Skedge's page

I got my "Your Order has Shipped" notice today. It says it is leaving Ruskin, Florida. That is strange, there are closer Amazon warehouses than that, like southern California.

Amazon ships from the closest warehouse with the item in stock, not the closest warehouse period.

Samurai wrote:

Thank you Jason! My handwriting has become almost illegible since my stroke last year, and even I have trouble reading what I wrote. But I still love to play RPGs, I'm just having to find new ways of doing some things.

My handwriting is nearly illegible and I don't even have an excuse. I love form-fillable PDFs that I can print and bring to the table.

I am in the same boat, cannot write in a legible manner, no excuse, never have been able to.

As someone who lives in the greater Seattle area, housing prices near Paizo, Redmond area if I recall, are fairly high already.

High being an understatement if Zillow can be believe median home value in Redmond is around $830,000.

Got trackin on mine, it’s been moseyin around Washington all day hehe

Mine is in the same spot 3 entries now all for Fife. WA. So close and yet so far, only about 1300 miles to travel... Hoping for Friday but expecting Monday.

Asgetrion wrote:

And I want to point out that I'm fine with max. HPs, I just still might want to house-rule them in my games. I definitely do not want to return to days of rolling ability scores, that often resulted in bitterness when one of the guys rolled up an "elven hero" and the rest were playing farmboys with pitchforks. This expression comes from an Undermountain campaign years and years ago; one PC was an elven fighter with vastly superior stats (Str 18/96, Dex 18, Con 17, etcetera), while others had 14s or 15s in their prime attributes. It wasn't really fun to play in that particular campaign.

I remember those days, as well. I started GMing at the tender age of...ten? With AD&D 2E, I think. I do remember the days of rolling my character's attributes, and HP, and I definitely don't miss it. I very much like the way that PF2E does it, myself. Rolling a 1 sucked. I know we were often allowed by one GM to reroll 1s, but then I would get a 2 or 3, and it just wasn't very fun. The rolls I want to matter are the ones taken for in-game actions, rather than vital character attributes.

Even so, I do hope they have an option for you. The default assumption they're running with is much more to my taste, but it wouldn't take much word count to give you an optional rule you're looking for, I think.

For the most part I agree with you, but think it was a mixed bag. The thrill of getting high enough rolls to play a Paladin or Bard... On the other hand, if you wanted to play a certain class and your rolls where just to low it sucked!

From what we have seen I am really liking the way 2E is looking for character creation and leveling.

I got my email stating that the books were being shipped but the link to download is not working.

As has been stated multiple times on the forums and elsewhere.

GOT MY SHIPPING EMAIL!

Which hilariously says it won't actually ship till Auguest 2nd XD

I just got mine as well, but it says it will ship BY August 2nd.

On a semi-related note, I pre-ordered some books for 2E and I got an email telling me it was pending. That was 5 days ago. Will I get an email when it goes through or will it go through today cause it's finally July 8th?

You will get another e-mail saying the order is finalized and providing shipment information. It may or may not be today however depending on where in the shipping order you are.

WatersLethe wrote:

I just really want to start building characters :c

Same, tbh. Character building is how I grock new D&D-type systems.

I do the same thing, the second I have the Core book in my hands I will start rolling characters, minimum of one of every class, likely multiple of each.

I think you will be fine, Just assign appropriate spells for your worlds Deities to grant, done. How and why those items and spells work you can decide to not explain or explain in a context that makes sense for your world.

From what I have seen and read I think it will be just as easy if not easier to use the 2E rules in other settings.

I am going to make a huge assumption and say it is likely that the different "breeds" will be via feat's choices available for the various heritages.

WatersLethe wrote:

Charisma as it stands is in a unique position, and can't be treated like the other stats without consequence. The only way to bring it in line is to formalize some alternative means to handling the narrative power of social skills and their interaction with ability scores.

That uniqueness is the problem in many cases. Every GM I have had in the past 5 years has subscribed to the "roleplay, not rollplay" philosophy of social encounters, meaning that charisma rolls never come up, and high Charisma is nothing but an ability penalty for my Sorcerer or Summoner (and even if they did do charisma roles, I don't want to play "the face"). So it stands out as the only ability that requires the GM to adjust their playstyle to make relevant.

It is not possible at every table especially if you play at events or online. But when I GM I take the PC's charisma into account when role playing an encounter. No dice rolling needed.

Not a hard or fast rule and somewhat arbitrary on my side. It also allows me to more easily do things like a noble that only respects other nobles or a barbarian warlord that only respects strength to make more sense.

I can see 0-level PCs working really well in 2nd edition. Choose ancestry and background, skip class, and go. When you hit 1,000 XP, you become 1st level.

I was thinking the same thing, you could start a group very easily at level 0 under the 2E rules, by stopping at various places in the creation process.

I am trying to remember the name of it, it was for either AD&D or AD&D2E, but there was a mod that started out with the PC's as commoners and the DM was supposed to track their behavior and assign them classes at a certain point in the adventure. I do not remember it working very well but was an interesting concept.

I can see it both ways.

"This sword, even though it is of normal quality has a rune etched into it making it easier to swing"

"This sword has been forged by the legendary Dwarf smith Bolthar HammerHand. It's quality and balance are superb making it easier to swing"

I will likely use both methods, at my table as both add some flavor to the game.

Maybe the first sword is owned by a young poor adventurer and the rune was etched by a friend or perhaps a wizard he helped out.

The second sword could have been commissioned by a Dwarf king and be a family heirloom given to the party as a token of thanks for saving the heir to the throne.

As long as players are allowed any agency in assigning stats, players will assign stats based on the character they want to play. Min/Maxing, stat dumping etc will always exist in such a system unless all stats are equally valuable to all characters.

The only ways to stop stat dumping, without fundamental changes to the game, like getting rid of stats entirely, would be to go back to rolling 3d6 in order and that is what you get, or allowing a single predefined array that all characters must start with.

A Paladin is a champion of Good. They hold themselves to a code of conduct to better themselves and lead by example; adhering to a code like that is something a Lawful character would do. Therefore, only Lawful Good characters would want to become Paladins. A Paladin code is not a pact you sign for power; it's a standard they hold themselves to because that is what they believe they should be.

A Chaotic character would never willingly force themself into something like that. If you think that they would, you clearly don't understand what Chaotic means: it's the manner in which the character thinks.

Honestly I have since AD&D 2nd edition ran Paladin's like this. They are holy warriors of a church and champion that church's cause. Paladin's in games I run are the alignment of their deity and we adjust their abilities to match.

For anyone who argues that they have to be lawful good:
pal·a·din
ˈpalədn/Submit
nounhistorical
any of the twelve peers of Charlemagne's court, of whom the count palatine was the chief.