Sajan

ShinHakkaider's page

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


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,759 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
cabbage patches

Video OR it didnt happen...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Saw this at a screening on Tuesday and again on Friday.

I personally think that the 2nd movie is the best in the series, followed closely by the 3rd and then the 1st.

There's about a two minute sequence in CHAPTER 2 where John Wick is chasing his quarry through a museum just MURDERING henchmen as he goes and to me aside from the earlier sequence in the tunnels in Italy is the best straight up action sequence in the franchise.

There's a sequence in CHAPTER 3 that comes close involving John and Sophia and the two dogs that comes very close to matching it.

CHAPTER 3 is great fun and has tons of action. I enjoyed it ALOT.


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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
(I mean, I'm pretty sure Shin actually would not, and it would be - relatively speaking - "fine" if he ever actually got a gauntlet, not that anyone ever really could. But, fundamentally, this post or sentiments like it are horrendous.)

You cant use the Gauntlet to "FIX" humanity's problems. In any way that would actually matter would be either removing free will or creating a path to an even greater conflict down the line.

Create more resources so that everyone won't go without basic necessities? Some greedy, amoral group of jerks is going to decide that not everyone DESERVES to have those basic necessities and try to TAKE THEM.

Making everyone forcibly "good", removes agency and free will.

Removing firearms? People will simply find more efficient ways to kill each other with improvised melee weapons just like they did before the advent of firearms.

Humans CHOOSE to be the way that they are. They make a conscious decision. It's one thing to decide that you're going to help yourself prosper. It's something else to decide that someone or some group doesn't deserve to prosper or even exist because of a darker skin hue, gender, sexuality or religion. There's no FIXING that part of it.

Even forced empathy, like making people feel the pain of others is just a band-aid. You shouldn't have to be forced to live in someone else's shoes in order to empathize. You're human. They are human. Anything that you don't want to be done to you? ASSUME that the other human doesn't want to be done to them EITHER. Human beings are unnecessarily cruel and callous because they CHOOSE TO BE.

Humans can't even do something as easy and simple as BE KIND TO ONE ANOTHER

And that is why I'd DEFINITELY *SNAP*.

Call it evil, call it crazy.

But having the means to eradicate a greater evil and pussyfooting around doing so or doing nothing is both cowardly and being complicit in said evil.

I bolded the part that's completely untrue....

Yeah, what I said has nothing to do with friends I may or may not have. You focus on your immediate surroundings and not the whole picture. I say the human race is horrible you think that I must be surrounded by THE WORST.

I was pretty clear that I was talking about humans in general and have already said that the there are good people but they are WAY outnumbered by selfish and evil ones. I'm not trying to win a semantic argument with you. I have the entire history of humanity to back up my argument.


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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Tacticslion wrote:
(I mean, I'm pretty sure Shin actually would not, and it would be - relatively speaking - "fine" if he ever actually got a gauntlet, not that anyone ever really could. But, fundamentally, this post or sentiments like it are horrendous.)

You cant use the Gauntlet to "FIX" humanity's problems. In any way that would actually matter would be either removing free will or creating a path to an even greater conflict down the line.

Create more resources so that everyone won't go without basic necessities? Some greedy, amoral group of jerks is going to decide that not everyone DESERVES to have those basic necessities and try to TAKE THEM.

Making everyone forcibly "good", removes agency and free will.

Removing firearms? People will simply find more efficient ways to kill each other with improvised melee weapons just like they did before the advent of firearms.

Humans CHOOSE to be the way that they are. They make a conscious decision. It's one thing to decide that you're going to help yourself prosper. It's something else to decide that someone or some group doesn't deserve to prosper or even exist because of a darker skin hue, gender, sexuality or religion. There's no FIXING that part of it.

Even forced empathy, like making people feel the pain of others is just a band-aid. You shouldn't have to be forced to live in someone else's shoes in order to empathize. You're human. They are human. Anything that you don't want to be done to you? ASSUME that the other human doesn't want to be done to them EITHER. Human beings are unnecessarily cruel and callous because they CHOOSE TO BE.

Humans can't even do something as easy and simple as BE KIND TO ONE ANOTHER

And that is why I'd DEFINITELY *SNAP*.

Call it evil, call it crazy.

But having the means to eradicate a greater evil and pussyfooting around doing so or doing nothing is both cowardly and being complicit in said evil.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:

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*

easy there, Dracula.

You know what? I think that I DID write this just after finishing S2 of CASTLEVANIA!

But the sentiment still holds. Human beings ARE THE WORST and pretty much DO need to be wiped from the face of the earth. It's easy to downplay and mock this sentiment but only if you have perma-blinders on and aren't paying attention to humanity as a whole.

We really are pretty bloody awful with no desire to do or be better. Are there good people out there? DEFINITELY. But any good that they are able to do is massively drowned out by the selfish, evil, simpleminded majority.

So yeah, my solution wouldn't be a brutal or as bloody Dracula's but it would be as permanent.


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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

For the games? Noble Knight Games will take them off her hands. Tell them you want to sell, send them a list and condition and they'll give you a quote for cash and one for credit.

I sold my entire GURPS/4th Ed CHAMPIONS and assorted TSR and WOTC books to them just last year and working with them was pretty smooth.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Honestly, the biggest obstacle to my gaming life if is finding a decent group. I have one now (and they're GREAT) but I would like to play and run more often and I think that the only way I can do that is with a different group.

I absolutely DREAD the process of weeding out the undesirables and the unreliable and the sociopaths and the ones who lack any kind of social graces. But if I want to play more it looks like I may have to submit myself to that soon. I've put it off for years but I think it's time.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Megistone wrote:
Having some characters modifiers at the ready is a common thing for many DMs who use secret rolls. Perception is the one they surely don't miss.

Yeah I do the same thing.

Hell having their passive perception (10+Peception_ranks) noted on my side of the screen was something that I've pretty much always done.
Unless a PC has a negative rank in Perception a DC 10 Perception check is usually a gimmie.

One of the other things I used to do was have each of the players give me 20 d20 rolls on a post-it, mark their names on the post it and stick them on the other side of my screen. Whenever I need to do a secret roll I already have their modifiers (without having their entire character sheet I might add) and I have their rolls. The only thing I'd switch up is whether I'd start from using their first roll or their last.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
thejeff wrote:

If there's any single thing that affects what share of sales the FLGS gets, it's Amazon.

An element of truth here.

When I decided to go in for 5E I did the simple math. If I bought the three core books at my local store it would cost me $150 plus tax. I bought the three core books PLUS Tales of the Yawning Portal, which is another $50 book for a total of $138.

That's four books for less than the cost of three at retail.

The thing is though, lately, there are fewer and fewer of those kinds of deals on Amazon these days. For things like electronics I'm likely to, depending on the size and bulk, find competitive prices at local stores (like B&H and Best Buy) and buy there instead.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Since 2012, I've been supporting Kickstarters:

Rappan Athuk @ $100
Reaper Bones Minis@ $256
Dwarven Forge Game Tiles @ $175
Giant Foam Polyhedral Dice @ $20
Deep Magic for Pathfinder RPG @ $40
Reaper Bones II @ $100
Deck of Many Things @ $24
Advanced Bestiary @ $45
Mythic Mania 3 rulebooks for Pathfinder RPG @ $150
Tact-Tiles @ $92
Aaron Allston's Strike Force @ $56
The Lost Lands: Bard's Gate for 5E, Pathfinder, and S&W! @ $100
Super Powered Legends Sourcebook for M&M @ $25
Critical Hit & Fumble Dice @ $22

That's $1205 over 6 years which may not seem like alot? But I can honestly tell you that I KNOW that I havent spent that much at my local gaming store in that time. Not even HALF of that. That's money that went DIRECTLY to the publishers/producers that I wanted to support and not a retail store.

This amount doesn't even include the boardgame (ARCADIA QUEST/ZOMBICIDE) or video game (PATHFINDER KINGMAKER) KS I've backed. To imply that Kickstarters don't have an effect on the game market is willful ignorance, AT BEST,


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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Almarane wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
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.

That's funny. One of my players regularly reminds me when I GM about rules I forgot and give advantages to ennemies. He also regularly reminds other players of rules that could advantage them as well. My other players tend to follow his exemple, but since he knows most of the rules like the back of his hand, they speak out less often than him. [Edit : My only problem player forget rules because he doesn't know them to start with. But as soon as we tell him how the rules work, he plays with them correctly.]

I'm sorry that you can't trust your players. My group understands that I put the emphasis on roleplaying, and they do their best not to metagame. If they can't understand it by themselves, you just have to tell your players that metagaming is forbidden. And if they metagame too much, take actions. And if they still can't understand, well.... they forgot what "R" means in "RPG", and should probably stick to dungeon crawling.

It's taken me a long while to find a good group that I DO trust and even then they still can't help but metagame. At least this group doesn't have an issue with the use of secret rolls because they understand WHY it's necessary. When I made my statement about players I was talking about over my over 30-year history of running and playing in games. Not specifically any one group including my group at present.


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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

After 18 years of playing the D20 system, I'm gonna go ahead and say NOOOOOPE.

I used to love customizing my monsters. It was one of my favorite things about 3x. But it was a very cumbersome system that often without the aid of something like HeroLab took forever.


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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The original series ended FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

There are teens alive now who have no concept of Buffy or Angel. Personally, I have no issues with reboots, not all of them work but not all reboots or remakes suck either. Fans these days are exceptionally narrowminded and hypercritical to the point of not being able to enjoy things if it isn't EXACTLY what they want. I also think a lot of the opposition to a remake of this show are fans saying "THIS IS MINE AND I DONT WANT YOU TO CHANGE OR INTERFERE WITH THIS THING." which to an extent is understandable. However, if this reboot brings in a new generation of fans then great. Not all fans have to enjoy things in the same exact way and Buffy is really kinda DATED.

I have my own particular issues with BUFFY. I used to be a huge fan and just yesterday set aside my DVD's of S1-5 (for me the show ends with that season. I pretty much ignore everything that came afterward) to be donated to a library.

I also dont think that rebooting her as a POC is a good idea, particularly in the current climate in the US. I mean it would NEVER be a good idea, Period. But in the current climate in particular, NO. If the main character was a DIFFERENT slayer, with connections to the original Scoobies? Then that could work. But a character that supplants the original? Not so much.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Fabius Maximus wrote:
Sharoth wrote:

Well damn! Someone beat me to it! Oh well, I don't care.

~Unmitigated fanboy scream~ OMG! OMG! OMG! It's back! ~begins to hyperventilate~

Don't celebrate if you're not willing to spend an extra 5-10 bucks per month for Disney's streaming service. Because that's the only way you're going to be able to watch it (along with all the rest of the Star Wars stuff and the Marvel movies).

Yeah I've already decided that I'm going to subscribe to Disney's streaming service. Besides having all of the Marvel and Lucasfilm stuff now that Comcast has dropped out of the bidding war it looks like Disney is going to be getting that ENTIRE FOX LIBARY as well. Which means Uncut Star Wars, ALIENS, X-FILES, and an entire slew of other things as well. It'll take them a while to incorporate everything but yeah...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Vidmaster7 wrote:
I would think avengers part 4 is probably mostly done at this point. If the buy out was finsihed right now I think we would probably still have about 2 years at least before we saw a F4 movies.

Well there are some pickups and reshoots that are scheduled for the fall, but we probably wont see anything regarding the new acquisitions until 2020 or so.


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...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
CrystalSeas wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
I dont know how it does because the link takes me to a 404 Error.

\

It's got a extraneous space

Thanks CrystalSeas!


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?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:
The URL above claims in 2017 that PF1 had the #2 largest market share for the RPG market.

I dont know how it does because the link takes me to a 404 Error.

" 404 NOT FOUND :(
Sorry, but the page you were trying to view does not exist.

It looks like this was the result of either:

a mistyped address
an out-of-date link"


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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
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*


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I really think that D&D 5E is as successful as it is not because it's a better game than Pathfinder (even though there are things to like about it) but because of CRITICAL ROLE.

I had no intention of ever running or playing 5E until I started listening to CRITICAL ROLE. It got me, a longtime Pathfinder proponent who has at least 17 AP's, all of the Pathfinder RPG books and a pretty decent amount of 3rd party Pathfinder material to buy the 3 5E Core books and Tales of the Yawning Portal.

I'm going to be using 5E to strictly run what I'm going to be calling campaign classics. But I'm going to be running 5E. I live in NYC and I can tell you overall? More people are aware of 5E through CRITICAL ROLE than they are of Pathfinder AT ALL. This is from being in nerd spaces like The Compleat Strategist or Midtown Comics or the Warhammer Store down on 8th street and hearing people refer to CR and wanting to or starting to run or play in D&D games. I've even run into people at my WORK who have started playing in D&D games thanks to either friends who have been inspired by CR.

Pathfinder does not have the exposure, the name recognition or popularity that 5E does at this moment. And I really doubt that Pathfinder 2E is going to change that unless there's something out there that brings the game to a broader audience in the way that CRITICAL ROLE did. THE GLASS CANNON Podcast is a good start but it's nowhere as popular as CR is.


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?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

HUH...

Luke Cage spoiler:
So the ending of this season is basically a cross between THE GODFATHER and the end of Brubaker's DAREDEVIL run when Matt Murdock accepts the leadership to the Hand in order to keep an eye on and curtail it's operations not realizing that the toll it's going to eventually take on him.

I'm interested to see where this leads for next season.


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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
xSaber0022 wrote:

I took the important info I learned and posted it in the group chat after that one player cancelled this last week.

The GM responds, basically saying he already knows half the stuff (which I stated in the message some of it was for clarification on debated subjects), and basically goes on a rant about how there needs to be more GM respect at the table and how he doesn't have the time or patience to read 500 pages of the rulebook, which again, he clearly has the time and I didn't read the whole rulebook, I just looked for stuff I didn't know already.

As for the "GM respect" thing, we have to constantly debate because he's the GM and HE DOESN'T KNOW THE RULES FOR THE GAME. And not to mention, he hasn't been the best with player respect. Sometimes he doesn't remember one of us making a perception check on something, and he's just like "I mean the answer's pretty obvious."

JUST WALK AWAY


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
MMCJawa wrote:

My favorite part of the ending was watching a 10 year old explain it to her parents...

Kind of a nice reminder that these movies are also for kids, not just us nerdy 30 somethings :P

SOLO Spoiler:
Yeah, Lucasfilm really isn't playing around when they say that the animated series is canon are they. I'm glad and was straight up surprised to see YOU KNOW WHO as the head of Crimson Dawn. At first I was like HOW?!? and then I was like "Oh wait..."

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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
MMCJawa wrote:
Werthead wrote:
Hama wrote:
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.

Fortunately these people are an extremely regressive lunatic fringe whose opinions can be discounted, filed away somewhere and then fired into the sun.

There are numerous problems with THE LAST JEDI relating to plot, structure and logic, but the things some people screamed incoherently about ("WHY ARE ASIANS IN STAR WARS?" seemed to be a particularly inexplicable one) definitely weren't among them.

If people aren't seeing Solo, it's almost certainly not due to some sort of Anti-SJW movement. It's almost entirely due to:

1) Disappointment with prior movies
2) Loss of novelty of Star Wars
3) Poor release schedule (A week after Deadpool 2 and coming on the heels of Infinity War
4) People hearing a million stories of the troubled development history of this movie
5) People not wanting to see Han recast
6) People not really feeling all that interested in seeing Han's backstory.

I can tell you that FOR ME it's mostly 6) and maybe, MAYBE a little bit of 2).

I bought my ticket today for a 11:30am show and I'm still wavering between going or canceling my ticket and staying home and painting more Necrons for my 40K army. The only reason I'm leaning towards still going is that it's beautiful out and I might walk down to the east village afterward just to get a little bit of exercise.

I'm not excited about this movie at all. I mean if I'm surprised by it that will be AWESOME. But when I went to buy my ticket this morning there were plenty of seats to choose from whereas when I bought tickets for Deadpool 2 in the same theater last weekend it was almost sold out THE DAY BEFORE.


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...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
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.

The Last Jedi didn't make as much money as The Force Awakens. The Force Awakens had a great advantage though as it was the first SW movie in a decade so the anticipation and the decent reviews, as well as the appearance of the original cast, contributed to the massive box office of that film (2+Billion world wide from a 245million budget).

The Last Jedi in comparison made 1.3 Billion off of a budget similar to that of TFA.
There was a Star Wars fix in between TFA and TLJ in the form of Rogue One which made 1+ billion.

Disney bought Lucasfilm in 2012 for 4 BILLION DOLLARS. It's 2018. Six years later I'm pretty sure that the purchase has paid for itself.

We haven't included the money made from licensing which you can probably easily tag on at least another billion.

So I guess my question is this:

On what planet, would anyone want to get rid of Kathleen Kennedy because of her perceived "failure" in running Lucasfilm? Except in the minds of some deranged fanboys? She's not going anywhere unless she decides to leave.


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.

1 to 50 of 1,759 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>