Dice

Quadstriker's page

RPG Superstar 9 Season Star Voter. Organized Play Member. 305 posts. 4 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 12 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 305 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

TOZ wrote:
This crew was hard earned, fought for with sweat and tears. Team Awesome stands as one, though we may be apart.

It should be noted that standing is not required. You can lounge, recline, or even lie down at your discretion. Also shoes, shirts, bras, and socks are optional.

Sovereign Court

I'd like to see the GM or Con Organizer given the choice to call for "Pregens only" or "BYOC" so that the game can be tailored to what would be most appropriate for the setting.

Sovereign Court

You can either say his name 3 times while staring crosseyed into a floor length mirror, or start a discussion about esoteric anime.

At least those are the two ways I summon the TOZ.

Sovereign Court

Large Animal Companions + PFS = Ugh.

The grid is crowded enough as it is.

Just my opinion of course.

Sovereign Court

"Best of all, Starfinder is designed to integrate easily with the Pathfinder roleplaying game, meaning your power-armored marine can still go toe to toe with orcs and dragons."

This is the line that gives me the most dread. It makes me concerned that they're going to go through a lot of effort and expense to try and cram more stuff into the shell of 3rd edition rules and I'm worried in the end it will just be Pathfinder in Space.

I wish they'd start work on something completely new. Sci Fi RPG? Wow yes! Easily integrated with Pathfinder? Uh oh.

Sovereign Court

Please do not add bloat to core.

Sovereign Court

Yeah we all know the system is chok full of bad equipment, feats, traits, and other choices. It's called book padding. Gotta fill space. Publish or die.

Sovereign Court

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

Like Andrew, I have 20+ characters and only one character had the jingasa. He now has a dusty rose prism ioun stone, meaning his AC remains the same.

Hey I like the way you think.

Sovereign Court

I like how they nerfed Jingasa into the ground and kept the price the same. lulz.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I wavered back and forth between making a couple pun jokes here or relating some anecdotes about players getting sloshed during the game and the antics that ensued, but a certain crowd would probably take them too seriously.

Sovereign Court

You want a special mode?

Make a special group.

Tada!

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Amanda Plageman wrote:
I just don't understand why the 90% is so devoted to keeping the 10% from getting what they want, when what they want doesn't impact the 90% in any way.

Many of us would strongly disagree with that.

Sovereign Court

No thanks.

Sovereign Court

I want a 30 page thread on the DC to jump over a 6 inch piece of bacon.

And then a 20 page thread about whether you can remember the bacon you may or may not have eaten last session.

And then a 10 page one about being able to recognize if this piece of bacon is the same type of bacon I had 3 sessions ago without a Knowledge: White Meat roll.

Sovereign Court

Page 36:

Tracking Prestige Points is fairly simple;
it requires you to read over the success conditions and
faction missions entries in the back of the scenario before
play, hand out the faction mission letters after reading out
the Getting Started text at the beginning of the scenario,
and then record whether or not the PCs accomplish these
missions during the scenario.

This needs to be changed.

Sovereign Court

N N 959 wrote:
Just out of curiosity, where is it written (RAW) that characters in PFS don't retain monster knowledge from scenario to scenario? Yes, I know there is that boon from 2014, but is it actually written that characters cannot retain knowledge?

You're just going to get a mix of "If it doesn't say you can remember things, you can't" and "omg you can't possibly recognize that it's the same type of creature you've seen before" from a certain crowd.

Sovereign Court

rknop wrote:
I may have to stop reading the forums altogether if I want to continue to have the motivation to keep playing in PFS.

Just think of them as a great source of comedy and you can laugh about it with the people you game with. "Get a load of this one..."

Sovereign Court

Apparently.

Sovereign Court

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm glad our local GMs and players use common sense to resolve such complex questions as "Can I remember what I did last week?"

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Stephen Ross wrote:

So if PCs negotiate a surrender you should award them full gold?

What about gold found from items on the opponents and gold found via searches (that they now cannot do)?

p35. Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide

"If, for example, your
players manage to roleplay their way through a combat and
successfully accomplish the goal of that encounter without
killing the antagonist, give the PCs the same reward they
would have gained had they defeated their opponent in
combat. If that scene specifically calls for the PCs to receive
gold piece rewards based on the gear collected from the
defeated combatants, instead allow the PCs to find a chest
of gold (or something similar) that gives them the same
rewards."

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
rknop wrote:


The Pathfinder rules set has become unwieldy. I wish they had stopped publishing core rules books other than bestiaries and codexes after Ultimate Campaign (which I liked), instead focusing on adventures and setting. Too many classes. Too many feats. Too many caveats that you have to know if you want to play the full system (e.g. in PFS).

I like the opportunities for play that PFS affords me, and the people I've met in it and play with in it. It's a well run OP campaign. I hate to give it up. But with each release (ACG, OA, now UI) I'm finding that the rules system is increasingly not the one I liked a few years ago, and the overwhelming growth is really turning me off.

Yeah that's where I'm at too. It's spiraled out of control since they dumped so many new classes in a 12 month period into the game (ACG, Occult) and I'm tired of not having a clue what anyone else at the table can do in a pickup game. It's like they actively want to discourage people from GMing with all this. Well it worked. I'll run a CORE game once in awhile and fortunately I have a home game.

Sovereign Court

Fromper wrote:

What's everyone got against Lini? I've actually seen a newbie have a great time and save the party playing her.

Pet rules. I just try and keep the game as simple as possible for a new player.

Sovereign Court

New player?

Core only.

And if I can hide the druid sheet, I will.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Highlights will remain up after the game as I understand it.

Session highlights are up.

If you have gamed, this has happened to you.
www.twitch.tv/quadstriker/v/55695528

Clockwise!
www.twitch.tv/quadstriker/v/55696203

One for Scooby!
www.twitch.tv/quadstriker/v/55696544

Dig Dig Dig!
www.twitch.tv/quadstriker/v/55697122

Delma and Fread have words
www.twitch.tv/quadstriker/v/55697979

Scooby Doo, where are you?
www.twitch.tv/quadstriker/v/55698184

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
And now is a good stopping point, so we can stop wasting peoples time.

For now!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
They will hopefully not remove our clothes for the highlights.
oh no its totally okay if they do!

Duly noted.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Highlights will remain up after the game as I understand it.

Probably late tonight as I remember when funny stuff happens and find it in the video later.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

Oh, so SHE is TOZ+1? Or TOZ's+1? Or The 1+TOZ?

You need to have her post to define this point.

==Aelryinth

I promise you that Mrs. TOZ confers much more than a +1 bonus.

Sovereign Court

To be honest, if I knew ahead of time that the GM had no experience playing PFS (or another similar style living-campaign), I wouldn't sign up.

Sovereign Court

I was thrilled just to have a mini on display with such a wide show of talent. I don't even have the words to describe being recognized as a prize winner!

Thank you to Tonya and all those involved at Paizo for putting the competition together, and a big congratulations to everyone who put a mini on display for the community!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The only thing that used to bug me about no replay is when a bad GM made a mess of a scenario and the experience sucked, with no chance to really get anything out of it. One chance. Gone.

Now with Core, there's another chance! So I'm all good with the current status quo.

The term "geek sudoku" though, that's a good one.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

They'd probably frown on the way I'd organize the problem player containment table.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just once during mustering I'd like to see a Venture Officer announce the following:

"Okay, everyone playing a character won't help in combat until XYZ happens during a full moon on an odd numbered day because you're a special snowflake and that's what your character would DOOOOOOOOO... you're all at this table."

Sovereign Court

Sensible rulings are sensible.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
Look to it's coming, at first blog, on the fifth day.

I'm hoping we get clarification on the strange "handing a tablet to the GM to satisfy additional resources and show them rules is okay, but handing it to them to show your character sheet isn't" dichotomy.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can we have the obvious "no you can't blanket ban everyone using herolab" ruling now?

Sovereign Court

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


If you're at a PFS table, you should be *playing Pathfinder*.

Not trying to beat the 'top score' on 'Candy Crush'.

I'd consider that 'being a jerk' if I was a GM, as it disrupts the table and it's insulting not only one's fellow players but also me as a GM, who is volunteering time to run the scenario.

This I can agree with. I find it totally disrespectful.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm just hopeful that the new ruling takes into account the current contradiction that Brock put into place by allowing a tablet of official pdfs to be fine to hand to a GM to read up on the rules for your character, but handing it to the GM as a character sheet? OMG DEVICE WORTH HUNDREDS OF DOLLARZZZZ WAT IF DROP?

Sovereign Court

Nefreet wrote:
For the record, I also ban those hexagonal dice trays at my tables.

Now I'm having a hard time believing this isn't all an elaborate joke.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Excited to be included in the contest!

Mortimer Raven's profile page is available here.

I had no painting experience until I shattered my heel last march while playing frisbee golf (a long story). After surgery, I was left unable to stand or walk for two months. I knew that if I just sat around watching TV and playing videogames I would feel miserable about myself, so I decided learning to paint minis would give me something positive to do. I'm very happy with the way Mortimer turned out and he's a lot of fun to play.

Thanks for your consideration.

Sovereign Court

Glad it's not legal.

Sovereign Court

G-Zeus wrote:
you should both have a talk with them about how to better optimize their characters as well as build the best/ most optimised character you can

As posted in the thread already, members of the lodge have tried teaching them how to play better.

It went nowhere and was dismissed with poor attitude.

Sovereign Court

TOZ wrote:


Have you sent this rant to the people responsible, so that they know there is a problem and how they can improve?

You're the responsible one. And I BLAME YOU!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nohwear wrote:


If I am understanding you right, you seem to be saying that unless the game store cooperates, this lodge is domed? I mean, what do you do if players are so disruptive that other people stop showing up? Is there really nothing that can be done unless things actually get bad enough to...

Well, it's the store owner's ultimate right to allow someone to be there or not. Speaking with the ownership and letting them know what's going on, why it's a problem, and the steps you want to take to correct them seems to be the natural steps.

If the ownership opposes you on the issues, yeah, you're going to have to find somewhere else to take the games or watch it whither and die.

Sovereign Court

Yes please. Let us know how it goes.

Sovereign Court

Bob Jonquet wrote:
It sounds like adequate attempts to talk to and train the players have been made with no success. It's time to cut them loose for the health of the community
What everyone who has stopped attending this gameday is thinking wrote:


"Bad gaming is worse than no gaming."

Before the gameday drops to 0 tables you have to act. Bexlee made it sound like diplomacy has been tried and failed.

The organizer or officer should approach them in private before the start of the next game with the last chance ("here's the standards of behavior everyone is expected to abide by, yada yada") and then be ready to wish them best of luck on their future endeavors when they don't follow them.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You're in a tough spot. I won't mince words here.

From your OP, it sounds like they're a lost cause and them attending game days will only be a negative for the group from this point forward.

Once people are choosing to stay home rather than show up and chance playing with them, severe damage has already been done.

The process of taking these players by the hand, convincing them that what they are currently doing isn't up to par, and showing them step by step how to improve, would take a lot of time. A *lot* of time. And even then the chances of success are minimal. These aren't new players to the gaming world. These are people who have done things a certain way for years, and my experience with the elderly is that they don't learn/change too quickly, if at all, ever. Just linking them to an internet guide and thinking that will help at all will be completely useless.

Even *if* someone did all that, you'd then have to convince others to please come back, I promise they're getting a bit better, they're not all that awful I swear! I wouldn't buy that story and I doubt others will.

Good luck with this spot. It sucks.

Sovereign Court

Andrew Christian wrote:


3) I believe you only get the boon when you reach the level of the adventure.

Correct, via pg. 21 of the Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide. You also get no downtime for dayjob rolls, etc.

Page 37 lists the gold reward rules.
"If the player is playing a non-1st-level
pregenerated character, he may choose instead to apply
this Chronicle sheet to a 1st-level character by reducing
this value to 500 gp (or 250 gp for the slow advancement
track)."

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Many people I know feel Core is a great addition and encourages new players and GMs. That's okay, right?

Sovereign Court

I for one welcome our new TOZ overlords.

1 to 50 of 305 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>