound of the question back at the OP. It's a technically correct answer, and it's good to keep in mind, sure. But often it assumes that a DM or player must be led by the nose to creative thinking. With most questions, it seems quite obvious to me that people aren't roboticly asking for the "right" answer, but are simply admitting that their creative well is a bit dry on the subject. As such, they don't need a blithe reminder that fluff is customizable, but ideas and suggestions that they can then spin off into their own unique solutions. Just as we are all inspired by other media, sometimes people come to the forums hoping to be inspired by other games and posters. From this perspective, telling somebody to "Come up with whatever you like," can sound like a saccharine command to "Just figure it out yourself!" It's dismissive, it doesn't move the conversation forward, and sometimes it's borderline insulting. This gets a bit more infuriating when somebody asks about how something works specifically in Golarion or another setting and gets the same response. It cannot get much clearer that such posters are interested in a shared canon, and are after concrete answers or sound community theories over establishing their own rules, but all the same, someone will likely show up to remind them that it doesn't matter, do what you want, believe in yourself!
I'm leaning on the side of "yes, your scent changes," myself. Though given how scent works, you might still have a lingering scent of your former shape for a few minutes after the change, as if you'd been in close contact with ex-you, unless you keep on the move. More intelligent monsters that are tracking you by scent might also be able to figure out the new smell that started where yours disappeared is probably also you, if you don't take steps to obfuscate the connection.
Had a shadar-kai order his shadow mastiffs to flank the party in Scales of War... "Klonz! To the left of me! Jokaz, to the right!" It was the first time somebody tried to physically assault me over the internet.
Halfling samurai named Zashi Osharena, or "Whacky" Zashi.
Interestingly, the neothelid provides some non-canonical evidence that mind flayers did inhabit Golarion at some point. In D&D lore, neothelid form from mind flayer tadpoles who do not complete their transformation, without the supervision of an elder brain. In theory, the neothelid of Golarion might be the successors of a fallen mind flayer colony, destroyed by any number of competitors.
Do some research about the strangest personal experiences of astronauts in space--not necessarily weird physics, but unusual sensations and experiences common among space travelers. Then build some wicked cool fey based on those odd moments, just as if a superstitious serf was trying to explain them.
Alright, thank you for the information!
Mildly annoyed. The roots of the "mancy" suffix are Greek, and I much prefer when the origins of all parts of a compound word are similar. This example struck out as the first time it's been between Greek and something outside the entire Indo-European family. Sir, I contend that the horrible pun is the best part of this idea, and will fight you to the staggered condition to keep it!
As people say, cats are not naturally intimidating to most players. So if you really want to ramp up the drama of this fight, you need to build up to it. On the way to this witch lair, and in the dungeon itself, have cats appear before actual traps and encounters. Arched back, hissing, yowling, hair on end--everything a cat does to scream "Don't mess with me!" In older times, cats could be interpreted as a bad omen; similarly, if you do this right, your players will become nervous any time a cat appears, because they understand implicitly that something dangerous is about to befall them. In game, you might say the witch is scrying through these cats for the PCs, and directing her traps and minions to attack wherever the cats find them. Fast forward to the penultimate fight. All the cats have gathered back up at the witch's lair as a last line of defense. The players, who know that cat = bad times, walk into a room full of hissing, spitting, yowling, mangy cats. It should give them pause. Now, for the actual fight, I wouldn't go full APL+4, since there are only two PCs and there is probably a witch to fight after these guys. Firstly, as has been said, use a swarm. If you don't want to build a cat swarm, the rat swarm should be about the same CR, and the cat's are probably filthy with disease anyway. If CR 2 is too low, you can add the advanced and giant template to beef it up, or add a second swarm. Swarms alone are pretty nasty, but since you have an alchemist, a swarm shouldn't be a great challenge unless he's used up his bombs already (or rolls poorly). If you expect the alchemist to be well-stocked, then the first time he throws a bomb at the swarm, have a pair of giant, advanced cats (feral-looking Maine Coon buggers), leap out of the swarm they were hiding in and attack him. As a pair of CR 1/2 baddies, they should provide the cavalier with a way to feel useful while giving the alchemist second thoughts about throwing another bomb. Don't forget, you can include the witch's cat familiar in this fight. If you give the witch the Animals Patron, you can also give her familiar Animal Speaker, letting it speak to others of its kind at 1st level. This lets it direct the cats to fight more intelligently. The familiar also teeeechnically doesn't raise the CR since its XP is baked into the witch's CR (If you aren't going to have the PCs fight the witch, then you should probably have the familiar count as the Witch's CR -3 or 4 for XP rewards). Lastly, if this feels a bit less exciting in terms of rules, set the encounter in a room that the cats can just ruin in their fight with the PCs. Set it in the witch's potion brewing room, or her library. Now in addition to its normal abilities, the swarm can topple shelves onto the PCs, knock dangerous chemicals off of tables, and take cover from splash attacks behind larger pieces of furniture. More options mean less certainty about what the cats will do next and thereby a little more anxiety.
Don't be a dick--okay, be a bit of a dick, but only sometimes.
Question on magical girl's "Finishing Move." I'm confused on the wording. Is it supposed to be an attack with a weapon that becomes a touch attack and deals +2d6 damage? Or a touch attack for 2d6 damage that can be used in melee or range? And if the latter, what is its range?
I don't have a problem with most of these terms. They get misused but misappropriation of terms is a human tradition going back millennia. You want to really set me off, throw down the phrase "MMO" when complaining that a system is too gamist. The term does not accurately address the issue--I've never seen it used for rules that are unique to MMO games. Further, it's a term embedded in RP snobbery against roleplayers in MMO games.
Just like no one is a good roleplayer, at first. Speak for yourself. Why, I've been a master since the day I was born! I remember it well, the warm, right crawlspace. The cold hands of the doctor. The harsh burning of my first gasp of air. I looked back at my mother, still aglow even after the ravages of labor. I looked at my father, beaming down with pride. And I told the nurse, "I'm sorry, there must have been a mistake. I was supposed to get off on the next floor." ...And I would have gotten away with it, too, if I'd had the cognitive function to wait until they had cut the cord!
Honestly, I'm much more concerned about my last game of Calvinball when it comes to issues like this. We still argue over who flipped the It-rod over forth base last.
I still browse online sites for 3rd party 4E material sometimes. And I've spent way too much on 3rd party PF material I'll never use or allow. Also, I've tried ERP before, only to find myself utterly bored with it. I don't know which half of that sentence I should be more embarrassed by.
Alright, let's belt out what I can of this idea before I sleep, work, drive, relate to family members, eat, drive, sleep, and work again until Friday evening. I'm considering an uzamati magus (mindblade) character for this game. And also the village bum. Old Hobbs: In a previous epoch of history, Gurzohl Yeicuemitl was an "simple guard" of a flourishing magical city-state. He is not sure what happened to change all that--all he remembers is he was on patrol outside the city gates when he heard a roaring sound, and suddenly his entire squadron was consumed in a blue-violet conflagration. Everything after that was a hazy memory of perpetual thoughtless nightmare.
When Gurzohl slipped back into the mortal world, he was no longer human--his body was a poorly-contained vessel of the energy that had both destroyed him and preserved his soul for what seemed like eternity. His former city was a ruin, populated with undead and magical abominations. The first few other uzamati Gurzohl met were insane and feral--it wasn't until he was miles away from the crumbling walls that Gurzohl found a camp of other uzamati with any common sense. These survivors explained as best they could. Like Gurzohl, they were guardsmen, rangers, or hunters, farther out from the city, but not so far as to escape the blast. The "oldest" uzamati had been free for decades, meeting only a handful of escaped brethren in every five-year span. The well of destructive energy that had captured all the souls of Gurzohl's home was leaking, but there were still thousands more trapped in a tormented limbo. From there, Gurzohl fell into lock step with the surviving sentinels. Though he was an intellectual, this disaster was beyond Gurzohl's ability to fathom, so he numbly fell back on his duties as a soldier, following orders to the best of his ability. Unfortunately, Gurzohl was a city guard being commanded by rangers. Eventually he got hopelessly lost on one of his scouting missions, such that he wandered for weeks on end. By the time he found human civilization, he had no idea how to get back to his homeland, nor did anybody recognize his description of the eerie ruins. Desolated, Gurzohl gave up. He put his old life behind him, and did his best to blend into the new human culture. Fortunately, Gurzohl still looked human--most of the time. However, Gurzohl was chased out of more than one sleepy community when his uzamati form manifested unexpectedly. Eventually Gurzohl became a vagrant, and by the time he settled into the town of Barlilly, most of his pride and sense of discipline had evaporated. In Barlilly, "Old Hobbs" Gurzohl is considered the local village idiot--harmless, but not good for much besides basic labor. He gets along alright with some of the town's other strange citizens, and often ends up as the unofficial babysitter of the children who otherwise run wild along the streets. When he hasn't found work to pay for a little coin, Old Hobbs spends his free time fishing out of the Styx. He rarely catches anything, and tries even less--as an uzamati, he has no stomach for food anyway. Recently, something has woken Old Hobbs out of his usual fugue. A peddler coming through town put up a flier in the town square advertising for recruits to join "the new army of Acazohuitl." The name of Hobbs' old city-state. A ruin. Had his people escaped? Was this army his homeland's descendants? Maybe the survivors he'd all but given up on finding again? Or were they charlatans and imposters? Old Hobbs resolved to find out. There were stranger folk in Barlilly talking about leaving town soon, and the gray-haired hobo soon made plans to join them as best he could.
I hope to see From the Deep AP and The First Language supplement get the support and resolutions they need to finish, with understanding to the difficulties those products are having. More speculatively, I'd like expansion docs for the psionic and akashic races, and also for the devs' favorite Bloodforge races.
I did not have any sexual urges until last year--and I just turned thirty. At the same time, while I found culture to be obnoxiously sex-dominant, I never felt specifically discriminated against for my habits. A few idiots expressed disbelief, or contempt, but I can find a few idiots that can't handle any given human habits, even common ones. While the emphasis on sexuality within the current cultural trends has always annoyed me, I think the term "rights" is too strong. "Acknowledgement" is probably closer, and even then, I don't think most folk truly suffer for asexuality, any more than we suffer for the multitude of other quirks and disagreements people find themselves in. It would be good for people to understand the additional depths of sexuality, but it is not a case of meaningful oppression.
While I feel that the thawn fails to back up its premise mechanically, I love the ideas. Thawns aren't just hideous--they are deformed to the point that some don't look like they should be able to live. They are grotesque and they know it, and it drives them mad. Thawns are natural builders of traps and decoys. A single thawn with a few beasts and enough time could take up the entire stretch of a dungeon, with false walls, fake thawns, and hideous traps. In addition, thawn are, as described, stealthy and strong, making them terrifying ambushers, much like bugbears. Take it a step further, and a thawn becomes something out of a creepypasta. They aren't deliberately malicious or aggressive, but something is inherently wrong with their minds and souls, in addition to their bodies, and even their best intentions turn into terrible sins and violence. --A thawn tries to make friends by kidnapping people and mutilating their bodies until they are as ugly as he is--but they are so beautiful, even if he whittles them down to bones! --A thawn sneaks into bedrooms at night to watch "the pretty ones" sleep; if they wake up, he strangles them to death for ruining their friendship. --A thawn takes a liking to a particular family or band--they wake up one morning to find their home has become a cage full of death traps, in order to "protect them." --In the dark of night, thawns are aggressively building their giant mud "scarecrows" closer and closer to an outpost--the field is dotted with a fake army, and nobody knows what will happen when these scarecrows reach the gates. --A band of goblins recruit a thawn to build them a new lair, with winding paths, dead ends, and nonsensical entrances and traps. The thrawn is a master architect, and takes payment in "friends"--weaker goblins that he cages and pampers until he's ready for them to "become one in his belly." Like I said, my only real problem is that the standard thawn lacks the skills to back up the concept. Otherwise, thawns can be a lot like the ogrekin of Rise of the Runelords, but more tragic. mad, and grotesque.
The succubus and the erinyes are two different beasts, even if they appear similar in artwork. If you can't wait for the succubus PDF, I know Necromancers of the Northwest wrote a succubus class here that is also based on the succubus monster, though I don't know how closely it will match this conversion's result, 20-level expansion aside.
Clearly the druid is invoking the aspect of the penguin, shoving other animals into the hypothetical waters to test for hypothetical orcas!
Are you suggest we uses our halfling slaves... to commit CRIMINAL ACTIVITY!? Hot and fiery HELLS, man, this is supposed to be a civilized discussion on slavery!
This "Historical Accuracy Fallacy" is only a fallacy when allusions to history aren't being deliberately engendered. It is perfectly fair to bring up and discuss elements of history if the setting wants to deliberately invoke aspects of a historical period. It's true that most games aren't going to explicitly recreate Arthurian times, but many games do try to recreate certain elements of the genre--the social dynamics, the warfare, the architecture and technology, the beasts or heroes of related myths. If you are using elements of a historical setting in your game, then historical accuracy becomes a relevant topic. Historical elements can be part of a campaign's theme, and with a theme comes with automatic expectations and internal logic. If the logic of a theme is completely disregarded, then the use of the theme itself becomes practically pointless, and even deceptive. Expectations are part of defining a social contract at the table; they are part of the rules that help define the campaign as something more than "a <rulesystem> game." When these expectations are broken without additional explanation or context, then immersion can be lost, and it is fair to invoke these expectations as part of your rational for not having fun. The existence of wizards and dragons in ye olde Britain does not automatically render the historical accuracy argument moot--players are able to accept these differences because they've been justified through additional context. The medieval English-style game has quasi-magic swordfighting because it also draws influence from the excitement of wuxia films. The Spartan society is completely equal in gender because we don't want to complicate or exclude from the game with the gender politics of the time. The Native American setting includes heavy armor and firearms to experiment with how the Iron Age might change our expectations of society and to give the game a twist, while reducing the amount of house rules required for equipment. These are all fine counterarguments to historical accuracy--but that does not automatically make the Historical Accuracy argument a fallacy, any more than good air conditioning makes "How can you live in this city when the weather is so terrible?" a fallacy. Even when historical accuracy doesn't apply, considering the argument helps develop your setting by requiring you to consider plausible reasons why your campaign or setting doesn't follow expectations. "It's not actually Mesopotamia, I'll do whatever I want," is not a satisfying answer for players or readers. In fact, it may be a fallacy of reductionism itself. In short, the Historical Accuracy Fallacy is only a fallacy when the logical justifications for the difference are deliberately ignored by the argument, or when historical themes and context were never intended or alluded to in the first place. I don't feel like Neal is really considering the underlying motives and merits of historical accuracy arguments.
Forgive me for being off-topic, but I'm disappointed that the post wasn't actually a question about people's fascination for clicking on threads whose titles are half-finished questions.
I would feel so bad for Stabby Bob the "iconic" antipaladin if he doesn't get his day in the sun during this adventure path. ...Well, as bad as you can feel for people that don't actually exist, and would probably be worse than Jack the Ripper if they did.
Browsed through Kyrt's and Alken's posting habits, TN and CN seem pretty legit for each. Myself, though I like to play CG characters, in real life I'm probably closer to Lawful Good, with strong Lawful Neutral tendencies. I believe in the power of a well-crafted society for bringing out the best in people, and that morality can be objectively defined... but that such a definition is so complex and omniscient that we must rely on subjective perspectives instead. I was even more Lawful Neutral when I was younger--convinced that most laws and traditions were inscrutable truths and that most people were only complaining out of lazy self-interest. Even today, I do not approve or agree with some of the tactics and credos of those who spend their lives combating the injustices of the system; though I have a more open mind to their perspectives and beliefs, I prefer strategies of change that are inclusive, positive, and peaceful--the ones that unfortunately get less media coverage.
Elevator and Pipe Bosses in WoW. Those bastards eat a little piece of your soul every time you fail, and they never die.
Greeeat. Now I'm imagining all new and terrible kinds of slurs for morlocks. This post has officially made me a worse person, and once I'm done giggling I'm going to be very disappointed in myself.
This doesn't work for me, likewise, because it tries to have its cake and eat it, too. Overgods work best when they are distant and inhuman--you introduce a "supergod" when your normal pantheon feels too powerful and idealogical for the universe to exist the way it does. Ao is brought up only to judge or punish gods who violate the inexplicable rules of Faerun. The Lady of Pain exists only to explain why Sigil isn't a warzone between all gods and demons. Past this, the two entities are only barely personalized, if at all. This lack of humanity or self-motive makes it easier to accept fact that they exist as macguffins; because we know so little about them, it is easier to accept that they are part of an even greater mystery. Omnia, on the other hand, is entirely too active, and too human, for that suspension of disbelieve to work. You describe Omnia as being very active in the affairs of mortals--meaning that a creature greater than Azazoth is know getting directly involved in affairs that should be the domain of PCs, and also means that Omnia will have a ton of exposure, demystifying him. Worse, the god has a clear agenda and personal opinions independent of the "campaign fiat" that Overgods are usually made to enforce. He is anti-violence, thinks plate armor and crossbows are cheese tactics, believes that all journeys should end, and most strangely, lets his opinion of other gods be affected by little events in his mortal childhood (like a wasp sting). It would be one thing if the information were church doctrine or the like, or even if the story about wasps or butterflies were fables about Omnia, used to deliver important church doctrine. But as writtern, it seems like pure characterization. What's more, there is another issue with listing Omnia's relationship with every god--it's treating Omnia as though he were their peer. Overgods exist on a magnitude above the regular pantheon. Omnia battling Gorum to a standstill isn't like the quarterback practicing with the freshman in football--it's Eli Manning going toe to toe with a four-year-old.* Or, in a broader sense, it's the principal hanging out with the junior high students after school. Even if the other students enjoy his company, it takes away from his status as someone who is not to be argued with when he enacts school policy. Supergod should not feel like "one of the boys" if his responsibility enscopes everything that has or ever will exist. ((Football fans feel free to include a better player than Eli Manning, he's just the last player I've heard mentioned that came to mind.)) All of this ends up creating an Overgod that feels more like a superhero than a longstanding, quintessential force of the universe. It's true that gods can carry mortal values and feel very human, but in most good RPG games they have certain qualities that prevent them from overshadowing the player characters. The gods are distant and must be worshipped to give the world their attention, or a pact of noninterference is what prevents the gods from plunging the earth into celestial war. Overgods usually exist to enforce that noninterference--Omnia outright breaks its tenants in the opening paragraph. And though it's unrelated to the main problem, the character assassination of the gods does this idea no favors, and makes Omnia sound even more like a fan-character. Because Overgods are so powerful, they need to be background characters because of problems like this. If Omnia can prompt Asmodeus to swear fealty without asking, get Calistria to chase him, and lets Gorum win one fight out of a thousand to protect its reputation, what's going to happen to the players' ego when Omnia delves into mortal affairs? Frankly, if I want an omnipresent entity of balance in my games, I'll just keep using the Monad like I planned.
First one that comes to mind that's Pathfinder related is Santiago: A Myth of a Far-Flung Future. I think Star Wars SAGA Edition had an adventure path, though I'm less certain about how commercially available it is.
And that is the fundamental divide. On the other side of the argument, some people do want their flavor to have an impact on their mechanics. That's why the class system exists in the first place--at the conceptual level, a well designed character option is supposed to emulate an important choice about your character. There are games that forgo that entirely, and they are a blast to play. But when something like character race means nothing for my character past some aesthetic choices, it becomes less interesting for me. The idea that halfling warriors require different tactics than orcs because of their limitations doesn't limit my character ideas--it helps to inspire me, and immerse me into that mindset, because I see advantages and disadvantages that I might not have considered if race provided no statistical difference. I wouldn't call this fascination a "hang up" -- it's too ubiquitous in RPGs for that label. It's a meaningful and separate school of thought in roleplaying--simulationism vs. narratavism, if I may dredge up the outdated terms. Some people want to their statistics to reflect the character concept they've already created; other people want each decision about their character to inform the final version, developing fluff and crunch simultaneously. Unfortunately, because both narratavism and simulationism rely on different kinds of consistency, the existence of one character in a game can diminish a player's taste for the other. And it goes both ways, as much as people tend only to see the bias of the other side. But neither side is invalid, and most people actually fall somewhere in between the lines of "refluff anything" or "refluff nothing"--it's good to remember that our preferences are, indeed, just preferences.
HNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGH!
I think, if I was going to try to make a "Mexico" in Golarion, I'd do it in Arcadia, but in the reverse situation that it was in the real world. Andoran and Cheliax have tried and failed to establish colonies on Arcadia, but that doesn't mean they left their mark. Women and children may have been taken as slaves, or refugees dying of starvation or plague might have retreated to native populations for aid and been integrated. Suppose that for some Aztec-like province or population in Arcadia, the culture was brutal and malicious, and a growing antinational settlement was on the rise. In the same way Americans have used native american icons to represent their dissent against the British in the American Revolution, these rebels may have co-opted the bits of Inner Sea culture and paraphenalia that survived the failed colonies to create their own identity, separate from the ruling class but stil blended with native Arcadian beliefs and fashions. In the aftermath of such a rebellion, if these rebels were victorious, it could create a society with a lot of parallels to old Mexico, in both culture and troubles.
I find both examples of reskinning to be fine. In fact, I find the 2nd one to be a particularly GOOD example of not letting rollplay and roleplay step on each other's toes. He wants to play a powerful... See, now here I would disagree. The primary purpose of reflavoring from a player perspective, to me personally, is to allow a player to realize a concept that may not be possible or playable with the available content. There are other times when reflavoring is a good idea, of course, but allowing a player to optimize their build isn't one of them, unless the build was unplayable without the changes. And this was a druid with a pet--the player was going to be fine. I do not disassociate fluff from crunch whenever it is inconvenient. What's more, this is a scenario where some homebrewing must be done. Half-orcs don't have the elf subtype. They count as humans and orcs for the purposes of effects. Allosaurs ares dinosaurs, while wolves are canines. The way the character interacts with a myriad number of conditionals and effects has been changed. I would have allowed the change for Fate's Favored, because one invisible hand of fortune is the same as any other, and if the player talked a good game I might have relented on one of the other two points. But when they all come together it represents a playstyle and behavior I'd rather not see at my games--one where the character groans under any kind of limitations, no matter how light. It may be a prejudice, but I wouldn't expect the player to fit in well with my gaming group, and experiences from my first attempts at DMing when I was younger provide additional, if anecdotal, confirmation.
Can confirm -- this is what world would look like if I was president for a day.
I did not have the time to try and submit, but I am deathly curious to see the winning submissions!
1. Hill Giants
I had a set of reasons for each one, but my post sessions got blown up by server problems, and it took long enough to write up the first time, alas. Suffice to say I'm coming from a "monster race, boosted with more culture, unique role to the other races in the book, and can generally be used as bad guys."
(I'm a bard player with a weird powerful rogue desire)
Oh man, that thread. The worst part is, even as you're complaining about his arguments being flanderized, there are people in that thread saying the same rules are exactly true. Clowns to the left of you, jokers to the right.
I find it strangely awkward when homebrew posts start out talking like they are 3rd-party product posts... but awkward in a good way. And I like what I'm seeing so far... gonna keep my eyes on dis tread
I've met many people who say that. I've met very, very few people who truly believe it. Which is a shame.
In a 4E game, the party had just taken down a hobgoblin dragonrider in a prolonged fight, after they'd accidentally revealed that they had the artifact he was hunting. After combat, they began interrogating the hobgoblin, but I think they were a bit worn out mentally from the battle. Their idea of interrogation was simply inflicting one form of pain or the other on the hobgoblin and then asking him questions. And in this game, hobgoblins have a very "evil military sergeant" complex--a complex that includes happily sacrificing themselves if it means screwing the enemy over. So the torture escalates, but the methodology stays exactly the same, and nobody is rolling well enough to beat the DC of the dragonrider because he's an elite NPC and they are hitting none of his buttons. Eventually, the party's hamadryad bard decides to take pity on the poor hobgoblin, and decides it's time to mercy-kill him so that the rest of the party stops inflicting the standard "PC inquisition tactics" on him. Me: "Okay. So how are you killing him?"
It's been a couple of years, and I don't think he ever figured out the awkward silence that followed on the chat. Pretty light compared to most of the stuff on this thread, I know. But a very weird example of "do the ends justify the means?"
|
