Matthew Jaluvka's page

animist is probably one of the best casters in the game in general, at the cost of being the most complex class in the game

Some of these recent changes I've really not cared for. I'll keep saying it but to me PF2E shouldn't be balanced like a mmo with nerfs to classes and it should be left to the GMs to ban/homebrew things they feel are too powerful like sure strike, electric arc, monk dedication flurry of blows etc at their tables and if Paizo feels it's an issue for society play have it adjusted for those in a separate rules page alongside the society restrictions they already have.

yeah dude I'm a huge fan of trap options never getting fixed and OP options never getting nerfed it made pf1 really easy and fun to get into

the errata finally loaded for me and I think the live wire nerf is actually more impactful than the sure strike nerf

once per encounter is not really a big deal tbh

"A door has opened, and something impossible is coming." confirmed, nex is definitely back

If it's your own setting for pf1, you wouldn't need the community use policy in the first place, you'd just use the OGL and cite any Paizo or 3pp books you use open game content from.

(note: I am not a lawyer, but this is my understanding of the licensing)

back to the subject at hand, as someone who enjoys both editions of Pathfinder and Starfinder, and the settings of both games, I'm hoping some exception will be created for 1e material with those settings to be able to exist, though I understand if it isn't possible

the claim that it's photoshopped artwork is objectively wrong both at a glance and when subject to analysis, and detracts from your argument to the point that it is, effectively, a non-argument

Quote:

good to know vague similarities are the threshold for accusing something of being stolen art

For sue-0happy corporations like Disney and Paramount, "vague similarities" is more than enough to issue a cease & desist letter.

You may not be able to see it, but many others do. With a trained eye it's not hard.

your "trained eye" was trained wrong!

Well, you'd be the first person who's said that to me. Literally every single time I've presented the two side-by-side the person I'm showing immediately recognized they are very much the same ship. The Revolution just has the side pods cut off, the front cockpit glass colored to grey, and greebling added. They are the same ship.

the revolution is significantly less chunky and blocky, and the side engines are in no way similar

TheCowardlyLion wrote:

Got any sources for the claim that Paizo/Starfinder is stealing art?

Look through the starships in SOM: many of them are bad Photoshops of stuff taken from other properties.

Prime example #1: the Redshift Revolution, SOM p85 is a bad photoshop of Star Citizen's RSI Apollo medical ship; they didn't even change the ship's colour.
The Ringworks Wanderer is a Photoshop mashup of a reversed Jedi Starfighter and Robotech Valkryie veritch's cockpit and nose.
The Idaran VoidRunner is a Photoshopped Naboo Starfighter.
The Infernex Unshakeable is a Photoshop of Farscape's Peacekeeper Prowler.
The UC Librama is a Photoshopped Zentraedi Flagship.
I've seen Photoshopped Star Trek ships (Norikama Valkyrie - they seem to like Maquis and Cardassian ships).
The Driftmaven station is a photoshopped engagement ring (and some pretty low-effort Photoshop at that).
The Infernex Justicar is a Photoshopped Serenity from Firefly.
I'm certain the Idaran Saga is taken from another IP, I just don't know which one.
The Sov-El Korinath is also from another IP.

Paizo mined just about every scifi IP in existence for not just inspiration, but material to alter.

If Paizo is going to start punishing the community for creating tools Paizo can't profit from, maybe these IPs should be made aware of Paizo's own copyright violations in turn.

good to know vague similarities are the threshold for accusing something of being stolen art

Artofregicide wrote:

You don't go into the RPG printing business to get rich. You do it because you love it.

Umm, if you really loved it, you wouldn’t go into business. The commodification of your passion isn’t love…it’s just….business. And to be quite frank, a business that has been “successfully” running for over a decade has made one or two people…a lotta cash.

I don't think it's necessarily true that you can't go into business doing something you love, especially when that something costs time and effort to do. And someone purely out for money would go into the fossil fuel or arms industry, not a portion of the entertainment industry with a small audience and razor-thin margins.

Is this book gonna have a chronicle sheet like the novels released during 1e did?

if my favorite overpowered spell happens to not be in a core book, that obviously means that the game is incomplete

Matthew Jaluvka wrote:

Kaspyr2077 wrote:

pH unbalanced wrote:

The thing I keep coming back to is that the sidebar in the conditions section (which I posted previously) says, essentially "The dying rules are more complicated than what we can put here. The full rules are on pages 410-411."

That means, they are already acknowledging that there might be interpretation differences between the two places, and if you are confused, use the ones on pages 410-411.

And those rules are clear.

It's a change. It's a change I don't like. But it is not ambiguous or contradictory, because they have *already told you* which section takes precedence.

In a home game I will likely run it the old way, but in PFS I will run it according to the rules on pages 410-411.

Documents link to broken resources ALL THE TIME. It doesn't add validity to those resources.

the fact that you don't like part of a game's design doesn't mean that it isn't there

No one is trying to argue that it's not there. The argument is that it appears to be legacy code that was reintroduced for no apparent reason. The poster I'm responding to is arguing that a reference to said legacy code can only mean that it is legitimate. My argument against that point is that you don't have to check a resource you're pointing to.

then let me rephrase: just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's somehow illegitimate

pH unbalanced wrote:

The thing I keep coming back to is that the sidebar in the conditions section (which I posted previously) says, essentially "The dying rules are more complicated than what we can put here. The full rules are on pages 410-411."

That means, they are already acknowledging that there might be interpretation differences between the two places, and if you are confused, use the ones on pages 410-411.

And those rules are clear.

It's a change. It's a change I don't like. But it is not ambiguous or contradictory, because they have *already told you* which section takes precedence.

In a home game I will likely run it the old way, but in PFS I will run it according to the rules on pages 410-411.

Documents link to broken resources ALL THE TIME. It doesn't add validity to those resources.

the fact that you don't like part of a game's design doesn't mean that it isn't there

I'm seeing a lot of revisionist history today to pretend this new rule was always the case.

People quoting out a former writer's claim that "I meant to do that", yet it was a "meant to" that didn't actually make the cut of the 2.0 book.

Even the PF2E code for Foundry didn't use this "was always that way" method when applying dying values.

That's a LOT of eyes on something that occurs very often in games that somehow the entire community failed to notice until today?

This is like the 1984 novel quote "We have always been at war with Eastasia," when... moments before stated, the thing wasn't true.

It's a brutal change to the survivability of the game. It also radically shakes up an aspect of the meta - the most damaging thing you can do to a team-mate now is heal them if they're downed. It nearly ensures a dead character. Before - there might be value in getting them back up to sway the battle, at worse they'd go to one extra dying value if downed again (assuming no crit). Now they're more likely to be instant killed.

This will lead to a dramatic change in the way people play the game, as it's now a deadlier game than the old "Paranoia" tRPG (which, BTW, was semi based on a '1984' like world).

people have got to stop calling everything they don't like 1984

remassacred

what is this, 2010?

I have asked for things like... ...burning amplification

spell trickster fixes this

Everything is nice, except...

Cantrips losing modifiers is awful. One thing that I adored about pf2e, coming from 5e, is that even my low rolls did a decent amount of damage. Every player I talked to from the community I come from felt the same way, too. Now that's gone, it's right back to wonderfully terrible feeling cantrips of 5e, where you just low roll constantly and have no bonus.

Whiteboard math is great and all, but most players aren't math nerds who see a number and think averages. They see low dice rolls and feel like they did nothing in comparison to the martials.

I wish there was a place to give this feedback before it all went to print, but alas.

what about rolling high on the 3d4 cantrips

is that just something you've decided can't happen

heavily imply that they'll release some form of joke material and then just make something completely normal and serious instead

Command doesn't work well as the enemy doesn't stay Prone. If your goal is to benefit from AoOs it works, but you don't have the benefit of attacking a Prone target.

however if your goal is to waste the enemies' actions, it's very good

edit: huh apparently the site can't render all emojis so the haha funny moyai post is not possible.

most traits that don't have explicitly defined effects exist for the purpose of interaction with other effects and categorization/prerequisites. for example, the shadow trait doesn't directly do anything, but the shadowcaster archetype interacts with the trait in a few ways (primarily the shadow spell metamagic, which can only apply to spells with the shadow trait).

If you spent big bucks on a sword 'folded a million times' then you got played.

what if I want a sword with a blade that's literally wider than the observable universe

9.75% chance to kill an on-level enemy for no resource cost except a single action seems excessive

The Players' Guides give the BASICS, they don't go into detail. You couldn't write a literary analysis of the AP with just the information the Players' Guides give you, and that's what I want: for the story that emerges from the game to actually be GOOD, as opposed to reading like an isekai or a bad fanfic.

it seems like you're missing the point of a game where outcomes are necessarily unknown until they happen

2. As a GM, I penalize players a level when their character dies. That is, if they lose a Level 5 character, their replacement is Level 4. Not sure how common that is.

wow, that's a really cool way to make their next character more likely to die!

I think I'm gonna have to drop out of this game, the forum format just makes it more difficult for me. Sorry.

I think I'm gonna have to drop out of this game, the forum format just makes it more difficult for me. Sorry.

Hey sorry I haven't introduced my character, I had some personal issues but I'm all good now. My initiative mod is +7 and I just filled out part of the table on the slides, though I still need to look through my old chronicles from 3 years ago to calculate gold and such.

I haven't played this one before, but I'm fine with anything. I'll post an intro soon.

Hi, I've been busy the last few days but I'm still here, probably going to play the sorcerer. I haven't played this scenario before.

hey wait didn't we already have this discussion and get absolutely nowhere?

Number on signup sheet: 1
104411-2
Lanthirion (Level 4 Sanctified Rogue)
Liberty's Edge
Day Job: Profession (Architect) +9

I have a 2nd level elemental sorcerer or a 2nd level paladin

Going by the pattern, it would be a level 21 item, and therefore couldn't be crafted by a PC, since the first requirement is that the item is your level or lower.

How much information does this book have on the Cairnlands? I've been trying to research them for an adventure I'm writing, and so far the main material I have is the world guides for both editions, dungeons of golarion, and PFS1 6-01 and 6-17.

keftiu wrote:

zimmerwald1915 wrote:

Vorsk, Follower or Erastil wrote:

zimmerwald1915 wrote:

keftiu wrote:

Have you seen Night of the Grey Death? Galt should be a pretty different place going forward.

Nothing interesting to do with a revolutionary republic than clamp reaction back down upon it, I suppose.

I mean, I am curious to see how Gralton reacts to the terror ending in their homeland.

They would be [among] the reactionaries clamping down, yes.

Do you have any evidence for a reactionary clampdown? Night of the Grey Death’s ultimate foe being defeated seems like an objective good to me.

Basic pattern recognition? Paizo's pulled this trick before in Korvosa, Ravounel, Artume, and Vidrian. A Good turn, in the context of a revolutionary uprising or revolutionary republic, means the restoration of legitimate, ancient (that is to say, outmoded and rightfully superseded) legitimate institutions.

I don't think the explicitly evil hell empire is rightfully superseding anything unless you unironically believe might makes right

Are you implying that the average consumer cares more about the salary of the delivery man than cheap prices? Because it is them that determine which business practices are successful.

Humbly,
Yawar

yes it's actually totally normal and cool to be fine with bad things for the sake of convenience

we'll need BIGGER maps to use those as minis on

do they count as miniatures if they're the size of kobolds?

I think the other point that's being missed here is that it's not even difficult to write villains that are evil because of the things they do

they're basically immortal compared to humans and would have a totally alien perspective on life. from a realistic standpoint, they should think about humans the same way we think about a mosquito. sure, they may have their own lives, but they're trying to bite my arm and wait where was I going with this?

are there any spiders that you're aware of that have humanoid forms and the ability to think about abstract concepts? because I think that might have some impact on things