Khonnir

Mark the Wise and Powerful's page

Organized Play Member. 364 posts (367 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 4 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 364 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
Ageron wrote:
HLO isn't a paizo product. Abandoning PF2 because you don't like HLO doesn't make a lot of sense.

No, I disagree with that. As a GM, there's no way in PF1 I could have nearly as good of a gaming experience without Hero Lab. I'm into VTT using MapTool with my own macros. I import NPCs into my macros from Hero Lab, giving me access to thousands of NPCs. Takes only seconds for me to import one. For the same level of detail entering info for PCs from character sheets my players give me (because they don't have Hero Lab) takes me hours. With my macros, I have full resource tracking for everything (equipment, spells, special abilities, etc.).

For me to consider PF2, Hero Lab is absolutely needed. I very much prefer the Classic version. I prefer when I buy digital assets to be able to download them and maintain backups -- and being able to continue to use it even if the provider goes out of business. With HLO, I just don't get that pease of mind -- unless I can export all the data I wanted to use (which I can do with Hero Lab Classic even though it's a Windows app).

Being able to do the same for PF2 with HLO is absolutely required ... and, then, I'd have to modify my macros. No small task. That means being able to export NPC content for the Bestiaries, APs, modules, etc. is necessary to make that effort worth it. I like to organize this exported data into libraries so it's ready to go for our games (and protect those and use them only privately because it's only fair to the IP owners and being a professional software developer I totally get that).

I've got to add that in addition to my PF1e framework (or game system) for MapTool, there's very good support for Hero Lab Classic's PF1e game system in Foundry VTT and D20Pro. Because there's no online charges, it is very cost effective to use. For MapTool, I've prebuilt a private library of nearly 7000 NPCs to drag and drop onto my maps.

I'd have to have the same thing in PF2e to give it serious consideration. There's no way I would buy into the online version of Hero Lab to get PF2e. Just way too expensive, and I have no idea whether it is as easy to use to do the same thing.

The PF2e community should push for Hero Lab Classic support!


Ageron wrote:
HLO isn't a paizo product. Abandoning PF2 because you don't like HLO doesn't make a lot of sense.

No, I disagree with that. As a GM, there's no way in PF1 I could have nearly as good of a gaming experience without Hero Lab. I'm into VTT using MapTool with my own macros. I import NPCs into my macros from Hero Lab, giving me access to thousands of NPCs. Takes only seconds for me to import one. For the same level of detail entering info for PCs from character sheets my players give me (because they don't have Hero Lab) takes me hours. With my macros, I have full resource tracking for everything (equipment, spells, special abilities, etc.).

For me to consider PF2, Hero Lab is absolutely needed. I very much prefer the Classic version. I prefer when I buy digital assets to be able to download them and maintain backups -- and being able to continue to use it even if the provider goes out of business. With HLO, I just don't get that pease of mind -- unless I can export all the data I wanted to use (which I can do with Hero Lab Classic even though it's a Windows app).

Being able to do the same for PF2 with HLO is absolutely required ... and, then, I'd have to modify my macros. No small task. That means being able to export NPC content for the Bestiaries, APs, modules, etc. is necessary to make that effort worth it. I like to organize this exported data into libraries so it's ready to go for our games (and protect those and use them only privately because it's only fair to the IP owners and being a professional software developer I totally get that).


A major problem with the character sheets is that they use way too much ink. There should be printer friendly versions.


Very good move! Thanks, Paizo!


I've released version 10.0.6.3 and 9.15 of my macros supporting Pathfinder 1e on MapTool. It's tested on 1.5.8 and 1.4.1.8, respectively, but should work on other MapTool versions such as 1.4.0.5 -- however for 1.4.0.5 you'll need to install a later MapTool version and export the "Example Campaign.cmpgn" from there to 1.4.0.5.

MapTool can be downloaded from here:

MapTool Download

My Pathfinder 1e macros for MapTool can be downloaded from here:

MapTool Macros For Pathfinder 1e Download

They are both free for you to use! Now, with easy to follow instructions -- and an "Example Campaign.cmpgn" file you can open directly in MapTool and get started building your campaign!


I've released version 9.14 and 10.0.5 of my macros supporting Pathfinder 1e on MapTool. It's tested on 1.5.7 and 1.4.1.8, but should work on other MapTool versions such as 1.4.0.5 -- however for 1.4.0.5 you'll need to install a later MapTool version and export a campaign from there to 1.4.0.5 and then save all the tokens and macro sets and import them into a 1.4.0.5 campaign.

Download MapTool and the macros for you to use for free at the following locations:

Download MapTool

MapTool macros for Pathfinder 1e


I've released version 9.12.3 of my macros supporting Pathfinder 1e on MapTool. It's tested on 1.5.4, but should work on 1.4.0.5 and 1.4.1.8 -- unless the files are incompatible (if not, I'm using compatible macro library functions and have been using my macros on 1.4.1.8 till now).

This code is very solid and we use it for our games every week. Lots of very powerful features such as:

* Party Treasure management

* Campaign Time tracking (you'll now be able to deal with complex issues such as PCs crafting while the party moves on to further adventures)

* Automatic spell DC calculations

* Spell management (complete for both prepared and spontaneous spell casters)

* Easy to use interface

* Greatly improved macro layout

* Resource tracking (equipment, ranged attacks, spells, special abilities, money, etc.)

* New skills can be added by the GM (and they are automatically made available to all the tokens)

* Temporary Adjustments for abilities, size, movement, saving throws, energy resistance, AC, attacks, etc. are automatically applied and can be enabled/disabled.

* "Character Sheet" makes reviewing PCs and NPCs easy -- can be used in conjunction with WinMerge to compare the old token's sheet and the new token's sheet.

* "Player Token Editor.cmpgn" enables players to edit their tokens offline.

Click these links below:

Pathfinder 1e macros for MapTool 1.5.4, 1.4.1.8, and 1.4.0.5

Easy instructions for GMs to setup an RPG campaign with MapTool:

How to Setup a VTT Campaign with MapTool

NOTE: If you don't play Pathfinder 1e, these macros can go a long way to helping you get started with writing your own for your own RPG.


Joana wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
Is there a guide available to help convert 1e characters to 2e?
Conversion Guide

Thank you.


The 2e Bestiary has ability modifiers but no ability scores.

What if an NPC suffers ability drain or damage? Assume the NPC has the odd or even ability score for that modifier?


Is there a guide available to help convert 1e characters to 2e?


Bringing us back on topic ...

So, does Paizo create the same volume of rule books for 2e as it did for 1e -- just try to make them better?

Or should 2e be constrained to a much smaller set of books?


But the beauty of it is that you don't have to stop playing 1e to put 2e on your radar. I don't. I still have a goal of mastering all the material in the 1e rule books. I really have to with all I've invested. I've also got 3rd party material I want to use.

2e has some good ideas and where appropriate you might apply them to a 1e campaign as home rules using 1e material. Some concepts 2e seems to have been greatly refined from 1e.

We have a way to go for 2e to get caught up with a volume of material. For the 1e dedicated GM (such as myself), I recommend looking at 2e to gets some useful ideas.

I felt that stopping 1e development was like throwing out the baby with the bathwater-- but ignoring what 2e is attempting to become just because there's some (major) items we find hard to swallow with our existing perspective is also throwing another baby out with the bathwater. There's lots of good stuff in there that should not be ignored.


Luna Protege wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Hm. I've been watching a review of 2e on YouTube. I am hearing some very impressive things.

I may have expecting 2e to be too much "like" D&D and 1e, rather than a major rethinking of these RPGs.

I'm hearing about a lot of issues in these other game system being resolved. I didn't really expect that.

I'm committed a huge amount of time and money to 1e (including 9 months of work on VTT macros), but I can see the possibility of 2e in my future.

I just don't have the resources right now, but I will be taking a much deeper look at it.

I have not heard what kind of issues have been "solved" in 2E, or even what issues they had With PF1E to begin with.

What I do know, is that its taken up at least one of the same problems of D&D 5e that annoys me there, and continues to annoy me in PF2E: Class Rigidity.

Here's a simple exercise to illustrate, by attempting to fill in the brackets with random combinations:

"I play a (Class) who specializes in (technique)"

... And ask yourself if that build is at all as viable as it would have been in another system; would playing such a character in one of the systems be needlessly handicapping yourself?

For example:
A Paladin who specializes in Unarmed Combat
Or A Barbarian who specializes in Ranged Combat

These two examples are two I could find immediately as implausible in PF2E... They're also implausible in D&D 5e as well. Both are POSSIBLE to make without handicapping yourself in PF1E however.

Special note for Unarmed in PF2E, not even the multi-class Archetypes allow you to become anything above trained in Unarmed.

This is somewhat a shame, because I really liked Saint Seiya, and so an armored champion of a god that forsakes weapons by their god's command in favor of fighting with their bare fists really appeals to me.

One example is spell lists in D&D and 1e have become too generic. Sometimes we can't even tell the difference between a divine and an arcane spell caster. So, in this case, I'd say there isn't enough class rigidity. At least part of this issue has been addressed in 2e.

Another issue that has been addressed is better roleplaying. Apparently, each character not only has not only traditional skills but, for example, might also have social skills.

Skills become more interesting in 2e, for example, because some characters (classes) can not only intimidate as we know it but they could intimidate someone to death (out of fright).

There's parts of 2e I wasn't thrilled with and I still see a lot of value in 1e, but I'm beginning to see the point of 2e development. Seems like there's enough there to overlook some things that might rub traditional, older players the wrong way and consider a new perspective. It's hard because 2e tries to be different and fix a number of issues we're so used to overlooking in D&D and 1e because many have been there since or near the beginning.

Different is sometimes hard. I've heard enough about 2e, though, that it seems worth it to tough it out and consider a very new (perhaps revolutionary) perspective. For the parts you just don't like, consider using home rules to fix it.

But, really, I think an amazing number of issues never addressed before may have been ironed out in 2e and it's worth a good hard look.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hm. I've been watching a review of 2e on YouTube. I am hearing some very impressive things.

I may have expecting 2e to be too much "like" D&D and 1e, rather than a major rethinking of these RPGs.

I'm hearing about a lot of issues in these other game system being resolved. I didn't really expect that.

I'm committed a huge amount of time and money to 1e (including 9 months of work on VTT macros), but I can see the possibility of 2e in my future.

I just don't have the resources right now, but I will be taking a much deeper look at it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

I worry also about trying to formulate a future for Paizo based heavily on Starfinder.

Check this out ... Stargate RPG based on 5e

I don't know if Starfinder can stand up to that. Stargate has a lot of appeal and is perfect for an adventure-based RPG.

They don’t have to for the same reason they don’t have to stand up to Star Wars RPGs.

Starfinder is a Science Fantasy roleplaying game.

A Star Wars game is not a Scifi nor Science Fantasy game, it’s a Star Wars game.

Same with Stargate.

Good point. Maybe not. Starfinder also has a magic element that can't really be explained in a Stargate RPG. That might very well give Starfinder an edge, but I don't connect with the Starfinder artwork on the core rulebook cover. Just looks to childish for me.


Gorbacz wrote:

I can and that's what I do, what these quotes do is show the context. And the context is your view that PF2/5e are simplistic games undeserving the attention of a sophisticated gamer. Apart from the fact that PF2 is significantly more complicated than 5e and lumping them together has little merit, these quotes pretty much paint the whole picture of your position one needs to make an educated opinion of it.

I have been looking at 2e in detail. I admit I have not looked at 5e so much.

What are the primary advantages of 2e over 5e?


I worry also about trying to formulate a future for Paizo based heavily on Starfinder.

Check this out ... Stargate RPG based on 5e

I don't know if Starfinder can stand up to that. Stargate has a lot of appeal and is perfect for an adventure-based RPG.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hope that 2e is a success and that everything I've said here doesn't matter about my impressions. Those of you who are the next generation of RPG players deserve to have your time ... and I wish you the best!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:


a more sophisticated group

people don't want to do the math in their head

middle school kids are the primary demographic

insult its players with simplifications

The fact that you prefer complicated game systems does not mean that you are more intelligent or sophisticated than a person who prefers less complicated game systems. There's no correlation between the preference and mental capability.

My 5e group has three people with degrees in Law, one M.D. and one PhD. They are extremely intelligent people, they just prefer more streamlined gaming systems where they spend less time fiddling around with rules and more time storytelling for their weekly RPGing.

Your error in understanding this leads you to groundless elitism where you see yourself as superior on the count of your gaming preferences. You're doing no favour to yourself, your position, your chances of anybody taking you seriously or frankly the hobby as a whole. It's neither wise nor powerful.

Your edits to my text somewhat put it out of context. Can't play by the rules or are you trying to over simplify things?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Luna Protege wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

By creating 2e has Paizo opened the door to losing more market share to D&D 5e?

I've looked at 2e. I'm staying with 1e, unless we lose all our players.

I very much like Pathfinder. With the colorful PDFs, it's very accommodating to the VTT environment I've grown to love.

For reasons that still perplex me, D&D 5e (last I check) still has no material in PDF format -- but 1e through 4e do.

Given the choice between oblivion (the loss of our 1e players) and playing 2e, I'd probably be forced to give up the ghost and go back to D&D.

Pathfinder 1e is really my most favorite RPG -- and I very much hope it doesn't come to that!

Paizo, I really think that to compete with 5e that a simplified variation of 1e would have had a better chance -- one that could have allowed players to scale up to full 1e if they decided too after becoming more experienced players.

I can't really stand looking at 2e.

I mostly agree with you... But I don't see how simplifying 1E is going to help; the fact they gutted everything about 1E to make 2E is why I dislike 2E.

D&D 5e appeals to people who didn't even play pen and paper RPGs, or anything remotely similar before they started; its "easy to learn"... Pathfinder's appeal was NOT about that, it was the system for people who were familiar with more complicated systems, and were having trouble gearing down into a system gutted of all its subtle interactions and choices.

I got into Pathfinder... Because when I was a kid, I played Baldur's Gate, and I wanted to have a chance to play more of it given the series was "over" back then.

I think reproducing that is probably going to be the main way Pathfinder may get some new life in it. Pathfinder: Kingmaker is probably going to bring quite a few people into Pathfinder, assuming it gets advertised.

Its a great option for people who can never manage to find enough people to form a group for Pathfinder; and people who don't play Pathfinder are going to find it easier to...

Simplifying 1e as a gateway to full 1e for those who may eventually seek out a more complex game. This is something that neither 5e nor 2e can offer. 2e strikes me as a me-too attempt to have a 5e but may not have done it as well.

I think the error here was to fail to do something smart and interesting in a new addition, but, rather, focus on a very young demographic that will quickly out grow and tire of 2e. 2e just doesn't adapt to a more sophisticated group, from what I see. Probably should start thinking about a 3e, if there's enough creative energy left.

Regardless of all the chatter, I still believe Pathfinder 1e was the best RPG I have ever experienced. Yes, it had flaws, but from what I see in 2e it looks like the baby was thrown out with the bath water.

I hope I'm wrong because I'd like to see Paizo continue to be successful.

What I think will happen is players, when given a choice of 5e or 2e, mostly it will be 5e. 2e is kind of a head scratcher. In a number of different places, such as the Bestiary that lists ability modifiers instead of ability scores because people don't want to do the math in their head, it just seems like we the fans have been greatly underestimated -- or middle school kids are the primary demographic.

Does 5e insult its players with simplifications like that? I'm really asking because I don't know. Given the choice between the two, I'd rather succumb to the RPG that at least still respects me.

But as long as I can still play 1e, I don't have to worry about it.


Anguish wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
I'm just proposing a fail back position for Paizo if 2e doesn't work out.

We've been down this road. The fallback position is: forward.

PF1 didn't produce enough income for Paizo to justify continuing it as-was. They will have shed PF1 popularity, even if you only consider the people who do shift to PF2.

This is math.

Let X = the number of sales required for long-term survivability
Let Y = the number of sales below X that Paizo was already at
Let Z = the number of sales below X that Paizo will be at in two years

X - Y -Z = still lower than X

There's no addition sign anywhere in that equation because there's no influx of new sales. "Not enough" minus "anything" is still "not enough".

If PF2 fails, Paizo will shift to PF3, or pure Starfinder, or, or, or, but revisiting the past is not very likely at all.

Says you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CrystalSeas wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
a simplified variation of 1e would have had a better chance -- one that could have allowed players to scale up to full 1e if they decided too after becoming more experienced players.
That would be the PF1 Beginner Box

No, the beginner box is too simple. There's simplifications that were applied to create 2e. Instead, direct those motivations to producing a paired down 1e. Just a thought if 2e doesn't catch on.

I've already talked to a DM for 5e who was laughing at all the different types of feats. I'm afraid 2e might be an easy target for things like that. It's going to affect mind share.

I'm just proposing a fail back position for Paizo if 2e doesn't work out.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

By creating 2e has Paizo opened the door to losing more market share to D&D 5e?

I've looked at 2e. I'm staying with 1e, unless we lose all our players.

I very much like Pathfinder. With the colorful PDFs, it's very accommodating to the VTT environment I've grown to love.

For reasons that still perplex me, D&D 5e (last I check) still has no material in PDF format -- but 1e through 4e do.

Given the choice between oblivion (the loss of our 1e players) and playing 2e, I'd probably be forced to give up the ghost and go back to D&D.

Pathfinder 1e is really my most favorite RPG -- and I very much hope it doesn't come to that!

Paizo, I really think that to compete with 5e that a simplified variation of 1e would have had a better chance -- one that could have allowed players to scale up to full 1e if they decided too after becoming more experienced players.

I can't really stand looking at 2e.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Odd. I'm facing a lot of conflicted emotions as Pathfinder 2e approaches its launch Aug. 1 and 1e becomes history.

First of all, I'm absolutely dying to see what's changed in 2e since the PlayTest. I'm very much hoping there have been major changes to the action economy from what it was in the PlayTest -- which I very much didn't like. It's a critical factor. If it's still pretty much the same, a lot of other stuff is going to have to be really good to overcome my objections. I did like some of the readability enhancements I saw in PlayTest books -- and the new concept that some spells could have a crit. fail or crit. success. That's kind of cool.

Second, I hope 2e is successful -- even though I'm still committed entirely to 1e. I've got way too much of an investiment in 1e to really move forward to 2e. I'm not convinced it's going to be worth the effort to do conversions, on the fly or otherwise, to get 1e material to work in 2e or visa versa. Unless 2e is really good (and not just dumbed down as some people possibly unfairly claim), to me an elf is just an elf -- is other words in one way all these different systems are really the same thing. The challenge is really working within the systems to "win". Not really sure it matters which one in a way.

So, I'm also a bit depressed because my 1e world has become frozen in time. It now only has a past. There won't be more future. No point checking for all the exciting 1e new releases -- except, curiously, while very happy with the breadth of 1e rule books, and in spite of their flaws, I'm very happy that this set of really great books is finally finite. There won't be more rule books to overload GMs. We now have an opportunity to master the existing material -- and will do so excitedly probably for the next 10 years or so as long as we have players.

There's a number of people that really love 1e because it seems to fit the natural progression from the now overly simple D&D. I started with D&D in the 80s. We called it AD&D -- you can think of it as D&D 1e. When you play that long enough, you want more than just the core races and classes, more equipment, more spells, etc. There's no way Pathfinder 1e fans can really go to something as vanilla as D&D 5e.

I hope that as Pathfinder 2e evolves that it leaves room for people like us to continue to embrace complexity even as, perhaps, others don't. Please don't forget us. Pathfinder 1e will be in our hearts forever.


I've released version 9.7 of my macros supporting Pathfinder 1e on MapTool. It's tested on MapTool 1.4.1.8, but should work on 1.4.0.5 and 1.5.2.

MapTool and these macros are completely free. If you like it, a donation to RPTools (the developer of MapTool) would be a nice thing to do.

New Features:

* New "Character Sheet" button added that allows you to see the entire online character sheet in one window. This feature will help players know what parts of their online character sheet are filled out. You can also copy-and-paste it all to a text file in a readable format. GMs can use that along with WinMerge (a free, open source tool that's easy to find) to easily compare changes made to the online character sheet vs an earlier version for a token (see below for an example).

* Big performance enhancement for the "Party Treasure" view.

This code is very solid and we use it for our games every week. Lots of very powerful features such as:

* Party Treasure management
* Campaign Time tracking (you'll now be able to deal with complex issues such as PCs crafting while the party moves on to further adventures)
* Automatic spell DC calculations
* Spell management (complete for both prepared and spontaneous spell casters)
* Easy to use interface
* Greatly improved macro layout
* Resource tracking (equipment, ranged attacks, spells, special abilities, etc.)
* New skills can be added by the GM (and they are automatically made available to all the tokens)
* Temporary Adjustments for abilities, size, movement, saving throws, energy resistance, AC, attacks, etc. are automatically applied and can be enabled/disabled.
* New "Character Sheet" button enables the entire online character sheet to be viewed in a single window -- and you can copy-and-paste from it. WinMerge is a great, free tool to use in conjunction with this feature.

MapTool macros for Pathfinder 1e

Easy instructions for GMs to setup an RPG campaign with MapTool


Zioalca wrote:

1. What is your favorite VTT?

Currently Roll20 but I don't have a ton of experience with anything else.

2. What features do you see missing in VTTs that you would like to have?
Not sure, like I said in question 1 I am still new to working with them.

3. What do you like most about your favorite VTT?
Dynamic Lighting

4. Do you prefer VTT over traditional tabletop? Why or why not?
I am very mixed on that. Traditional tabletop and being there with real people that you can physically interact with is a lot of fun. Virtual does have the advantage of letting you display the information for a module much more easily though. Also not having to perform math on the fly is a help some times.

5. Is Pathfinder better done over VTT?
I think 1st edition is. We will see after 2nd edtion is out.

6. Are their any VTTs you are thinking about trying and want more info about them?
I've been experimenting with Astral Tabletop. I may end up switching to it.

7. How would you rank (between 1 and 10 with 10 the best) the VTTs you've come into contact with?
Have only really used Roll20 for a game so I don't have anything to compare it with yet.

8. If you're using a VTT, what other tools do you use with it to:

a. Develop your campaign?
Herolabs

b. Run your campaign?
Herolabs

9. Are you having any trouble with recruiting?
No

10. Do you prefer combat, role playing, or both?
I like a mix of both.

Thanks for responding.

Yes, I'd agree that dynamic lighting and FoW (fog of war) are my most favorite features BUT way on top of that is the ability to write macros that automate a lot of the mundane activities that most GMs ignore that are central to the game but are also too burdensome.

Examples include resource comsumption, date and time on the AR calendar, day of the week, season of the year, the passage of time, weather, damage to weapons used in combat, etc.

And, then, there are issues very difficult for GMs such as how to track situations where multiple PCs want to craft items, the durations are all different, and the rest of the party wants to move on and continue the adventure. One of the PCs in my campaign has become infected but symptoms won't show for a week. Got to also track situations where it takes multiple saves to resolve a condition.

Players have a bit of paperwork to do each time they rest.

All these things are easy to handle with macros to either automate dealing with these issues or helping the GM keep track of them.

I can create a much more realistic campaign in a VTT environment than I ever could in straight traditional tabletop.

Some GMs are doing a hybrid of VTT and traditional tabletop -- even by placing an HD TV down on the table and using it for the map.


BTW, I forgot to mention that another major feature for my MapTool macros is:

* Temporary Adjustments for abilities, size, movement, saving throws, energy resistance, AC, attacks, etc. are automatically applied and can be enabled/disabled.


I've released version 9.6 of my macros supporting Pathfinder 1e on MapTool. It's tested on 1.4.1.8, but should work on 1.4.0.5 and 1.5.2.

This code is very solid and we use it for our games every week. Lots of very powerful features such as:

* Party Treasure management
* Campaign Time tracking (you'll now be able to deal with complex issues such as PCs crafting while the party moves on to further adventures)
* Automatic spell DC calculations
* Spell management (complete for both prepared and spontaneous spell casters)
* Easy to use interface
* Greatly improved macro layout
* Resource tracking (equipment, ranged attacks, spells, special abilities, etc.)
* New skills can be added by the GM (and they are automatically made available to all the tokens)

MapTool macros for Pathfinder 1e

Easy instructions for GMs to setup an RPG campaign with MapTool


I've released version 9.2 of my macros supporting Pathfinder 1e on MapTool. It's tested on 1.4.1.8, but should work on 1.4.0.5 and 1.5.2.

The major feature is that now skills and skill meta data are maintained dynamically. That means if the skill you want isn't there, you can add it. You can also have skills with a secondary detail (I called them "subskills"). So, you can having things like Acrobatics and "tight rope walking".

As the GM updates the skill meta data, the changes are automatically and transparently pushed out to the players' tokens.

The download location is the same as above (for the 9.1 release).

Please, check it out. I'd love to have more people using it. I put a lot of work into it.


I've released version 9.1 of my macros to support playing Pathfinder 1e with MapTool.

Click on the links below:

Macros supporting Pathfinder 1e in MapTool 1.4.0.5, 1.4.1.8, and maybe 1.5.X. Tested on 1.4.1.8:

MapTool macros for Pathfinder

Easy instructions for GMs to setup an RPG campaign with MapTool:

Instructions for Setting Up a Campaign to Use MapTool

Major changes and new features include:

* Everything, except skills, is now maintained as dynamic data (rather than static data) -- so you can, for example, specify an unlimited number of different types of melee attack.

* Equipment is now supported -- and characters can give equipment to each other.

* Online party treasure. GM can transfer party treasure directly to characters.

* Handouts are supported.


I've released version 8.0 of my macros to support playing Pathfinder 1e with MapTool (tested in version 1.4.1.8).

Click on the links below:

Macros supporting Pathfinder 1e in MapTool 1.4.0.5, 1.4.1.8, and likely 1.5.X (bug posted on GITHUB for a 1.5.X issue -- can't support these macros yet) and above:

MapTool Macros for Pathfinder 1e

Easy instructions for GMs to setup an RPG campaign with MapTool:

Easy Instructions for How to Setup a VTT Campaign (with MapTool)

Major changes and new features include:

* Support for the Weapon Finesse feat was not clear. You need to specify whether you can use it for each type of melee attack. Now, it's clear.

* Reduced the skill buttons down to just 5 buttons -- making them far easier to maintain.

* GMs can now apply Temporary Adjustments and Buffs/Conditions to groups of tokens, rather than one at a time.

* GMs now have a "Set Initiative to Last" button that's very useful for when tokens move to a new map (say while being chased or chasing their opponents). It's also useful if the players rolled their initiative before you added them to the Initiative Window.

* Crits and Coup de Grace are now fully supported, and resources (such as arrows) are appropriately maintained.

* Improved how spell casting is done. Casting spells at different levels with multiple slots is supported! Resting a PC's token recovers his/her spells.

* HP lethal, nonlethal, and healing can now be applied to all the selected tokens by responding to a single dialog -- or use a dialog per selected token.

* URL fields are now used to display links in the Chat window for spells cast, equipment used, melee attack weapons, and ranged weapons.

* Melee and ranged attacks can be linked to feats, traits, and/or deeds.


Steel_Wind wrote:

I have been using D20Pro (in its various incarnations) for about nine years now. I have used it to GM the following campaigns:

Carrion Crown AP
Age of Worms AP
Mummy's Mask AP
Giantslayer AP
Curse of the Crimson Throne AP
CoC: Masks of Nyarlathotep
SF: Dead Suns AP
Savage Tide AP
Legendary Planet AP

D20Pro is far more user friendly than MapTool, and in just about every way, equally as powerful -- or more powerful -- than Maptool.

D20Pro's greatest strength is now the built in code for pre-set spell effects, which are extremely robust. But above all, it is a 64 bit program which allows me to create extremely large and well detailed maps using image sizes that both Roll20 and FG II just cough a fur-ball on and cannot run.

D20Pro costs money. Generally speaking, when it comes to software, you get what you pay for. Often, you get far more than you pay for, too.

From the above list, you are probably wondering "how the hell did he get Call of Cthulhu to work in D20Pro? Well, with some difficulty. At first, I decided I would try to use Fantasy Grounds for it, especially as there was already a campaign add-on for FG for MoN that was available for purchase. So I bought it, fired it up...

And I hated it. Loathed it even. The limits on map sizes, token details and virtually everything to do with the program was horrible. Yes, the die roller is pretty. And HELL YES, the character sheet in FG is more attractive and easy to use.

But it stops there. The ease of building maps and encounters in D2oPro is far higher. The limitations on map building are endless when coming from D20Pro expectations. I found that this enraged me. This analogy is closest: It was as if I was doing my map and monster tokens in Photoshop -- all so they could only be displayed in MS Paint, locked at 800x600 resolution.

That analogy is balls-on accurate. Those are the graphical limitations of both FG and Roll20 as compared to D20Pro.

I use maps which are 6000 x 4000 pixels in size. I have every Paizo flip-mat...

Thank you for sharing your experience with D20Pro. I used it for, I think, nearly 3 months. I'm very glad it has been working out for your group. Very good input about networking connection requirements. Our biggest problem was connecting to my D20Pro server -- especially if multiple players tried to do that at the same time.

I believe MapTool and D20Pro are the best VTTs, provided a small number of issues I reported for D20Pro have been resolved.

My favorite is MapTool. Though I totally agree that D20Pro is the best at handling huge maps, I like MapTool for its lower network connection requirement, faster connection speed, ease of use, powerful & easy macro language, stability, good online documentstion, fast online support in forums, and large team of developers working tirelessly on it.

However, I am glad that D20Pro seems to offer a viable alternative. I'd sleep better at night knowing there were two of these.

D20Pro attempts to do rule automation. MapTool does not -- though I have developed and continue to improve macros for MapTool to support Pathfinder 1e. I have features such as automation for doing temporary adjustments, full or nearly full resource tracking including spell casting for spontaneous and preparing spell casters, crit determination and die rolls, etc. I think I've got support for the entire character sheet -- plus things that have been overlooked (like tracking checks to see if a spell is understood and how long till the attempt can be made again). This is a feature I really like about MapTool -- the macros give us a high degree of customization without much lot of effort.

To get my macros, look for my posting as adventuremagic123 in the User Creations > Campaign Frameworks forum on RPTools' website in the Community section (just click on "Community"). Search for Pathfinder 1e. It's on the first page!

I think you'll like what I've done, and I continue to improve it. I just did another release today!

Sounds like you're saying VTT is the only way to go -- and I completely agree!

For my group, I use MapTool 1.4.1.8, Discord, Google Drive for campaign documents, Hero Lab (for all my NPCs), and hl2mt.exe to do the Hero Lab to MapTool token creation.


Steve Geddes wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
For those of you convinced that PF1 is dead in the water, what is your plan B? PF2.5? What would that be?

Are you asking what we think Paizo will do if PF2 doesn’t sell very well? Whar we think they should do? Or what we’d like them to do?

All of the above. Brain storm.


Davor Firetusk wrote:
While I hold no particular illusions that Paizo will switch directions a large part of Gorbacz's rhetoric and statements are flat out economically at odds with the numbers of new people hired by Paizo over the last couple of years. It is not the behavior of a company that is losing money.

Yeah, I think Paizo is just fine. Like I eluded to previously, they have had the resources to create a huge amount of material. They are putting all their energy behind a new product. If it doesn't work, I'm still sure there's enough sales between the other products and PF2 to give them time to change course.

I wouldn't buy into PF2 just to save Paizo, though. If it's not good, for the health of Paizo, we as consumers will have to push back and encourage them to do something better. This thread is about proposing a potential plan B if PF2 doesn't work.

For those of you convinced that PF1 is dead in the water, what is your plan B? PF2.5? What would that be?


Gorbacz wrote:
Ryan Freire wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
They are the ones best equipped to know which pipe to smoke.
Maybe. The rhetoric about how old and undoable 3.5 was as 4th came out was more or less exactly what people are saying about pathfinder 1.0 now, right before a radically different game under the same name gets released.

Funny thing is, back then I got flak from 4e fans for saying the PF1 is the better choice and now I'm getting flak from PF1 fans for saying that PF2 is the better choice. But I'm fine, I like a good fight.

And the market did change massively over the 12 years. Pen and paper RPG industry looks now totally different in this post-5e, post-Critical Role world we live in. It's now full of people for whom PF1 is a clunky mess, and the number of people who loved PF1 for its complexity and didn't switch over to 5e because everybody around them did it is dwindling.

Also, I hope that you realise that there's no scenario in which you win this fight - if Paizo tanks, there will be no forum for you to state "Gorbacz you were wrong and I was right! Paizo should have listened to me!" and if Paizo succeeds, well, you'll look silly every time I'll link any of those "well let's just wait until they fail because they will fail and they will be sorry!" posts you're now making.

Yeah, it seems like most people don't like lots of complexity like we have in PF1.

I do, though.

I got feedback from a GM, who says he left PF1 because of all the constant book releases -- but now that it's stopped, he's coming back.

I've noticed the same thing. As big as it is, as you keep working on learning PF1 book after book -- everything gets much easier. Like climbing a mountain on step at a time.

So, I like it more and more.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
They are the ones best equipped to know which pipe to smoke.

Absolutely! All we can do is provide customer feedback. The rest is in their hands.


TOZ wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Oh, yeah, and I forgot to add that part of our purpose in this thread is that if PF2 doesn't meet all the wild speculation for revenue -- these are our suggestions for how to revive PF1 and try to get revenue from it.

There's a lot of people, I think, that are not fans of PF2 and have resolvable issues with PF1.

I wouldn't bother with that aspect. If New 'n' Pathy! doesn't make, Paizo will likely close up shop. They've given up on their flagship product for good. Succeed or fail, this is the end of an era.

Never give up ... Never surrender ...

:)

Don't ruin yourself on a pipedream.

It's just a game. Lighten up!


blahpers wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Oh, yeah, and I forgot to add that part of our purpose in this thread is that if PF2 doesn't meet all the wild speculation for revenue -- these are our suggestions for how to revive PF1 and try to get revenue from it.

There's a lot of people, I think, that are not fans of PF2 and have resolvable issues with PF1.

I wouldn't bother with that aspect. If New 'n' Pathy! doesn't make, Paizo will likely close up shop. They've given up on their flagship product for good. Succeed or fail, this is the end of an era.

Never give up ... Never surrender ...

:)

We don't know that they have for good. When you look at the huge product line they have, I'm sure if PF2 doesn't make it, Paizo will still have plenty of chances to change course or course correct -- whatever they decide to do.


BTW, I've made major enhancements to the macros I wrote for MapTool to support PF1 -- and they can probably be changed to support PF2.

They are on RPTools website and can be easily found in the Campaign Frameworks forum -- they are on the first page and I am adventuremagic123.

You will have to go to my latest reply to my original posting to get the latest macros. As of this writing, the version is 7.2.

MapTool is a great VTT, and to get started I also have some instructions to setup that can be found in the User Creations forum on the first page. Use Youtube videos to learn how to use MapTool.


Joana wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
I haven't asked for any continued PF1 development. I'm just asking for bundiling and discounts on PF1 material that is, for example, churned into consolidated AP books for PF2 (you know, where they take the entire AP, modify it for PF2, and release it as a single, cheaper book -- like they are doing with Kingmaker).
You may not be aware if you're not following the P2e Kingmaker news, but I believe that PDFs of the original AP are now included as a bonus (at certain pledge levels or whatever, I don't Kickstarter).

Yes, I was aware the PDFs were included.

With PF2, I'm planning to buy the Core Rulebook and Bestiary PDFs as soon as they are released. Honestly, I am very excited about it. I hope it is successful. This thread is just in case it's not.

I will, then, look at PF2 to see if issues I didn't like at the start of the PlayTest were fixed -- or if not, how I feel about it with respect to the rest of the material.

Then, if it turns out that I like PF2, I'm going to look at all the PF1 material I own and evaluated how easy or hard it would be for me to use with PF2. If it's hard, then I'm just going to have to stay with PF1 -- because the reality is that it's all just a game. I've got a lot invested in PF1 -- so I can't just throw that all away just because there is now a new game system in PF2 (no matter how much I like it).

After that, then it would start to depend on PF2's popularity. If a huge community forms around it and if the PF1 community dwindled, I'd have no choice but to adopt PF2.

I think, though, that there always will be a sizable PF1 community. As I keep using it, I am in turn mastering each of the enormous number of books available to PF1 -- and that, in itself, also affects my decision with PF2. I am not sure I want to wait for PF2 to mature as a product to gain the same stature that PF1 has -- and I think others feel the same.

So, key for PF2 is rule system, ease of use with legacy material, maturity of product, size of community that forms around it, ...


Oh, yeah, and I forgot to add that part of our purpose in this thread is that if PF2 doesn't meet all the wild speculation for revenue -- these are our suggestions for how to revive PF1 and try to get revenue from it.

There's a lot of people, I think, that are not fans of PF2 and have resolvable issues with PF1.


Gorbacz wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
But what should not be underestimated is how much some people love and care about PF1.

Love and care do not translate to sales. A lot of people love and care for 0e, BECMI, 1e, 2e, 3/3.5e, heck, Tequilla Sunrise still loves 4e above all else. Many of those people think that whatever edition came after their favourite is rubbish and TSR/WotC betrayed their feelings by moving on. Heck, if you ask many old school edition fans, they'll tell you that Pathfinder is a gamist, player-entitling pox upon their beloved hobby.

But despite that, WotC doesn't "remain sensitive" to them beyond keeping PDFs of old book available, which is *exactly* the same what Paizo will do.

I don't have any expectations beyond that -- but beyond sales there is also market reality. Piss off your previous customers -- and that is exactly what they will be. Buyer beware for the new ones. It's not a realistic situation you'd want to get started with a customer base. I'm sure they are keen to that even if you're not.

Sales *are* market reality. Paizo isn't a charity whose founders have set out with a mission to keep 40+ yo American men who grew up playing D&D happy. They're a company full of cool people who want to pay their bills and go for a nice vacation.

The number of PF1 customers who actively buy Paizo products has fallen beyond the point of profitability. This is because existing players quit playing PF1 and because new players entering the hobby don't replace them. Faced with that and with the fact that the main reason behind both those vectors is 5e, you need to react. Putting out a new edition that will hopefully draw more new players and win back some old ones is your only choice.

And you can't support PF1 an PF2 at the same time because a) you don't want to have two competing product lines b) you don't want to confuse customers c) you're a small company who simply can't do both with its...

Customer Loyalty is market reality. A company that is disloyal to its customer base will not last long. I didn't ask for anything unreasonable in my original posting, so I have no idea why the bunch of you are going off so.

I haven't asked for any continued PF1 development. I'm just asking for bundiling and discounts on PF1 material that is, for example, churned into consolidated AP books for PF2 (you know, where they take the entire AP, modify it for PF2, and release it as a single, cheaper book -- like they are doing with Kingmaker).

Nothing unreasonable here.


Gorbacz wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
But what should not be underestimated is how much some people love and care about PF1.

Love and care do not translate to sales. A lot of people love and care for 0e, BECMI, 1e, 2e, 3/3.5e, heck, Tequilla Sunrise still loves 4e above all else. Many of those people think that whatever edition came after their favourite is rubbish and TSR/WotC betrayed their feelings by moving on. Heck, if you ask many old school edition fans, they'll tell you that Pathfinder is a gamist, player-entitling pox upon their beloved hobby.

But despite that, WotC doesn't "remain sensitive" to them beyond keeping PDFs of old book available, which is *exactly* the same what Paizo will do.

I don't have any expectations beyond that -- but beyond sales there is also market reality. Piss off your previous customers -- and that is exactly what they will be. Buyer beware for the new ones. It's not a realistic situation you'd want to get started with a customer base. I'm sure they are keen to that even if you're not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Knowing the enemy is the biggest determinant of difficulty in the game. Being unaware of enemy capabilities leads to wasted turns doing ineffectual things. Against a dangerous enemy, this leads to character deaths. So it's up to you how you want to handle that. I've seen plenty of times when bad rolls prevented characters from learning vital weaknesses.

Back in the day of D&D 1e, the GM would weave revelations into the storyline and combat situations -- and did not rely on die rolls.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm reposting this here from the Kingmaker thread so more people, who are concerned with PF1, can see it.

Paizo's split market situation -- and being fair and considerate to the PF1 community:

1. Seems like a lot of people I've seen posting are vested in PF1 and didn't like PF2 (at least as it was at the start of the PlayTest).

I've got a lot of time and money wrapped up in PF1, so I will stick with PF1 depending a lot on whether issues I had with PF2 were addressed and on how hard it is to convert PF1 to PF2 and, maybe, visa versa.

I don't have the time or money to play more than one rule system, so it will probably be PF1 -- but I will get the core rules and Bestiary for PF2 and check it out with curiosity.

Also, another major factor is that it seems like PF1 will have a lot more material than PF2 for quite some time. I don't think I want to wait for PF2 -- nor put in the work to convert PF1 to PF2, though I am still not clear how hard that is.

2. Some people are vested in PF2. I'm not sure how many that is versus those in PF1. I am very excited to find out. The newest (maybe youngest) members very likely see PF1 as being obsolete -- so they likely won't pick it up.

3. Some will GM and play both. Not sure how many.

4. Some might give up and just go to 5e.

I think this is where we are at this point -- Paizo is probably looking at servicing a fractionated market but we won't know exactly what it looks like till August 1st and some time passes after that.

But what should not be underestimated is how much some people love and care about PF1. Those feelings may just now be surfacing as Aug. 1st approaches. I blogged from the initial PF2 announcement and have only recently come to peace with the issue that PF1 development is coming to a stop -- and only because there's a lot of PF1 material available.

Paizo, I hope, will remain sensitive to the PF1 community when they make compilations of PF1 material and re-release it to the PF2 community. If they make such a compilation available and at a cheaper price -- please at least bundle the PF1 material and give the PF1 community the same price.


Are there too many rules in PF1?

I ask because I used to play AD&D (D&D 1e) a long time ago. While everything was left to the GM's discretion, there was effort to define a comprehensive rule system.

The one thing D&D 1e didn't have that I think made things more fun was knowledge checks. Players were expected to discover, use intuition, and role play, instead.

Would PF1 be improved if we did away with knowledge checks?

Are there any other rules that should be dropped? Or at least considered for dropping?

I say that because there were also times in D&D 1e where the story progressed too slowly because the party wasn't doing the right thing to learn what it needed to know.

So, removing knowledge checks might also have consequences -- but with a crafty GM seems like it could still work out?


I finally asked for some clarifications about MapTool's macro language -- and I'm really glad I did.

At first glance MTScript appears to be kind of limited -- only allows 2 levels of nesting, for example.

But, when you find out how to create libraries of your code (library tokens), pretty much the above issue goes away.

I greatly underestimated MTScript's ease and power, and now I'm really, finally, rocking and rolling.

I just wish I had asked earily. I pretty much understood most of the concept -- just needed a little help getting started.

At the present time, I very highly recommend MapTool 1.4.1.8 -- and am providing feedback for pre-release versions of 1.5.X.


This is version 6.3 of my macros to support playing Pathfinder 1e with MapTool.

Click on the links below:

Macros supporting Pathfinder 1e in MapTool 1.4.0.5, 1.4.1.8, and likely 1.5.1 and above

Easy instructions for GMs to setup an RPG campaign with MapTool

Major new features include:

1. Increased the number of Melee Attacks, Ranged Attacks, and Special Abilities to 30 (up from 10).

2. Fixed the tooltips for the buttons to better explain how to use each of the macros.

3. Fixed what is now the "Rest PCs or NPCs 8 hours" button. Not only to add new features. I broke it recently for another minor change -- sorry about that. Works now.

4. Moved some of the GM buttons to the Campaign window. This is because, apparently, the Global window has a much smaller limit on macro size -- so I had no choice but to move them to the Campaign window -- but players are prevented from using them.

5. Increased the buffs and conditions to 10 (was 5).

6. Increased the sets of temporary adjustments (modifiers) to 30 -- and they can be made to a character due to various buffs such as haste, bless, enlarge person, etc. or conditions such as slow, curse, reduce person, etc. (This fixes a major nightmare of most GMs -- it's fully automated!)

7. Added support for domain spells, specialty school spells, etc. (Yes, I know level-0 spells aren't typically used for this -- but I left support for them in there just in case.)

8. Added more descriptive text as need to the dialogs to make their purpose more clear.

9. Fixed a bug where level-0 spells were being removed from the "current" spell list of spells available to cast. Now, they are not removed.

Other features already supported:

1. Working in conjunction with hl2mt.exe, has the ability to very easily import the thousands of NPCs (and PCs) available from Hero Lab's libraries of the Bestiaries, Adventure Paths, etc.

2. To the best of my knowledge, full support for everything on the character sheet (or at least nearly).

3. Probably lots of other stuff I'm currently too tired to remember -- because I've been writing macros all day.

Future Work Will Include:

Fixing the issue that spell slots are not being handled for opposing schools, etc. Right now, you'll have to work-around.


Elorebaen wrote:
Thanks for the info Mark!

You are completely welcome!


Here's a nice list of the huge number of VTTs available and some comments about each (click this link):

Huge Number of Virtual Tabletops Listed And Review (And It's Pretty Current)

1 to 50 of 364 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>