Sajan

ShinHakkaider's page

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber. 1,759 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 533 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Sean Sapp wrote:


But you aren’t making 3 different 576 page books (or 720 page). You are creating 3 different stat blocks (which you are essentially doing anyways due to the besitiearies) with most if not all of the descriptive text the same. You are doing more layout for sure. I am a 5E player/DM that buys a fair amount of Pathfinder modules and converts them but this excuse doesn’t pass the smell test. I have seen many Kickstarters that produce books for multiple editions and you are not even doing the 5E conversion. I get that it is a lot of work but charging me $115 for the $80 I want is not a good business plan or test of what the demand is for 5E products.

As part of my job I provide tech support for clients who do layout and design for an mechanical engineering magazine. For you to downplay how a few changes can throw off the exisiting layout and having seen first hand the gymnastics that come into play to sort those issues out to still create a viable publication? Again, I've seen the work that goes into the design and layout of a publication/magazing/document.

I have a fair amount of FFG products, before I stopped supporting them as a company, and while not bashing thier content their presentation doenst even come close to what we expect from Paizo. I think the words "no-frills" comes to mind.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Saw this at a screening last week and next to Spider-Man 2 it's EASILY my FAVORITE Spider-Man movie.

I would watch a movie about ANY of these characters, Spider-Gwen, jaded Peter Parker, Spider-Man Noir (who despite his deadpan delivery generates quite a few laughs), Penni Parker and Spider-Ham. FRIGGING SPIDER-HAM. There's HUGE fight near the end of the movie where SPIDER-HAM just HANDLES (hilariously) one of the bad guys. I was smiling so hard during this movie that my face hurt. This is a heartfelt, at times somber and mostly FUN Spider-man movie and I'm here for this. Seeing it again this weekend.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'm not saddened by his passing at all. There's a quote of his floating around somewhere basically to paraphrase: He was saying that he'd never retire. Most people retire to relax or to do something that they always wanted to do. HE WAS ALREADY DOING THAT, so why would he retire?

I'd like to think that he was doing what he loved right up until the moment he passed.

That should be an inspiration for all of us. He lived a full life doing what he wanted and left a MASSIVE cultural imprint. He's left a piece of himself EVERYWHERE. Hell, if I'm able to pull off a fraction of what he did I'd call that a WIN.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
DeathQuaker wrote:
And because I am a monster... I would give all cats thumbs.

MY GOD. You ARE a MONSTER.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'd wipe humanity from the face of the earth.

Humans are AWFUL and the number of indifferent, callous and downright cruel people waaaaaaay outnumber the half decent or even good people. I'd wipe the entire memory, existence of humanity so that nothing that we created would exist. Any aliens coming to Earth afterward would see no trace of our cultures, civilization, ANYTHING.

So...*SNAP*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I chose:

We're not switching (tried the playtest and don't like the direction, feel 1e is the perfect game, etc).

There are things I like about PF 2.0 like the action economy and some of the way that characters are built with more than average hit points. But there are some things that I don't particularly care for (almost everything else). I noticed that the combat was actually a little faster during what parts of the playtest we used but it just failed to excite our group.

I've said all of this over and over again but I'll repeat it here. I have enough Pathfinder 1E (*PASTFINDER as one of my players calls it) materials to run games until my death bed. If I can tweak things to include the 2.0 action economy and things like Legendary actions from 5E? Then I'd be close to having a game I'd be even more interested in playing and running.

I forgot I also like the way monsters are built in PF 2.0. I've been playing fast and loose with monster modification since 3.5 so I have a pretty good handle on modifying monsters (changing abilities, slapping PC Class abilities on them, spells, etc).

Unless PF 2.0 changes SIGNIFICANTLY I really wont be switching over.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

Why should a player trust a GM if the GM won’t trust the player?

Why should a GM trust a player if a player won't trust the GM?

See, I can do that too!

Trust isn't a one-way street. It's a two-way street. IT GOES BOTH WAYS.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Saleem Halabi wrote:
Witch of Miracles wrote:
And the default, from a rules perspective, should always be for the GM to not trust the party not to metagame.
I... what?!? How can you play with people if you don't trust them? This line of thinking literally makes no sense to me.

I think that a more honest question for this thread (and not you specifically as I understand what YOU are saying) is: Why is the trust only demanded in ONE direction (players HAVE to be able to trust the GM. Otherwise, the implication is that the GM is BAD) and not the other (The expectation of the players not to cheat or metagame)?

Because trust should swing both ways here.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
Claxon wrote:

Nope, I like it.

Those checks should be secret and players shouldn't know the results.

Trust your GM to play fairly. If you don't, you should probably find a new GM.

What if Game Masters trusted their players rather than strictly enforcing players blindly trusting their Game Masters?

Maybe it's because players, in general, have proven themselves to be an utterly untrustworthy and inconsiderate bunch?

I've had bad GM's and YES a Bad GM is THE WORST. But I've had waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more bad players in my gaming lifetime. Both as a GM and sitting at a table as a player WITH awful players.

Players are more than often willing to ignore rules when it doesn't benefit them and call out those same rules vs. the GM when it comes to NPC's and Monsters. Players will metagame the hell out of things to the point where under any other observation it would break immersion but as long as the players get their advantage IT'S FINE.

All that being said, the GM should let the players know that this is how crafting/stealth/perception/ secret rolls are going to work at the table. So the players can make a choice if they want to play that way or not. I know that that isn't feasible under Society play, so I kinda get people being upset by it.

There are two reasons why Society Play is a no go and always will be a no go for me. The inability to have rule flexibility and the garbage players who might show up at a table.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'm also not that impressed with this new edition but I'm also understanding that the range of bonuses seem to be smaller deliberately so I'm not going to judge until I've actually PLAYED the game hence the playtest.

It took me over a little over an hour to make a 1st level human barbarian using the rulebook. I wasn't even certain that I'd calculated everything correctly.

Later that evening (even though I said that I never would) tried Hero Lab Online to make that same character and had it done in a little under 20 min and only becasue I was unfamiliar with the interface.

I'm going make a few more characters "by hand" now that I kinda know to go A(ncestry)-B (ackground)-C (lass). I know that I learn through repetition and growing familiarity. I see some of the responses here and while some of the gripes seem legit and would go toward possibly making the game better I've also learned to ignore the hyperbole.

I don't think the game as it stands now is the garbage fire that some people here are making it out to be. I'll reserve my judgment until after I've played it.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
CrystalSeas wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

And, yet, you still claim all this knowledge about the inner workings of Paizo but acknowledge you are not an employee.

Sorry, but I feel like you are putting words in their mouths.

If I post direct quotes from Paizo staff, with links to their post, that is in no way "putting words in their mouths."

It is them writing, for everyone to see, what they are doing.

For example, when asked when the last PF1 materials will be released,Lisa Stevens, CEO of Paizo said

Lisa Stevens wrote:
July 2019

When asked how long the rulebooks would stay in print, she said,

Quote:
If you read the FAQ, you will notice that we plan to keep Pathfinder 1st edition in print through our pocket editions until there is no longer enough sales to justify them. If they last another ten year, then cool! No need for a 3PP. We are already going to do it.
You may not believe it when the owner of the company says they're not publishing anything for PF1 after July 2019, but I do.

CrystalSeas, he's not interested in hearing anything counter to how he thinks things should be unless it's from Paizo themselves. He feels that he's owed an explanation as to why things aren't being done the way that he wants them done.

He talks about having an opinion and that's fine. But there's such a thing as having an INFORMED opinion which he clearly does not have and quite frankly isn't interested in listening to. I'm not going to post in this thread anymore because there is nothing even remotely constructive to be gained here.

I think if there is any further support for PF1 to be had it's with a 3rd Party publisher who can put out quality products. He's not interested in that. Paizo is supporting Starfinder AND a pending new edition. Where is the manpower coming from to continue to support 1E? Where is the money coming from to pay these people to support 1E? He also has no idea of the manpower and the amount of time that goes into creating just ONE hardcover book and how far ahead in advance that needs to start.

I've been listening to publishers, designers, and developers for over to a decade on how this particular business works and what goes into it. I listen to them because THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK. It doesn't take a lot of effort to find where developers, designers, and publishers are saying the same things that are being put forth here. and a fair amount of what we're saying is COMMON SENSE.

but like I said, he's not here to hear any of that. He just wants what he wants. And really you cant have a productive conversation with a person like that so...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
Phntm888 wrote:

Let's look at this another way. You think Paizo should continue developing PF1 products during the launch of PF2 - that it would help both products sell better. So, let's consider what that entails.

** spoiler omitted **...

I aporeciate all the effort to make estimates, but it's a lot of supposing about their financials.

You mean the way youre supposing that Paizo continuing to develop for 1E will be better for their financial situation in the long run? You mean THAT kind of supposing?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Phntm888 wrote:

Let's look at this another way. You think Paizo should continue developing PF1 products during the launch of PF2 - that it would help both products sell better. So, let's consider what that entails.

** spoiler omitted **...

I find it particularly telling that Mark the Wise and Powerful hasn't addressed or responded to this post yet.

I think there have been several pretty solid arguments posted here as to why Paizo isnt going to continue to support PF1 over developing for PF2 and SF.

I'm not against more PF1 material. But at this point, it's probably going to come from a third party source. And that's if that 3rd party source isnt jumping on the 2E bandwagon. maybe a smaller company with freelancers will be able to pull off producing for both.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
And getting easily picked up by casual players is extremely important these days, because RPGs are losing full time to board games due to the issue of high entry bar.

THIS.

I have an easier time introducing normals to a game of SUPER DUNGEON EXPLORE or ZOMBICIDE than an RPG.

And I LOVE RPG's but the barrier to entry is high because most people don't have a concept of what an RPG is or how it's supposed to work. Again CRITICAL ROLE has gone a LONG WAY into lowering that barrier but we need MORE things like that to show people "Hey this is what this looks like" and "No it really isnt that hard to start".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
Though, I've put about $800+ into PF1 and I'll be focused on getting my money's worth out of that.

*Blinks*

*Looks over at his THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS of Pathfinder books*

*LAUGHS HYSTERICALLY*

I bought mostly PDF files. I thought about people who bought the hard back versions ... How do those of you who did feel about how Paizo is preserving your investiment?

What investment? I bought the books because I enjoyed the game and I wanted to support the company. I can STILL play the game. In fact, I still plan on running a PF1 game right alongside any other game that I run. Whether it be D&D, PF2 , CHAMPIONS, or whatever. The very idea that you won't be able to find anyone to play in a PF1 game after PF2 comes out is RIDICULOUS. The pool of players may shrink but if there are people out there running AD&D or 4E or 3.5? There will still be a pool of players running PF1.

I was HERE during the transition from 3.5 to 4E. People played 4E. But those of us who didn't care for it still played 3.5. Paizo SUPPORTED 3.5 until they released Pathfinder. The 1st 4 Paizo AP's (Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne, Second Darkness and Legacy of Fire) were 3.5 well into 4E's lifespan.
Paizo is doing one better than WOTC did during that time, They are keeping the previous version on their game IN PRINT.

There almost 10 years of development and official material not to mention a metric assload of 3rd party material for PF1. To expect Paizo to continue development on a system that had it's issues (as all systems do) while rolling out a new system is unrealistic.

If you want support for PF1 so badly and if you think the demand is out there for it start your own imprint and start hiring freelancers to develop material.

If you cant do that, then ORGANIZE. Try to find like-minded individuals who will spread the gospel and run games and introduce people to the system that you love.

But I think the ship for new PF1 material has salled. I know that I personally have enough PF1 material to run games for the next few DECADE or so. The 1st 17 AP's I have in hardcopy (and I plan on picking up Return of the Runelords and Tyrant's Grasp), RAPPAN ATHUK in hardcover, THE SLUMBERING TSAR in hardcover, every Pathfinder RPG Hardcover, a bunch of assorted Campaign setting, players companions and modules. And then there's the 3.5 AP's like AGE OF WORMS and SAVAGE TIDE that can be converted over.

Nah, I'm GOOD for PF1 material...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Why not rename Pathfinder something?

What that is would take some thought -- but it should immediately draw out vivid mental images and be thought provoking. Dungeons &
Dragons is thought provoking. Pathfinder is not. There's the major advantage -- D&D has a great, vivid name. Even though the art work is leaps and bounds much better in Pathfinder, it just isn't enough to recover. Pathfinder should be on top.

Wait...your big suggestion is the product, that at one time was beating DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS in sales and was for a long time the second highest selling TTRPG in the market and that has existed IN that market for almost a decade: CHANGE IT'S NAME.

THAT'S your idea.

OK.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Furdinand wrote:

Best of luck, Crystal! War for the Crown is the best AP so far.

I do feel like this is part of the worrying trend of forward-thinking creatives, who tried to expand what Pathfinder and TTRPGs can be, leaving Paizo in the last few years.

I've been thinking the same thing but have been kinda hesitant to bring it up. Sean KR, Wes, Sutter, Jessica Price, and now Crystal. Sean has been gone for at least 3 years(?) but didnt Wes, Sutter and Jessica leave just last year?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'm just on episode 11 and after episode 10 all I can say is that they need to produce a POWER MAN and IRON FIST series like NOW.
Episode 10 was so much fun to watch, especially the easy camaraderie between Danny and Luke.

So far I'm liking this season of Luke Cage far better than the first. It's more cohesive and the performances are uniformly great especially Simone Missick, Alfrie Woodard, and the late Reg E Cathey. Even Finn Jones is growing on me as Danny Rand. I dont think that this season suffers from the slump that the Marvel/Netflix shows and am looking forward to Daredevil S3 if it's just as smooth as this one.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Saw INCREDIBLES 2 lat night with my son. I didn't enjoy it as much as I did the first one and it's nowhere as good as the first movie. That being said it IS a good and very enjoyable sequel. I felt that the first half was a little casually paced but there's a certain point in the movie where it kicks into high gear and it gets GOOD. Elastigirl is pretty much the lead character in this. Swap Helen and Bob's roles from the first movie and you basically get THIS movie. Jack Jack is the MVP.

I'm definitely buying this on Bluray and I kinda want to see it again.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


I'd humbly submit that Frank Castle was intended as an anti-hero, not a villain.

However, making them 'socially acceptable' is where it starts getting a bit trashy.

Castle made no bones about his War.

I'll be the first to admit that my extreme dislike for the character (and even MORE so for his fandom) colors my perception of him. I think that Frank is interesting in VERY small doses. PUNISHER: BORN is a GREAT Frank Castle story. As is his appearance in Brubaker's run on DAREDEVIL.

But for the most part, I'm not a fan of the character. One of the few characters if where I see he's guest starring in a book I'm less likely to read the book. For me that's pretty rare.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

For me Venom ONLY worked when they were a straight-up antagonist for Spider-Man. I loved those first few appearances of Venom/Eddie Brock in AMAZING SPIDER-MAN. I absolutely HATE what Marvel started doing in the 90's by taking their best villains and trying to turn them into sympathetic "anti-heroes" which was GARBAGE.

Just like the Frank Castle, Venom is a VILLAIN re-skinned to be a hero and it annoys the ever-loving crap out of me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Sorry to hear about your mom and I completely understand about not having the energy. You'll be missed Sissyl.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

So I just got back from seeing SOLO and I have to say I enjoyed it a bit more than I thought I would. I thought the scale was right, the stakes were right and the performances were solid. A little taken aback but a something near the end but I recovered quickly and had to smile.

Not the best Star Wars movie but pretty enjoyable.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Selene Spires wrote:
Hama wrote:
Selene Spires wrote:

Saw it last night it was a fun space heist movie. I don't get the hate...or the empty theater. It is so much better than Last Jedi...great action...a storyline that makes sense...some surprises...etc.

My favorite things were...

** spoiler omitted **

Because most people choose to boycott the film hoping it will flop so that Disney removes that Kennedy woman from the chair she's occupying currently and put someoene competent in her place, preferably one without a SJW agenda to push on the audiences.
Yeah...stupid reason there. As this movie really did not have a SJW agenda being pushed...sadly it is their lost.

Basically, the movie's theme of "the Force is for EVERYONE" echoes the filmmakers' idea that "Star Wars is for EVERYONE" has upset the fanboys so much that they call that Social Justice Warring. Which is pretty telling since if everyone can love Star Wars they should be able to see themselves in that universe. I mean every form of alien and droid is FINE but a woman or a person of color as a lead character? YOU"VE GONE TOO FAR KENNEDY!!!

Also, the use of SJW in a conversation is usually an indicator that I probably shouldn't be engaging in conversation with that person...


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Hama wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
As someone who liked TFA and LOVES TLJ
Wow, you're in a vast minority

I’m absolutely fine with being in that minority.

I haven’t met anyone in real space who has the pure vitriol for TLJ that people online seem to. I’ve met people who have issues with the movie (as much as I love the movie I have issues with it as well) but not the “Kathleen Kennedy and Rian Johnson should never touch the franchise again” crazies that I see in online spaces. It’s fine not to like a movie, there are plenty that I don’t particularly care for. I simply don’t revisit those films or talk about them. The nutbags who start petitions to remove movies from canon or to have a director blacklisted from working on films again need to be ignored and never mentioned in the same sentence with rational fans. Those people aren’t fans (yes I know “fan” is short of fanatic but to the millions of others who don’t act in such a childish and embarrassing manner, they aren’t real fans?) they’re entitled manbabies who claim ownership in something that is not solely theirs.

TLJ has its issues, then again so does Empire (and I LOVE Empire). Definitely not the type of issues that warrant the online reaction that it’s gotten.

Also I’m looking at the box office and while I’m willing to admit that a portion of the people who saw the movie may not have liked it, you don’t make that kind of money off of single viewings of a film. People (like myself) sat through multiple veiwings of that movie. So I kinda don’t think that I’m really in the minority at all...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

As someone who liked TFA and LOVES TLJ and am excited about Star Wars in general (I didn't expect a whole lot from Rogue One but wound up really enjoying that one), I find my ambivalence toward this SOLO movie odd. It just doesn't really spark any real excitement for me? I liked the second trailer but the excitement cooled for me considerably.

To be fair the two movies that I'm most looking forward to now that I've seen INFINITY WAR three times are THE INCREDIBLES 2 and MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - FALLOUT.

There are a couple of smaller genre films that I'm looking forward to (UPGRADE and THE FIRST PURGE) and maybe ANT-MAN and the WASP and JURASSIC WORLD: FALLEN KINGDOM.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Black Dougal wrote:
Hama wrote:
It's out in my country. People say it's pretty meh. A bad space western.
Didn't we already have that? It was called Serenity. But I don't recall it being that bad.

SERENITY wasn't bad but it wasn't exactly great either. My favorite thing about Serenity is THE OPERATIVE and how Mal solves the problem of defeating him. Otherwise? as a movie? It's okay.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Saw it Saturday morning. I'm not a fan of the character in the comics but was surprised by how much I liked the first movie. This is more of the same except less focused and a bit long-winded (especially near the end). I liked it less than the first one and a lot of the jokes fell flat for me.

The mid-credit scene, however, was easily the best part of the movie (next to Domino and her luck power).

"You're Welcome Canada..."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

GAH. I had no intention of moving over to PF2. But I LOVE these smaller stat blocks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
DeathQuaker wrote:
Apropos of nothing, has anyone else had "The Rubberband Man" in their head for the rest of the weekend?

WOW. I seriously thought that I was the only one...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Saw this last night. I've seen a lot of movies in movie theaters, I dont think I've ever heard a reaction from an audience like I did at the end of this movie. Stunned silence and then sounds of disbelief.

I swear, no BS there was some guy SOBBING behind me during one part near the end.

This movie was pretty much everything that I wanted in a GIANT Superhero crossover movie. This is filmmaking done on a truly EPIC scale. Movies like this are why I still go to the movies in the first place but there are still enough emotional stakes here where youre legitimately concerned about the heroes. And with good reason. As weak of a villain as Ultron was in AGE OF ULTRON? Thanos is the EXACT opposite. He's a LEGIT threat and it's established how legit of a threat he is EARLY.

BigNorseWolf is absolutley right. DO NOT get the large soda. The pacing of this movie feels RELENTLESS. You think there's a time where you can run out and go to the bathroom and you'll miss something. The line for the men's room after this movie was RIDICULOUS.

Is the movie perfect? No. But the issues I have with it are petty and I understand why certain things are the way that they are because I understand how movies are made. I'm seeing it again this afternoon with my mom and my sister. It's a good thing I saw it alone last night because I don't know how my mom would respond to me dropping the F-bomb (as in WTF?!?!) as many times as I did during the course of this movie. Then again knowing my mom she would understand and have a few choice words of her own. I honestly don't know how she's going to take this movie. My sister is more than likely going to be sobbing her way through the latter half of it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Kohl McClash wrote:
The 5e PHB is still selling over a thousand copies a day on Amazon, 3.5 years after initial release....now that's amazing! I'm doubtful that even when PF2 comes out that it can overtake such a huge lead.

It might. At that point, 5E will be at least 6 years into it's lifecycle so it might be on the downswing. ON the other hand, if shows like CRITICAL ROLE and other streaming games continue to be as popular as they are using 5E? You're right Pathfinder won't have a chance to pass it all unless it does some streaming promotion of it's own.

I had no intention of running 5E at all until I started listening to the Critical Role podcast and was able to follow what going on rule wise without owning any of the books for reference. When I found out that Tales of the Yawning Portal collected a bunch of older adventures converted to 5E (including Tomb of Horrors, Against the Giants and White Plume Mountain) I ordered my 5E books off of Amazon and proceeded to set up to start my "Classics Campaign" for this summer.

I'll still be running Pathfinder but for people who haven't played RPG's before I'll be using 5E.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Also I'm bracing myself for Cap's demise and if he goes I'm probably still going to be weeping like a small child. He's my favorite MCU character and as long as he goes out like the hero he is I guess that I'll be alright.

*NO I REALLY WONT*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'm still trying to understand why Paizo owes us conversion templates/documents to convert PF2 stuff to PF 1 stuff. There's literally almost 10 years of PF1 stuff and that's not enough?

I don't want to begrudge other people getting and having their new shiny thing fully supported. Much like I got Pathfinder 1 shiny and fully supported all those years ago.

And the idea that PF should devote resources from producing PF2 stuff to keep producing PF1 stuff is...well "delusional" isnt a word I like to throw around as it comes across as insulting so I'll just say maybe...not based in any sort of practical reality?

And this is coming from someone who has no intention of moving to PF2. It's not that I don't like the system (haven't SEEN the system yet and will make an informed decision when I get my hands on the playtest) it's just that I literally have a complete system with something like 22 -24 (by the end of the run) AP's and countless other Pathfinder adventures not to mention the 3.5 adventures that were produced INCLUDING AGE OF WORMS and SAVAGE TIDE.

Basically even though I'm not moving to PF2 I'm fine with other people getting what they want because I'm not a selfish entitled twit.

EDIT: and I want to be clear, I'm not calling anyone HERE a selfish entitled twit. I'm saying the behavior can be perceived as such and I'M not that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I am a member of the community, and I’m good with a new edition.

I'll do you one better.

I am a member of the community and I'm good with a new edition EVEN THOUGH I won't BE MOVING TO IT.

I literally have THOUSANDS of dollars and almost 10 years worth of books and support for the system of my choice and I'm going to stand here and tell other people "NO you cant have this new thing because I still want this other thing?"

Yeah...NOPE.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I've already stated that while I'll be purchasing that Playtest books, I'll be sticking with P1 for the forseeable future. I simply have too much invested in P1 and at this point it's a completed system that has pretty much everything that I need. I own the 1st 17AP's as well as RAPPAN ATHUK and THE SLUMBERING TSAR so I'm not at a loss for material.

I'm not looking to rebuy all of the same books all over again just to have to ditch them again in another 10 years. I've already done that several times in my life, willingly I might add. This time is different so I'm dancing with the one that brought me...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Steve Geddes wrote:
MR. H wrote:
Matrix Dragon wrote:
I think the problem is that when you don't word something kindly, you are implying that you don't have any respect for the person you are talking to. That's the key difference between well worded constrictive criticism and simply going out and calling someone's work trash and giving them a list of fixes. If Paizo ends up thinking that you don't respect them, then it becomes less likely they'll pay attention to you during the playtest.

You are conflating talking to a person unkindly and talking about an idea/work unkindly.

If people unkindly talking about an idea you had, makes you feel like they don't respect you, then I think that is a line of thinking to avoid.

This is a private venue. The rules here are you have to speak kindly - whether it’s a person or an idea a person had that you’re critiquing. This isn’t a public forum protected by freedom of speech/expression. There are rules.

Posters should speak kindly. It isn’t hard.

AGREED. Yet apparently, it's harder for some than it is for others.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I just want to be clear here: I'll be buying the playtest because I want to see what changes they've made and possibly try them out with my group IN ACTUAL PLAY and not theory craft before I declare AWESOME or SUCK.

Either way I won't be moving to 2E as ruleset nor will I probably be supporting it. It's a financial issue for me. I have over $4K of Pathfinder books that I can still use. I don't (nor will I ever) do society play so it'll just be a curated group of players that I play with.

Still the level of anxiety and venom I see on these boards and knife sharpening I see on other boards is ASTOUNDING. It's like the boards are filled with petulant 13-year-old boys with impulse control issues (is that redundant?). An edition change is imminent and we've learned ABSOLUTELY NOTHING from the last one 10 years ago and it's meltdown city all over again?

Man, I've said this for a long time. I LOVE my hobbies but the fandom? Not so much...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
ProximaC wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:

I'm sorry DeathQuaker but all this says about you is that you are a rational, empathic human being first and NOT a borderline sociopath.

Unfortunately, you seem to be an outlier when it comes to the TTRPG community so...

Nah, it's just that, like in all things, the audible minority shapes the perception of a group, no matter how much smaller than the silent minority is.

Personally, I think it's wisest to reserve judgement for now. The details we have are so miniscule, and so devoid of context, that misinterpretation is easy. There'll be time for pitchforks later once we've seen the whole picture in all its playtest glory.

(Incidentally, I'd like to elect DeathQuaker as my spokesperson. I don't know how, but she always manages to write what I'm thinking way more eloquently than I would have myself.)

Agreed on that last part.

And you ALSO seem to be one of those rational, empathic human beings that's so rare to see in these parts. So that's at least two...


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

The real question is do modern gamers have enough self awareness to be thoughtful, kind and generous in their criticism?

** spoiler omitted **

NO.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Cthulhusquatch wrote:

As someone that played a DnD 2e game last week.. I am not sure how it is all worthless because of a new edition........

Chad Nedzlek wrote:

I'm so sad about this. I've mostly just been sitting here in shock for a couple hours, feeling a sense of loss. I've spend literally thousands of dollars on Pathfinder. Much of which I haven't really gotten a chance to use. And now I never will. The same thing happened with 4th edition. I bought a bunch of stuff that was all suddenly worthless.

I'm not made of money, and spending new money on top of old to get back things I already paid for once leaves a sad taste in my mouth. I feel especially upset about more recent purchases. They are essentially wasted money that I didn't know were wasted at the time. It's hard enough finding a group willing to play current RPG lines... The idea that I'll just be able to keep playing Pathfinder in whatever edition I want isn't a reality for me. No one wants to play the obsolete thing.

So, I guess, good bye and good luck. Maybe fresh players with fresh money will enjoy this, but it won't be me.

It's not. It's hyperbole. No game is worthless as long as you have players for it. There are new games that people wont play because people love older versions of the game. There are older games that people wont play because ongoing support and new and shiny are important to them. It all depends on the gamers in question.

But Im absolutely certain there will be people playing PF 1e years from now. The same way that there are people still playing 1e/2e/3e D&D today.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I'm genuinely confused how all the "No new editions ever no matter what" people were not weeded out by 3.5 coming 3 years after 3rd edition. Are we just selecting for people who already convinced themselves "no, 3.5 was fine" since this is a Pathfinder board?

No there were people who were pissed off and angry about the 3.5 update too. mean I wasnt one of them but there were people who were just as heated as people here are about PF2.

I empathized a little bit back then, I don't empathize now.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Kaladin_Stormblessed wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
There's enough material that you'd never want for new stuff except out of an extreme sense of entitlement or pure GREED.
Uh, wow, okay. Guess I'm entitled and greedy for still having more things I hoped to see in a game I'm familiar with and like.

That's MY POV, Yes. Especially when some of the people in this thread have been downright belligerent about 1e support being cut off after 10 YEARS of product. Product not only from Paizo but from solid 3rd party companies as well.

I mean Pathfinder is one of THE most supported systems out there, PERIOD. At this point, I think it surpasses the level of support that 3.5 had in its twilight. So yeah maybe greed was a little harsh, but I do stand by the sense of entitlement that people have in regards to feeling that Paizo should still support a system that already has a metric ton of support already.

SNS. *shrugs*


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

So i've slowly been selling off my RPG's and some boardgames to Noble Knight Games. I was selling my stuff becasue my Pathfinder books needed space and I wasnt playing alot of the other games anymore. I got rid of all of my GURPS 3E books and almost all of my CHAMPIONS 4E books. ALOTof my 3.5 books are gone with a few exceptions.

Just last week I finally caved and bought the 5E core books and Tales of the Yawning Portal from Amazon for about $130. I've been listening to and enjoying the 1st Critical Role Campaign and really enjoying it and have been getting a feel for how 5E plays. Do I mean for it to supplant my Pathfinder game? No but WOTC reprinting a bunch of their older adventures in one book in the latest edition was too hard to pass up. I'd pretty much been ignoring 5E since it came out until recently.

I've been with Paizo since the Dungeon days. I still have all of my issues with the AGE OF WORMS and SAVAGE TIDE AP's. I was here when the Pathfinder AP's kicked off and was a subscriber from the beginning. I was and still am a subscriber to the RPG line even though I've been thinking about canceling. Now that I know that Planar Adventures will be their last RPG hardcover it seems like a good solid jumping off point.

I dont get the crying about the lack of support for PF 1e. It really seems like some ol' crybaby stuff. You literally have close to a DECADE WORTH OF MATERIAL. I will NEVER be able to play through the 17 AP's that I own. I have the RAPPAN ATHUK HC, the SLUMBERING TSAR HC, several PF Kickstarters like the MYTHIC HEROES HAND BOOK, MONSTER MANUAL AND SPELL COMPENDIUM, DEEP MAGIC, BARD'S GATE and ADVANCED BESTIARY. There's enough material that you'd never want for new stuff except out of an extreme sense of entitlement or pure GREED. Of all the things Ive read people complaining about this is the one that makes the LEAST SENSE to me.

I've already decided that I'm going to keep playing OG Pathfinder alongside 5E (if I enjoy it). That way I have my crunchy ruleset and my streamlined ruleset. I have M&M for my supers game and I'll have Modern Age for my Lazarus game that I want to run.

The playtest is free as a PDF and I may by a hard copy just to peruse it. But I cant in good sense re-buy my entire PF library to play with in a new edition especially when I just sold/traded a bunch of books to clear space. Maybe I'll feel different in a couple of years but for now looking at my shelf of PF books and remaining 3.5 books? PF 2E is a Pass for me folks. I'm not nearly as emotional about this as some people here are. I've supported Paizo for a loooooooooong time and understand that they are a business and has to do what's right for them as such. I bear them no ill will. Good luck.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Skeld wrote:

I saw it last weekend. It was a good, solid Marvel movie, but not my favorite. Here are a few thoughts i had about it:

** spoiler omitted **...

To your second point:

Real Life spoiler:
White Supremacists have been doing just that DECADES. Gang members as well. People join the military to get access to training all the time. It's why of all the things about Killmonger in the movie that part was the
LEAST problematic for me because it accurately reflects what some people actually do.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Saw it for the 3rd time this morning with my Mom, who LOVED it and is making plans to see it again.

So there's one thing that I realized on my 3rd viewing that I missed the 1st two times:

Balck Panther Spoilers:
The opening narration that I thought was young T'challa asking T'Chaka to tell him a story about home. I just only realized that that WASNT T'challa and T'chaka. It was young Erik and his father N'Jobu.
The tip-off for me FINALLY was the line "Baba? Tell me about HOME."

Which made Erik's line to T'challa near the end of the movie "Can you believe that? A kid from Oakland walking around, believing in fairytales." all the more poignant and heartbreaking.

But of all the lines in the film that hit me it's Erik's final exchange with T'challa that hit's me hardest.

T’Challa: Maybe we can still heal you.

Killmonger: Why? So you can lock me up?

Killmonger: Nah, bury me in the ocean with my ancestors that jumped from the ships. Because they knew death was better than bondage.

For my money, Killmonger is the best MCU villain next to Loki. And he went out true to himself. Just imagine him and T'challa working together though? That would have been AMAZING.

1 to 50 of 533 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>