599 posts. Alias of Oceanshieldwolf.


1 to 50 of 599 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
Was Clark the Frog God guy? I haven’t seen him post for a long time. Then I again, I might have just missed it…

Necromancer Games. I went back and looked. And found I had even posted in the thread. My memory…terrible.

I want to get this. I have physical copies of most of the first tier, but not really any of the rest. I really hope the fact that 6,000 of these have been sold doesn’t mean issues with redeeming them… ;)

[EDIT]Ok, seems like over 14,000 now…[/EDIT]

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I also just wanted to say one lil thing. I absolutely loved the action economy in PF1e when playing the odd inquisitor. Through slightly clever use of Swift, Standard and Move actions (because I’m not really smart enough nor have system mastery to optimise/copy paste munchkin builds) the narrative power was incredibly fun. It felt tactical, dynamic, strategic and active. There was considered choice and there was informed change. It wasn’t particularly impressive from a DPR perspective. It wasn’t masterful battlefield control. It did engage with the other players and was wrapped in narrative and descriptive flourishes. Admittedly it was mostly low-level and was basically effective but it was engaging.

I do see that the three action economy from Unchained has been polished, however I read a lot of posts saying that in principle it is a great idea, but in practice it has been hobbled. I am yet to play enough PF2e to have a grasp of this. I hope that I can at the very least do as much as I did, at times in PF1e.

I understand Freehold DM’s lament. I want to love PF2, but after the engagement of PF1, however unbalanced and broken it might have been I am left hoping for the same engagement with PF2e.

To be honest, the amount of leaps and bounds required to do certain things completely put me off. I have to do what with a shield to get what? And then the shield…whats? Explain that again?!!

I was late to 3.0/3.5. (I started with Basic and ADnD. Left not long after ADnD2e) But it made a while lot of internally consistent sense to me. Missing the odd Key Term or two (*cough OSW cough*) didn’t harm me. PF1 made the same sense. PF2 really doesn’t. Yet. I don’t understand magic items and runes at all, though I haven’t really looked at them. I see bunches of posts telling people their players should have x this and x that that I at this stage basically don’t understand. I have no local group to play with, played in one PF2e PbP where my beloved Hobgoblin Druid basically felt like the Druid in one of the two early 5e games I played. Same zappy spell, every time. Jab with spear and miss. Try the hell to understand what the paladin just did with their retroactive thingummy that PbP really gels terribly with. Blah blah blah.

So my point is, rambling aside is that I am a classic PF1 exile who did enjoy it, could completely understand the problems with it and agreed with most of them, and has no horse in any race and just wants to have fun. And all that pitiful PF1 mastery I didn’t even have is still enough to bork any understanding of PF2 becoz “old assumptions”. I dearly want someone to make a top down play through of PF2 combats that doesn’t take a million years of pointless exposition and simply explains some basic combat tenets.

As someone upthread said, PF2 is what Paizo is making now. I made a conscious decision to leave PF1e behind for now because PF2 is the new game. I like the concepts. I think it has a lot going for it. I think it has some strange, not rough edges. I do think the basic math is elegant, but that is a belief and gut feeling, not experiential/lived. And it is its own thing, just as able to tell any kind of story as any other system in the hands of particular referees/groups. So to Freehold I say: I hear you, but I’m going to play it anyway. Well, run it more likely.

If anyone made it to the end of this, my apologies and sincerest thanks.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
@magnuskn: Check out this post by breithauptclan that addresses some of the design paradigms that might be preventing some of that bloat…

I'm not sure how the post addresses the issue of bloat in any form. Bloat happens by new options (classes, feat, magic items, etc.) being released constantly, until newer players are overwhelmed by the amount of rules available and often perceived as necessary to fully enjoy the system. I myself am starting to play Anno 1800, a city building PC game with a ton of DLC, so I can currently relate very well to the feeling.

Paizo has already released eight new classes in the last about four years, is about to release its ninth and presumably also released a ton of feats, spells and new game systems to boot. I am not saying the system is bloated yet, but the fond wishes of some people during the playtest that Paizo would slow down on their systemic expansion with 2E seem to not have borne themselves out.

Just to reply, my error, I did conflate Power Creep and Bloat-which-leads-to-decision-paralysis-and-possibly-trap/crap-options. I’ve never had much of a problem with Bloat in terms of decision paralysis, though trap options could be a thing.

Personally I’m not sure any reasonable player who likes options would be concerned about 9 new classes in almost four years.

Given PF1e had a bunch of classes at its finish, and I still wanted moar and it has taken this long, so far to still not have the same amount while still not really presenting anything particularly “new” apart from the Inventor and Thaumaturge (both only just) I feel quite the opposite of seeing “Bloat”. I can’t imagine what folx who want an Inquisitor must be feeling. The rate is glacial just to get to where PF1e was, and the threat of yet another edition to reset the Core and build up from that is maddening. To me.

magnuskn wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:

While they could have tweaked 1e math, I don't think you could have fixed more inherent problems in 1e with just tweaking though.

That and I don't like idea of "let's reset edition every ten year with minor changes just so there is less content to confuse people"

Well, now we got a new edition with big changes which put a good number of older fans, who went to Paizo because they wanted to continue playing an actively supported 3E-like system, out of buying new stuff from them. Of course it also got new players to support the system, too.

But 2E also is starting to get into the bloat problem, as far as I can see. Paizo certainly isn't releasing any less stuff than under 1E, which some people seemed to think would be the case when 2E was new.

@magnuskn: Check out this post by breithauptclan that addresses some of the design paradigms that might be preventing some of that bloat…

breithauptclan wrote:
TheRabidOgre wrote:
Does this ever happen to anyone else?


I believe that the rules for PF2 were written with the intent to provide solid boundaries so that the game balance is easier to be kept in check.

The core proficiencies of each character provide minimum bonus values, and the prevention of stacking bonuses and the lack of feats giving numerical bonus boosts limit maximum bonus values. Which means that challenges can be written with the expectation of the characters bonus values falling into a fairly narrow range.

Similar idea with feats and actions and traits. There are boundaries built in to the core system to prevent a lot of interactions. Flourish trait to prevent really powerful actions from being stacked into one super powerful turn. Subordinate Actions and not being able to replace parts of a composite action to prevent unbounded action chaining.

Multiclass Archetypes not giving all of the class features of their base class - which allows base classes to put a bunch of class features and abilities given up front at level 1 without worrying about multiclass character abuse grabbing powerful abilities from several different classes with one level dips.

Another result of all of this restrictive design is that the system will prevent things that would be fine and probably should be allowed. One that a group I was in ran into was with Gunslinger and Way of the Drifter. Drifter's Juke isn't compatible with Reloading Strike. The Subordinate Actions rule prevents the melee strike in Drifter's Juke from being replaced with Reloading Strike.

So our GM got to feel like an ally of the party by granting an exception and allowing the replacement. And I think that is a good and healthy thing for a gaming group to have - these opportunities for all of the people at the table to realize that they are in fact all on the same side even though one of them has to play all of the...

Thanks breithauptclan - this both explains a couple of things AND reinforced my feeing that I do want to run/play PF2e more and more, and that yes, there are definitely things I will be changing, allowing, eliding and removing.

Can someone explain to me how niche protection works, and why it is a good idea?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I took Lord Fyre’s “class balance” to mean not that classes were balanced in PF1e but the change from the popular conception (misguided or not) of the balance or imbalance between classes i.e. the change from PF1’s “caster/martial disparity” or “linear fighter quadratic wizard” to whatever PF2 has.

Going to drop from this. I think you are in good hands with DM Doctor Evil, enjoy.

DM DoctorEvil wrote:

@DM Doctor Evil: my First Printing CRB lists the Adventurer's pack costing 7 sp, 2 bulk and contains:

backpack , bedroll, two belt pouches, 10 pieces of chalk, flint and steel, 50 feet of rope, 2 weeks' rations, soap, 5 torches, and a waterskin.

Archives of Nethys entry lists same as 1 gp 5 sp, 1 bulk and contains:

backpack, bedroll, 10 pieces of chalk, flint and steel, 50 feet of rope, 2 weeks' rations, soap, 5 torches, and a waterskin.

Which would you like to go with?!?

I wonder it is in the errata somewhere. My version of Hero Lab agrees with the AON listing/weight/cost. So let's say the 15sp (1.5gp) version is what we will be using.

The AoN has superscript to say it is from the 4th printing, so I’d say yes, errata’d.

Billi Hardstone wrote:

Thanks for the campaign backgrounds. Investigating the death of my parents Billi got addicted!! Easy to see one causing the other, but I like the addict line.

Anyone knows if anyone can cold turkey shrug off any drug addiction, it would be a dwarf!! War axe is sharpened and ready to go. I looked into multiclassing to cleric, but don't see it happening. But PF 2E lets a fighter be fairly well trained in medicine!!

Battle Medicine is, from my reading of the boards, an extremely useful combat skill for groups both with and without magical healing. Sadly, fighters get very few skills, and it didn’t make sense for my character’s background. Or…it would have…but given that paucity it was too far down the list of those that did.

Ezekieru wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Tarik Blackhands wrote:
Honestly the hardest part for me was parsing the rulebook. Lord does 2e crb have layout problems...
OMG does it.

I was literally just posting about this elsewhere on the boards today. The page flipping is endless.

And, pretty please, can someone please direct me to the exact text that explicitly states that monsters/NPCs get three actions? I mean I think I know they do, but where is it actually stated? I’ve looked in the CRB, the Bestiary and the GMG, but I can’t find the actual text anywhere.

Encounters, Core Rulebook pg. 10:

"The players and GM roll initiative to determine who acts in what order. The encounter occurs over a number of rounds, each of which is equal to about 6 seconds of time in the world of the game. During a round, each participant takes a turn. When it’s your turn to act, you can use up to three actions."

Turn, Core Rulebook pg. 13

"During the course of a round, each creature takes a single turn according to initiative. A creature can typically use up to three actions during its turn."

Aaaahhhhh!!! Thank you Ezekeriu!!! In the sections on Playing the Game, and Key Terms. Which I clearly never bothered to read.

I realised too late to edit my post above, but you can’t actually replicate my dice roll by Replying, but using the “How to format” your text should be the most helpful.

Essentially, a Recruitment thread is where you pitch a character to the GM, Discussion threads are for out of character discussions with the group and Gameplay is where the magic happens. Unless it is a game without magic.

Some GMs use Roll 20/Foundry/ VTT for maps, some use Google slides and some just use “theater of the mind”.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:
Tarik Blackhands wrote:
Honestly the hardest part for me was parsing the rulebook. Lord does 2e crb have layout problems...
OMG does it.

I was literally just posting about this elsewhere on the boards today. The page flipping is endless.

And, pretty please, can someone please direct me to the exact text that explicitly states that monsters/NPCs get three actions? I mean I think I know they do, but where is it actually stated? I’ve looked in the CRB, the Bestiary and the GMG, but I can’t find the actual text anywhere.

@DM Doctor Evil: my First Printing CRB lists the Adventurer's pack costing 7 sp, 2 bulk and contains:

backpack , bedroll, two belt pouches, 10 pieces of chalk, flint and steel, 50 feet of rope, 2 weeks' rations, soap, 5 torches, and a waterskin.

Archives of Nethys entry lists same as 1 gp 5 sp, 1 bulk and contains:

backpack, bedroll, 10 pieces of chalk, flint and steel, 50 feet of rope, 2 weeks' rations, soap, 5 torches, and a waterskin.

So the original is heavier, cheaper and comes with two extra belt pouches.

Which would you like to go with?!?

5 people marked this as a favorite.

And for those of you who haven't seen them before:

PbP Guides:
Doomed Hero’s Guide to Play by Post Gaming

Building a Better Doomed Hero: Painlord’s Guide to Advanced PbP play

Doomed Hero’s Guide to PbP GMing

CthosEris wrote:
Hi! I am completely new to this, and I want to make sure I'm understanding the format correctly-- we would be playing by text?

Yes, play by post on this forum. This is the Recruitment thread. HERE is a link to a Gameplay thread chosen at random.

In each post you can describe your character's actions and randomly generate dic rolls using the conventions found below each post box below: "How to Format your text".

I can make a dice roll thus:

1d6 ⇒ 3 Which is written {dice}1d6{/dice} with "[" and "]" replacing the { and }, because every time I try to write it correctly it will generate a dice roll. You can hit Reply on my post to see how I did it and then just cancel...

hustonj wrote:
Smiles-a-lot wrote:
Right now I’m thinking about a varisian fortuneteller/harrow reader. Looking for something gish like with some personality.
Thaumaturge, perhaps?

Great advice hustonj! I’m not sure you can get any more personality than a Thaumaturge. Given all the roleplaying fodder in the class mechanics and given Smile-a-lots’ idea, being able to wrap a harrow-deck theme around literally everything it is a great pool of potential.

Thaumaturge is absolutely my favorite class in PF2e, but I really need to focus on the basics at this stage so chose Fighter…

@Lia: I’m not sure of I understand you completely by “character sheet”, but here goes.

Click on the My Account section at the top right of the screen.
Then click Account Settings (which may necessitate signing in/password again).

In your account setting you can make a new alias on the left side of the screen.

Your current alias has no information, but if you click on an alias that is yours you can edit it and populate it with character sheet information. Dorian Grey has linked one upthread I think.

Happy to answer more questions or clarify anything if you need it…and apologies if I got you completely wrong!

Hi Doctor Evil, looking to submit a Human Fighter (from the Shingles) as I want to understand PF2 mechanics from a simple starting point! Even some of the 1st level feats have me asking questions…

As for a background, I was looking at the Framed background from the original Player’s Guide. Would it be permissible to have the framed friend actually dead, hanged by Zenobia “the Hanging Judge” Zenderholm - my character’s motivation would then be more revenge than clearing my friend’s name.

Is there a PF2e actual play that dispenses with the roleplay and just presents the adventure with mechanics for beginners to learn the system? My two major problems with actual play are a)the players/GM and b) the lack of clearly indicated use of the game rules.

I know that isn’t exactly “actual play” as largely presented, but it would be an awesome resource. Most videos I have seen take multiple minutes to explain one mechanic.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thank you Paizo. Will check it out.

I am interested. Played only a little PF2e here on the boards (a few encounter of Fall of Plaguestone.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Catgirl wrote:
Apparently the page for cancelling subscriptions went down from sheer traffic. You love to see it.

Checking Ginny Di’s Twitter linked from Linda Codega’s article linked above shows a lot of people have their hearts in the right place. Cancellation after cancellation, many of them truly wrenched by giving up a tool they use regularly and love. If you know anyone who uses DnDB, let them know cancelling is giving Wizard$ and Ha$nobros a major headache.

A PR nightmare. Really interesting to see this happen in 2023 - it is true that bosses and shareholders will literally shoot themselves in the foot to try to make maw cashola, don’t understand people and care not a jot for anything except that cashola stuff.

Has anyone taken the time to quantitatively assess the options - feats, talents, suites etc available to every class and work out which ones are “bursting with enough options we would love more but don’t need them” and which ones are “please, sir, cood oi av an option?” And then ask Paizo to make a book with options for the latter. Because one of the many refrains I see that rubs shoulders with FAQ is making the game solid and giving support to last year’s shiny, instead of just all the oo new shiny that is upcoming in next week’s blog, is all the rage of elements until rage of elements comes out and then goes in the dustbin of witchstory.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

“One DnD”. One game to rule them all and in the darkness bind them. To assert total and utter, final control, to find the outliers and scurriers having weird strange unkempt fun and to diminish them, co-opt them, steal them and claim their creativity to be diluted, watered down, de-idea’d and rechurned out as Splogg. There can be only One.

Evil, hackneyed, mustachio twirling stuff. Because when capitalism hits fun, owners, big owners, squeeze and destroy the little owners, and all the consumers are debased by the whole.

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Catgirl wrote:
Meanwhile, "adventurer bars" are basically gay bars, and you have to be careful when accepting an invitation to join an adventuring party to clarify whether this is an actual adventuring party, an invitation to someone's four-way, or both.

Too funny. I love this KC. Certainly makes “being adventurous” quite the double entendre.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

That some people cam abuse the Voluntary Flaw system socially (either by being ableist or insensitive) is no reason to remove said system. However, I’m not sure that was implicitly stated as the reason, nor was biological essentialism made the entire reason implicitly.

The discussion on character creation is interesting to me coming from over four decades of rolling for ability scores. Sometimes the dice would roll low, and voila - low ability scores. That the best of use role-played well, many ignored (while ignoring much else in the role-sense) and the worst made a parody of disability. I guess. I haven’t actually seen much of any of this, but did my best to roleplay low-Int/Cha/Wis characters as complex individuals. Who interpreted the world around them as they saw it, and experienced it.

Point buy in PF1 made low scores less common, in fact many GMs forbade stats below 8, some below 10. It…made things more homogenously “heroic”, but not the kind of heroes who overcame their own innate deficiencies.

Stat arrays in PF2 moved the pendulum even further away. And to be honest, I probably wouldn’t choose:
A) a flaw for a boost because I don’t min/max and am content using the base stats or
B) a flaw for no benefit because unless I made the flaw, like a 6 or 7 or 4 it isn’t that meaningful. And the associated mechanical penalty, as folks have indicated, in PF2 could be punishing. Now I don’t take much stock of the “letting the side down” paradigm, but it seems there is a fair contingent of people who play PF like a teamsport, are incredibly invested in “succeeding at the roll-game” and will tell you about it. Luckily for me, with my characters interpreting the world ad they see it, I don’t play with those people.

As for Humans: there is only one reason why I play a human. Because I want to inhabit the story as a human. I have read, over the past 10 or so years on this forum people advising posters asking about certain classes to play and how to get the most out of them: “Play x race/ancestry” Why would you tell someone what race/ancestry to play a certain class as? I am completely flummoxed that outside of any knowledge of the campaign or person’s interest that someone would be helpful by telling me what race/ancestry to play. I understand the mechanics favour certain combinations, but when I choose a class, I choose a class based on the story I want to tell, and the same with the ancestry. I don’t pick a class and then shop biology to work out a good match and then attack the narrative so armed. I guess people do, and enjoy that approach, finding their way to the start almost like an adventure in itself. I’m too driven to have a reason first, or not play.

And, as I get older, I find humans…the least… ridiculous. Elves are, no elves are often still ridiculous, they suffer with dwarves, halflings and gnomes from some serious Western/Tolkien baggage (don’t get me started on the terrible surname conventions of the smallfolk) and the Golarion versions aren’t any different than human-culture rip-offs however much Golarionophiles might beg to differ . Half-orcs, tieflings, aasimar. But the leshys, the kitsune and conrasu, the lixardfolk and gnolls (and I love the gnoll, and the lizardfolk and really like the conrasu) begin to feel like humans-with-funny-heads, and it takes me a long time and much effort to want to portray them, or delve into their “fantastic” “societies” and “cultures”. As a kid I was all in on lizardmen, orcs, vegepygmies, dwarves, halflings, gnomes. Homebrewed races. Undead. Tweens and Shades. But now I want to play a human. Not because they are mechanically superior, or not mechanically superior. But because they are what I am currently really into playing. If people aren’t playing humans enough then I’m glad I’m not playing with them. The ridiculousness levels are rising - you don’t need a funny head to tell a meaningful story, just a head and heart in your player.

Which isn’t to say I won’t delve into something..ridiculous (ouch that is harsh, why always to terse OSW?) but I’ll be playing humans mostly, and not for the feats and stats but because that’s where I’m at.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
the bigger problem is that I can't voluntarily lower perception.
I just really dislike that perception is hardcoded to class in general. A Fighter who's good at noticing things or a Thief who isn't both seem like they should be valid.

I agree. Unnecessary pigeonholing. Vocational essentialism rears its ugly head.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Very pleased to see an errata improvement. I am happy to see Paizo prioritising the health of their much-beloved game and I hope it will instil further adoration and increase longevity of the system. Kudos.

Anything that causes Golarion’s Gnomish—adoption rates to plummet can only be good for global mental and emotional health Earthside. Adoption-for-crunch is an anathema, no matter the ancestry (though egregious with gnomes/halflings/dwarves where longshank bebbies are concerned). Ok, Ok - Carrot was funny, a bit. Once. But this…sport… of ridiculousness is…ridiculous.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Erryll Reyven wrote:

A psychic would be okay?

Have dreamed of playing one since Dark Archive came out.
Question: Free Archtype and/or Ancestral Paragon?
Will just influence the direction the character takes.


From the original post:

GM Inara wrote:
>Free Archetype: From L2 we will use the free archetype rule as it adds some nice extra flexibility for the players.

No idea about Ancestral Paragon.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How do the rules of PF2e inhibit hexcrawling or sandbox style games? Or to flip it on its head - what rules do other systems have that enable hexcrawling?

SodiumTelluride wrote:
It looks like GM hasn't posted in a while so I'm not sure the status of this recruitment, but if it's a casual non-PFS game I would like a spot. I'm a 2e noob (played a lot of 1e but 2e noob) who'd like to get some experience with it.

You’re fine, this is only an Interest Check, Axolotl hasn’t made an official Recruitment yet. I think.

Had a change of heart. I’m not making a submission for this game, but I stand by my comments about the awesomeness of djdust, except the poop part!

Ok, ok.

About OSW:

I’m 48, living in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney Australia with wife, one son and two dogs, some chickens. I have been an envirnmental and social activist, dental cream filling machine operator, ground crew for arborists, teacher’s aide, carpenter, screenprinter, buyer for a popular survival-themed syndicated TV show and a few other things. I have just stepped down as the President of my son’s P+C and before and during that time was the President of the Football Club. I am also a member of my local Rural Fire Service. I am a massive introvert who is somehow able to interact with fellow humans. By preference I am a writer and illustrator.

I started with Basic DnD in 1982, the year my brother hit high school and was introduced to roleplaying. I was 8 years old and was made to be a halfling because “…at 10th level you’ll be able to….blah blah blah…stuff I didn’t understand and was probably wrong….etc etc etc”. I was instantly hooked, and before long I was running games for my brother and friends. In my late teens we started and tried a kajillion systems like: Traveller, GURPS, Talislanta, Star Frontiers, Gamma World, TOON, Car Wars, Mekton, Cyberpunk, Shadowrun, Battletech/Mechwarrior, Palladium/Rifts, Paranoia, Tunnels and Trolls, Twilight 2000, Dragon Warriors, Fighting Fantasy etc etc as well as mulriple home-brewed systems my friends and I came up with. And forays into gamebooks, boardgames (Talisman!) etc.

I fell out of gaming during my twenties but kept up with “advances” in various editions of various games. I liked 3e, and 4e too, though only ever played one session of the latter. I discovered Pathfinder via the Kobold Press blog and from there the Paizo forums. I hit the homebrew forums hard, and also submitted and had accepted articles to Wayfinder, Kobold Quarterly as well as participated in crowdfunded works by Kobold Press where I was published in Midgard Tales, Journeys to the West and Legends of Midgard. I also produced a single issue for Kobold Press’ Midgard campaign setting that took more than three years to complete: Yggdrassil Fanzine - it’s free and you can download it right here!

I’ve played in a bunch of PbP’s here on Paizo and had a million die due to GM’s disappearing mysteriously. I myself have had two breaks from PbP where I suffered overload or personal burnout. I don’t play maximised characters because I don’t often know…how…to…maximise…stuff, and often try to make characters that are interesting mechanically in theory, but may not actually work as intended. I would echo Ariarh Kane in not being able to “build” a character to 20 levels ahead of time, and frankly find the concept anathematic as it appears to take no account of the possibilities of the passage of the game or its environment. I like to play characters who inhabit a world and act according to their mind, heart and history, and who can if not get along, at least interact with their companions. I don’t believe in needing to fill roles, or that RPGs are a “team game” but do understand and participate in teamwork! I hear PF2 is all about teamwork. Weirdly, as a devout atheist I have played a lot of priests, warpriests, clerics and inquisitors! I struggle with spellcasters, and loathe ranged types after a long standing IRL game we had as teenagers where the ranger “scouted around” a lot, and foolishly never died by fighting face to face like a proper meatbag.

I’m looking to learn more about PF2, and played a bit of Fall of Plaguestone. I’m currently running an IRL game in PF1 of the classic Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh series for my brother and our kids (aged 11-18) which has reached the third adventure in that series. For this game I imagine I will submit a Human Fighter, as I find the rules jar a lot from my knowledge of PF1 and I want to understand the basics, and I’m not allowed to make a Thaumaturge because djdust is a poop.

On that final note: I have played in one of djdust’s other campaigns which I can say was meticulously presented with a rich, multifaceted and personally entwined campaign intrespersed with memorable environmentally interesting combats. Those accepted into this game will be treated to a heartfelt story. And for anyone that wants to improve their play, I cannot recommend any more highly Painlords Being a better Doomed Hero cribbed and expanded upon from Doomed Hero’s guide. I played with Doomed Hero a few times and they always made a great story.

Hey djdust, you know who I am - your least favorite missing Harrow inquisitor.

I am looking to play an introductory PF2e game and have been for a while. Having said that, as you probably know, I’m pretty…grumpy…about…stuff…so there are some races I won’t want to play, so as the Harrow, lets consult fate.

Please no halfling, please no dwarf: 1d100 ⇒ 62 Phew!

Will be making a human thaumaturge.

[Edit] Except no thaumaturges. Ok then. A human. Something.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There were some articles on Half-Ogres in Dragon magazine in the ADnD days. While they barely touched on culture, and mostly presented mechanics, they made quite an impression on my 10 or so year old self. I’d like to see them return.

GM Inara wrote:
@Wandering Wastrel - I wouldn't mind at all if you had played it before.

Seeing as you say you are learning to GM PF2 and Wandering Wastrel has GM’ed this exact adventure it could be very handy indeed!

LandSwordBear wrote:
Sanityfaerie wrote:

Just a thread for tossing out silly ideas within a rough Pathfinder 2e scope. They don't have to be good ideas - just silly.

Halflings, gnomes and dwarves.

Hmmph. Seeing as snorves are getting their own AP, apparently so silly it’s…not silly. Pritty silly.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I’m not a part of PFS, and not particularly interested in joining, so I would bow out if that were the case. Which should make your choice a little easier! Let us know which way you go.

Albion, The Eye wrote:
And since I cannot edit my post, and only now read my PMs - thank you OSW for heads up on this one! :D

Any time! Just don’t begrudge me if I want to make a simple fighter also. ;p

I’m looking to get more familiar with PF2. I’d be up for short games that might develop into something longer, but I’m also fine if they don’t.

ThanKs for stepping up Axolotl - once I feel I have a grasp of the system I’d like to run a campaign, but that feels a ways off.

Played plenty of PF1 here on the boards, been playing versions of THAT game since the early 80’s.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Huh. My son plays DRG. I personally don’t get it, but love a good randomly generated dungeon. Interesting idea.

@GM Shadowlord - I am unfamiliar with Foundry, do players need to have their own account?

Albion, The Eye wrote:
Is there room for PF2e noob to apply? I promise I would bring something simple to the table, so as not to shoot myself on the foot - probably a Sword and Board Fighter trying to be a tank :)

Ha! I was just checking out your Lost Lands game and remembering our discussions on playing PF2. Had seen this recruitment and wondered why no-one had posted in it for a couple of days. I was going to post here with an almost verbatim request, PF2noob-wants-to-play, though I was going to try Thaumaturge. And here you are! Alas, I’m possibly still not quite ready…and there’s already a wolf here wanting to play a thaumaturge…

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@Water’sLethe: Can’t access the slides link. Can you present the info here, however condensed?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

And by technology as folks in this thread have postulated: magitech that shows magic expanding and evolving or as magic is used by Outsiders and on outer planets/galaxies; biotech grafts and beastguns; psitech enhancers and equipment; mundane steam- and clocktech; super wyrd dimension tech nobody really understands…; (riffing from the playable drow thread and general darklands skimming of the wiki) darklands tech that uses modified blightburn radiation or defunct aeon orb tech etc etc etc…

So my vote would be something in the vein of Book of the Dead or Dark Archives - part exploratory tome of the subject, part mini bestiary or adventures, and part equipment guide. With a shiny new class or bunch of ancestries/heritages.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nobunyaga wrote:

This one came to my mind while reading Book of the Dead. I wasn't actually that hyped about the undead archetypes, when they were announced, simply cause playing an undead character isn't something I'm particular interested in. Or at least I thought so, until I remembered Shraen, a city full of undead drow. I would really love a campaign centered in Shraen, but since my best chances for this campaign to happen are writing and running it myself, I actually haven't put much thought into a PC concept for this. But playing a drow vampire sorcerer or wizard would be cool!

Just read up on House Shraen and their exile and city. Some hardcore survivors there. Undead drow would definitely be a blast.

And also came across the bit where Aroden stole 5 suns/aeon orbs from the Darklands so humans could use them better than the xulgath et al? Huh. What a complete villain. A genocidal, superiorist prannit.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I haven’t kept up with the rumors/mentions of a newly established Sarkoris, but loving the old Sarkoris and Godcallers I guess I should read up on it….

[reads Pathfinder Wiki on Sarkoris]

Ah. Ok, I did forget the Kellid link, even after having played a Kellid of Sarkoris in a PbP. And now it is the Sarkoris scar. Yes, a beleaguered people with a history of extraplanar summoning should probably be a good candidate for moresuch!

My favourite peoples of Golarion are the Varisians and Shoanti (for their Thassilonian bondage genesis) and the Kellid. Or, as the thread title should have been: Why the entirety of Golarion will crumble beneath the bare feet of their Kellid overlords (and why the Godcallers shall rule the world)

2 people marked this as a favorite.
keftiu wrote:
One wonders why more monarchs and other leaders don’t look for backing from beyond Golarion. Even those who aren’t bound to immortals can thrive if they utilize other realms of existence, as we see with Oprak’s lucrative trade routes through the Plane of Earth - and likely, Kyonin’s portal network. If I’m sitting on a throne, I’m throwing the royal coffers at any binders and contract-writers I can find!

I would imagine it comes down to the tension between a ruler’s level of obligation to responsibility for their ruled (lands/people etc) and their sense of whether they can maintain/prolong it; then that again seen through a prism of pride or caution - pride in self-sustainability, and caution of losing ultimate control.

All compacts come with trade-offs and compromise and some rulers can’t or won’t abide them, or have constituents they are beholden to through influence (court) or economy (mercantilists) or power (mages/priesthoods/cultists) who won’t allow such aid (or even wish for other unwanted pacts).

But it would certainly be fun to see, for example, Azaersi bind her new hobdom to equally wily extra-planars… [EDIT - beyond the elemental contracts you mentioned - she already seems to be willing!] Seems like a good idea for a new thread keftiu - “which rulers would you like to see make extraplanar pacts with who and why?”

1 to 50 of 599 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>