Michael Moore 51, where be ye and yuir ladywife? I like the cut of your jib, and would like to further explore the enormous commercial possibilities inherent should the sheep succeed in flying. Oh, wait, momentary Python incursion. Rephrase to being curious as to if you and yours are geographically nearby. We are on the Garner side of Raleigh, but could likely find our way to anyplace in Wake County on a regular basis, as well as host.

Hey, Dr. Wholmes, this answer probably has better context here, since this is part of the thread started by jhpace1, who is currently our GM. As Mr. Pace said, we live and play in Durham. It is a bit of a hike from the Garner side of Raleigh, but we have had folks drive in from as far as Knightdale to play here. Fortunately, we are on the Raleigh side of Durham and do most of our shopping at Briar Creek. I try to visit Game Theory for Pathfinder supplies on Saturdays when I have some spare change.

We don't go afar for games right now, though, because we do have two boys, 9 and 7, who would probably destroy the venue we take them to if they do not have something constructive to do. They're sweet kids, but they have more energy than we know what to do with.

As Mr. Pace said, we do play Rise of the Runelords every other Saturday, and we fill in on other Saturdays when at least three of us can meet and I don't have a large assignment due for school. I am in my last two quarters pursuing a masters degree, and the pace is pretty brutal. The reason Mr. Pace is GMing is because I am in school, working full-time, volunteering with my sons' elementary school, and helping to coach my boys' soccer teams. When I graduate in April, I will probably return to GMing. My plans are to dabble with Boot Hill for a few sessions before going full blast back on Pathfinder.

Let's chat online for a little while, and as time picks up at the top of 2014, we'll set up a social get-together, you and your wife, me and my wife, and just chat about whatever we find interesting. My personal email is michael(dot)moore(at)mindspring(dot)com.

Ha, Dr. Wholmes, you would get along with my wife, who is huge into Dr. Who. Me, I confess, not so much. My guilty pleasure is King Arthur. I have been toying with running a super-hero game set in a Marvel Universe where the original characters of the comics aged year by year and got older, leaving the story line open for a new generation of super-heroes to carry on in the heroic legacy of guys like Captain America, the Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, and the like. Certainly, heroes such as Thor and Wolverine, whose aging was retarded or non-existent, can carry on and have adventures in the new setting, but for the most part, Spider-Man, Captain America, the Fantastic Four, and other heroes have retired, and their children (those who had kids) are all grown up and interacting in the universe. But, it is still under construction...

Actually, we are kind of laid back. We don't nitpick whether an NPC should have a certain trait or another because he grew up among the Shaonti on the Storval Plateau or something. We sit around the table pretending to be on a grand adventure and roll dice. We like to joke around and make funny pop culture references. If this sounds like you and you have the time to play every other week, more or less, then please let us know. We just want to have a couple more people at the table to share our adventures.

I spotted the following item on Drive-Thru RPG: http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/0/Name-Not-Found?products_id=120999&a mp;src=sub

Is this company licensed to use Paizo intellectual property and publish its own content on Golarion, such as Shaonti and Storval Plateau?

I only recently began to explore the possibilities of lycanthropes in Pathfinder, and I've been reading some third party OGL material to enhance my stories. I noticed that D&D 3.5 had a Control Shape skill that afflicted werewolves could buy ranks in, but it appears that Pathfinder has dropped this skill in favor of a straight Constitution check. Is this the case, or is the skill just a hidden rule now? I'm considering whether to retrofit this skill or to allow afflicted lycanthropes to add +1 per two levels advanced after gaining the affliction to their Con check. Which do you think makes more sense?

I wonder if anyone has written up a paragraph or two on the effects of being subject to a flea infestation in d20 (I'm sorry 3.x OGL) game mechanic terms. Can anyone point me to a source book with this information, or does anyone have any ideas?

I was thinking that laying in a hay bale full of the little critters might make one uncomfortable, itch all day, cause circumstance penalties on certain skill checks, require a Spellcraft check to cast any spell, and even cause loss of sleep, which over time causes fatigue. Does this jibe with anyone else's thoughts?

And how would you set the EL on an encounter with fleas?

All these posts seem to galvanize how I have felt off and on about the apparent direction of the RPG scene since WotC announced 4th Edition.

For myself, I have played two sessions of D&D 4th Edition, although not yet with a group. My wife DMed me through two mini-adventures she made for one player, and I have to say that I had fun. The feel of the game play was very exciting. But then, I was playing a fighter, not a cleric or wizard, so I have no full-on comparisons until I see one of the other classes in action.

I have a huge collection of D&D material from every other edition, and 3.5 material now burgeons my office at home to the point of pushing everything else I own to the limits of the space I have. I can barely walk from the entrance door to the desk I have so much stuff. I DM a D&D 3.5 setting that will be integrating Pathfinder into it as of the next session. I will likely not DM 4th Edition, and it is not because 4th Edition is not a good game. So far, I have liked it. But the poster who sited the five reasons he turned down 4th Edition was right on. I had the exact same issues. I was very put off by the videos suggesting that grapple was so difficult a maneuver to resolve that all action halted while rules were consulted. I found it problematic that a company could market its new game by telling everyone that the game they were playing now sucked.

Once the 4e rules came out, I did get a copy to test out because my wife is playing a 4e campaign with another group. I am disappointed with the skill system, though I have found many good ideas in the game. I don't like the dropping of the monster classifications or the ability to customize them by adding class levels to them. The game system seems to be contrary to how I want to run my game.

But for play, I have found the new game fun so far. It feels better than it looks.

I look at it this way: Pathfinder OGL D&D 3.5 is a great fantasy RPG. D&D 4th Edition is a fun fantasy RPG. Both are different games with equal merit depending on your play mood.

All versions of D&D up to 3.5 have been progressive improvements upon the versions before it. Whereas AD&D 2nd Edition streamlined 12 years of rules development in AD&D 1st Edition and D&D 3.x streamlined an entirely baroque game system, 4th Edition created something new and different, not really an improvement over the version before it (although it could not have been made without 3.5), but certainly a game with a fresh feel. I suspect that when all the smoke clears, we will probably have a first in the FRPG scene: players playing two versions of the game at once because they have really sort of branched out in opposite directions that are equally valid for one reason or another. That is just my opinion, though.

I guess I'll add my two cents worth of opinion: d20 companies aren't taking over. The market is splitting up a bit more.

Before 3rd Edition, there was TSR/AD&D and then everybody else. TSR was the largest producer of gaming product, and it dominated the market. Then, it went under and WotC bought them out. 3rd Edition came along and WotC dominated the market, and so you had 3rd Edition and all the d20 companies. Other publishers made their way supporting 3rd Edition and 3.5.

And then OSRIC slipped in.

Look at all the flavors of D&D being played today:
Grognards still playing AD&D 1st and 2nd Edition and possibly enhancing their gaming with OSRIC product
D&D 3.x (including 3.0 and 3.5), d20 and 3.5 OGL
Hackmaster 4th Edition

Soon, there will be a very strong base of players on D&D 4th Edition and Pathfinder RPG.

I don't think it will be just D&D 4th Edition and the other guys anymore.

I think that there will be equally valid factions of players playing all these flavors more prominently. It's not like we're talking about competition among the publishers, but more like publishers producing material that appeals to specific audiences.

I'm with Pathos on this. Use Spellcraft as you would in place of concentration.

Cast on the Defensive wasn't part of Alpha 3, putting the DC on there just don't make sense. :)

Hmm, from my reading of that section of the document, it looked more like the top priorities for this level of publication were wrapped around changes. If casting defensively had not changed from the 3.5 OGL, then it was unlikely to have made the document.

I'd like to express my own concerns about the Acrobatics skill to add to the numbers with the hopes that the Pathfinder designers take our feedback to heart.

After reading the skills section, I see that Acrobatics essentially has combined Balance, Jump, and Tumble under one catch-all skill check. I can see the rationale for doing this to an extent, but there are several snags as I understand this.

First, Jump was a Fighter class skill in 3.5. Considering that fighters had a number of class skills you could count on a single hand, losing Jump as a class skill, which would probably be a bread and butter aspect of his training to enter the profession in the first place, is it a good thing for the fighter to lose the Jump feat as a class skill? On the other hand, he does get access to Survival as a class skill now, which he didn't have in 3.5, so I guess it's a trade-off.

Then, there is the issue that Balance and Tumble are Dex-based checks and Jump is a Strength-based check. I've seen the argument that jumping is a dexterity-based activity, but I have to humbly disagree with that, although one of the posters was once a long-jumper. Jumping proficiently, like everything else, is a function of many things, your speed as you pick up a running start (a function of leg strength), proper form (not a function of Dex, but a function of knowing what position your legs and arms need to be in and doing it), and the leg strength propelling you from the ground. Considering that proficiency in the skill assumes that you have developed knowledge and application of proper form, and speed is an abstract that really would make the system over-complicated if we were to attempt to factor it in (and the armor check penalty, IMO, covers that), wouldn't it make sense to break off Jump from Acrobatics and either let it stand as its own skill or group it under Athletics with Climb and Swim as suggested by another poster?

Slightly off topic, or maybe back on.

In the Acrobatics skill description it says,
“If you are proficient in the Acrobatics skill…”
So proficient means it is a class skill and you have ranks in it?
If it is not a class skill how many would you need to be proficient?
Or could you be?

Proficient, as I understand it, is having spent 1 rank in the skill. Correct? Whether a class skill or not, 1 rank spent on it means you are proficient in the skill, to my understanding.