Steerpike7's page

Didn't see a forum specifically for discussing the licenses surrounding the logo and/or OGL, so I'm putting this here.

Have a couple of projects in the works. The first is simply a rewrite of an adventure I already have for sale under OGL. Putting out a Pathfinder compatible version of it, and I don't see an issue there.

The second project, however, is an alternate rules system for magic for d20/OGL and I'd like to make it compatible for use with Pathfinder. That said, it's a fairly dramatic revamp of how magic and spellcasting work, taking a much darker and more dangerous slant on things.

Use of the compatibility logos requires that the products maintain compatiblity with Pathfinder. My question is, how far outside of the default ruleset can you get and still be considered compatible? My system would work with Pathfinder, but all of the rules regarding how spell casting works (memorization, spells per day, spells that can be cast, classes that can cast) are altered.

You can drop these new rules into the game rather seamlessly, but I want to know whether this is still considered a product that is "compatibility" for purposes of the license.

Thoughts?

I've never quite liked the idea that when you shoot into melee you have no chance of hitting a friendly target. It stands to reason if you miss badly enough you could hit your friend, particularly in the chaos of battle and exchange of blows that takes place during a round.

Our group has employed a house rule for this, and I was kind of hoping Pathfinder would put a variant rule in place. So my questions are:

1. Any change Pathfinder will implement rules for this sort of thing. Seems unlikely based on what I saw in the beta but I am curious; and

2. Do any of you house-rule this, and if so do you mind sharing your house-rules? I would like to consider possibilities for adjudicating this sort of things.

Thanks!

I'm posting this here as opposed to WotC because I know the community here tends to be more mature and less prone to simply flame.

Here's the thing: I've been running and playing 4E along with a couple other systems up until about a month and a half ago. After that time, I got tired of 4E. It didn't have the staying power for me personally that other editions or other systems have had.

No big deal. Gaming preferences are subjective and some people like one thing while others like another. That said, I want 4E to be quite successful even though I don't play it, because the D&D IP has been my favorite among RPG systems for 25 years.

When 4E first came out, we had some people who would only play 4E, and other like myself who played both 4E and some other edition. Like I said above, I stopped playing 4E in favor of other editions and systems. Interestingly, in the last week to two weeks, a lot of the people who only wanted to play 4E are coming around looking to get in my 3.5E game or my Warhammer FRPG game, having also grown tired of 4E. Of the people I played and around with who switched, I'd say 8 of 10 are going to something else.

This made me curious how 4E as a whole is progressing in terms of sales, player base, and the like. I suspect that 4E has brought in quite a few new, young players who will be sticking with it. I also know core books sales were good (I pre-ordered them). Someone like me isn't likely to make any future 4E purchases, however.

Can anyone point me to anything that gives post-core book 4E sales? I'm thinking adventures, Realms Campaign Guide, etc.

I'm thinking future books like PHB2 will be more telling.

But like I said I'm curious and I haven't seen anything on the success of 4E after the initial core books sales figures, which were quite good.

Also, I'm not bashing 4E. I'm glad people like it, and frankly I hope it draws many, many more people to the hobby. I'm just curious (what spurred this is I got another email from one of the 4E-only people this morning looking to get into a 3.5E game. I directed him to Pathfinder. I wonder if this is a trend, or if it is just an artifact of local gamers and more specifically the ones I have played or associated with).

Thanks, guys.

Annual dark-themed Halloween game coming up. We vary the ruleset every year. Last year was a modern-day Zombie invasion using Call of Cthulhu rules. This year is dark fantasy using Warhammer FRPG rules.

It's a one-day game. Everything you need is provided. Message me if you are interested in playing.

The group is an ongoing group, and we are recruiting more players for that as well. Probably use 3.5E/Pathfinder going forward.

I am posting this message here because I am working on a 4E adventure and I wanted to get feedback from the 4E crowd.

I'm contemplating putting a piece of short fiction at the end of the adventure. It is related to the storyline of the adventure, of course. It won't add much to the download size of the adventure, but it will add pages for anyone printing it out.

So what's the general consensus? Do you like fiction along with an adventure, or it is more trouble than it's worth? Clearly, if the fiction sucks, then it won't be worth it...

...so to that end I was hoping someone with an eye for this sort of thing might look at the opening (a battle scene; small PDF linked below) and give me their thoughts. I appreciate any honest feedback, good or bad. You won't hurt my feelings:

Steerpike's Opening

Conservative radio and CNN host Glenn Beck was raving about it as a salute to the current administration's tactics in the war on terror, willing to do what has to be done to stop evil.

I've seen any number of blog posts on the subject, as well are articles an op-eds in the NYTimes and LATimes.

Wall Street Journal ran this:

What Batman and Bush have in Common

Discuss :)

Regarding the problem with casters being so dominant at higher level.

One thing we house-ruled in a lot of game (and took from 1E AD&D) was having different XP tables for each class. Part of the problem I had when 3E came out was that the Wizard went flying up in levels as fast as the fighter.

If you have a much more lengthy XP progression table for wizards, then you alleviate some of the dominant spell-caster problem by the mere fact that it takes wizards so much longer to get to that level. That's how it worked in 1E AD&D. If you made it to the upper reaches of wizard levels, you were powerful, but it wasn't easy to get there.

Has anyone else tried this in 3.5E? We did some tweaking the numbers to try and hit a good balance, but I'm curious if anyone else ever did this.

The 4E group I have been playing with has decided to go back to running 3.5E.

My existing group, which has always been 3.5E or an older edition has flatly refused, to a man, to move to 4E. We ran one session of it and they weren't excited about it. It was "fun" but not their thing (not sure I understand that entirely).

All of the other D&D games advertising for players at my gaming store are 3.5.

I'm really looking forward for DDI getting off the ground so I can find some people to play 4E with. Might even try a PBP game or something.

Anyone else having any trouble finding a 4E group? Or did your existing group just switch over? Advice??

I'm going to advertise for a group again and see what happens...any other thoughts on getting a group? Anyone know a web site where people might advertise for players or a DM?

Got to thinking about this in the "Destruction of the FR thread."

Looks like a lot of people who don't like 4E FR are going to stick with their own FR timeline using 3.5 rules, or pulling Paizo material into their FR setting.

I'm curious why more people don't take the opportunity to simply make the jump to Golarion. I'm very new to Pathfinder and Golarion, so I don't know nearly everything there is to know, but from what I've seen it looks pretty cool. And FR was getting pretty bad by the time 4E came along...

...so why not switch?

Is it nostalgia? Been playing FR for 10 or 15 years and that's that?

I assume we have some folk around here who read them. I've not read many of them. I started with Nathan Long's BLACKHEART books, and those are a lot of fun. Then, when I saw that Long wrote a Gotrek and Felix novel called ORCSLAYER, I picked that one up and liked it as well.

That prompted me to go back to the beginning of the Gotrek and Felix novels, by William King, and I am reading those now. Also quite a lot of fun.

The Warhammer setting seems like my kind of place.

So for those of you who have read novels in this setting, what would you recommend after I get through the Gotrek and Felix novels? I'm interested in reading more.

Latest Drizzt book out in paperback.

Says "Transitions" on it, so I figured it was going into the post spell-plague era. But flipping through it I see all the familiar names who shouldn't be alive after spell-plague.

So when does it take place? And more importantly, is it any good?

This is a subject that was bugging me mildly at the outset, and has become more of a problem for me, logically, as I am working on an Adventure.

The POL idea postulates that there are small pockets of civilization, with some really dangerous areas in between. At the same time, the PHB (or maybe DMG, can't remember which I read it in) contemplates that even in small villages the PCs are going to be able to re-supply, sell stuff, buy magic items, etc.

I don't think those two concepts jive very well. Even without POL I think the availability of selling and buying can be problematic, and with POL it seems to get worse.

In the adventure I am currently writing, the action takes place around a small village near the shores of a lake in the crater of a long-dormant volcano. The village is basically the dead end of what once might have been a more traveled road. There is nowhere to go past it. The area around it is wild.

The village is small. Villagers survive mainly on hunting, fishing, and foraging. Maybe some planting even though there's a very short growing season.

There is no reason in the world there would be any magic items for sale in this village. There is not much reason that even most gear would be available. There is also no good reason that anyone would have the means or desire to buy loot that the PCs accumulate. It just doesn't make any sense.

A merchant caravan was suggested in another thread by P1nback, and I think that's generally a good idea. In this case, though, there is no reason a merchant caravan would come to this village, at least not with the kind of stuff PCs want. They might come to trade flour and the like for fish, furs, or whatever, but that's about it. And given the POL setting, travel is dangerous enough that it's more likely that a merchant caravan would never even bother coming to a village this small.

Anyway, I want to write the adventure without having a completely ridiculous supply of gear and equipment in a village where it would never be, but I also don't want to get too far outside of what the rules contemplate for fear of hampering the party too much.

The economy of POL doesn't appear to have been thought out much if at all in 4E.

Thoughts?

Not to slam them too hard, but this is getting kind of pathetic isn't it?

Does anyone know whether and to what extent Gleemax will be handling the online components of DDi? Because I am not impressed with them in the least.

If the name and default color scheme wasn't bad enough, the lack of ability to keep the forums going really boggles the mind.

/frustration.

Trying to decide if this is too open to a TPK.

The situation is, the party has to climb some stone stairs carved into the side of a rock cliff. Think of the stairs Smeagol takes Frodo and Sam up in LOTR, except not quite that narrow or steep.

Goblins defend the top of the staircase. They have ranged weapons. They've also assembled some boulders (not overly large) to push over the edge toward any PCs heading up. The total climb is around 100 feet in height.

Also, goblins at the top are going to have pretty good cover with respect to climbing PCs.

I'm a little concerned that the party is going to take too much of a beating on the way up this thing. I'm trying to tweak the number of goblins, their resources, etc., but I don't want it to be a cake walk either.

Any ideas?

I'm not a map-maker by any stretch of the imagination, but I downloaded a cool free terrain generator, and within a couple hours of playing with it put together a map for an adventure I am creating. I then used GIMP to label it.

What do you guys think? Here is The map

Cool flick. Check it out:

http://www.fidothefilm.com/

Only forum it happens in are these. Firefox version 2. When I make a post, I can't see it if I refresh the forums unless I also go in and delete my cookies (in which case I have to re-log).

The monster is temporarily in a PDF file here:

RUSALKA

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Particularly as to whether the creature seems appropriately powered for its level.

Thanks!

My local gaming store recently devoted a relatively good amount of shelf space to Paizo products (this occurred about the same time as the 4E launch). I was talking to the owner the other day and asked if they planned to continue to support the Paizo products as well as they currently do. She said "definitely." In fact, they're planning to do a bit more in terms of showcasing the material on the shelf.

I said "So it's selling well, then?" and she said "Very well."

I took this as good news.

Maybe a Pathfinder game day would go over well when the RPG releases....

I'd heard rumors, but then nothing. If done correctly, such an RPG would rock.

My 3.X campaign is wrapping up after close to two years. The whole group is pretty sour on 4E, even though I like it enough that I'm going to play it with other people.

The question for our group is this: what are we going to do next? The group is leaning toward an Iron Kingdoms campaign because they haven't played in that setting and it looks cool to them. I've played Iron Kingdoms and I love it.

But I've purchased some Pathfinder stuff from the store (I'm new to Paizo, having never really used Dragon or Dungeon or other Paizo materials) and I really like it a lot. I would rather run some of the Pathfinder adventure paths than do Witchfire Trilogy in IK, for example.

So here's the question, and this is for anyone familiar at all with Iron Kingdoms - how well would Iron Kingdoms races and classes fit into a Pathfinder adventure path? That way, I can use the cool Paizo stuff I want to play, and the players in my group who are really excited about some of the IK stuff (like Ogrun and the Gun Mage) can still play what they want to play.

What do you think - easy to bring those classes and races in, or will I be asking for a headache?

Someone mentioned the lack of in index in another thread.

I've put one on my blog here:

http://betterdnd.wordpress.com/2008/06/27/index-of-pc-powers-4e-phb/

EDIT: If someone can make a working link out of that, that would be great :D

I ask because I see a lot of people seem happy with a more combat-focused hack and slash type of adventure. I like those as well.

But I'm working on a 4E compatible adventure and so far I've got a lot of details on numerous NPCs, including possible skill-challenge encounters for many of them. Not all of them are required, of course. It is fairly non-linear and I'm using the information to provide a depth and realism to the location where the adventure is set. I'm also throwing in some non-combat/skill challenge encounters that don't involve NPCs, but involve hazardous areas and the like.

Not to say there won't be good combat - that part is definitely there. But parts of the adventure will also give rise (if the PCs so desire) to good roleplaying and NPC interaction.

So what's the consensus here? More combat and less of the other? Or do you prefer a healthy dose of all of the above?

I decided some months ago that when the new edition of D&D came out I'd try my hand at putting out some quality Adventures for use with the new system. I want to emphasize roleplaying, thinking, and, of course, exciting combats. Nothing new there :) I am also emphasizing quality editing.

Anyway, I'm about halfway into my first Adventure, and after quite a bit of deliberation I've decided not to sign onto the 4E GSL. The gains that the GSL provides do not, for me, justify signing on. The license is restrictive enough that I feel like I might as well develop material without signing on.

So I hope to have my first Adventure done within a month, at which point I'll have some people play test it (I'll post here when the time comes - maybe some will be interested). I'll edit the Adventure based on the play testing, and then release it. The reception the first few Adventures receive will probably determine whether I move forward from there.

I was pretty excited about the GSL prior to seeing the license. Having reviewed it, though, I'm not comfortable with it. I wonder how many 3PPs will feel the same. Ironically, the more restrictive GSL could drive more 3PPs to try to make supplements without signing on, whereas OGL was open enough that there was little pressure to go that route.

Thoughts?

I'm not going to opine on the boundaries of the available space for creating 4e-compatible products without being under GSL, but what some people seem to be forgetting in the analysis here is that there is some limitation to copyright protection for game rules, and you can also stay out of trademark territory if you're smart. People could conceivably create 4e stuff without subscribing to GSL.

I'm working on a monster and batting this around as a daily power:

Watery Grave (minor; daily)

Close burst 10; an unnatural water fills the lungs of the target, accelerating the drowning process; target is dazed (save ends). First failed save: target is dazed and weakened. Second failed save: target is dying. No healing surge can be spent while under this effect.

Any thoughts on that for a 5th level monster? On the one hand, it has the possibility of dire consequences, but on the other hands seems likely that the PCs are going to save. It may just be me, but it seems like the new saving throw system is geared towards the PCs making their saves.

This relates to a 4E adventure I am developing for my group.

At one point, the group has to cross a suspension bridge across a chasm. The bridge is old and has been further weakened by recent use. There is a % chance that it will collapse with each PC that crosses (the % is modified by weight, how many PCs are on the bridge at once, etc.).

My question concerns adjudicating what happens if the bridge does collapse.

Seems like the easiest way to resolve would be a series of Athletics checks:

Once to grab the ropes as the bridge starts to collapse (though this might be better tied to a skill with Dex as the ability - can't find a good one);

Once when the rope bridge slams against the wall of the chasm (to hang on);

Once or more to climb up the bridge to the lip of the chasm.

I'd like to change it up a bit though, rather than have the same check three of more times.

Suggestions?

I assume most people who post here will, which is why they're still attracted to the Paizo forums.

The follow up question, then, is why?

I was asked this question a short while ago by a friend. His point was that they're both basically the same type of game, so why play two versions instead of a completely different game (which I do as well, like non-d20 Call of Cthulhu).

So I started thinking about it, and some of the posts here, and I have an answer to the WHY question for myself.

My D&D campaigns have always tried to keep an internal logic, a certain degree of verisimilitude, and a low degree of metagaming. I was leery of 4E for reasons of verisimilitude (ok, you can only do so much of this with D&D, but there are degrees, and 4E has less of it in my view than previous editions) and metagaming.

But when I played 4E I had fun. Despite the above. To me, it's a different game in large part. It's video-gamish, metagamey, etc. And fun to play.

So I'm playing 4E because I enjoy it. And I'm playing Pathfinder/3.5 for the same reason. But I probably wouldn't be playing both if they didn't FEEL like very different games.

4E is streamlined, fun, and I got over the metagaming and verisimilitude because of it. But 3.5 gives me more in the way of the latter, and lets me more easily work with the kind of world I like to play in, where martial characters don't have quasi-magic powers, and everyone can't heal themselves, etc.

Make any sense?

Just thought I'd toss this out since it's the house-rule my group has used.

INIT modifier is also included in the initiative check, so it seemed to us that it didn't make sense to use that as the tie-breaker because it is already factored into the tied scores.

So we decided that whenever initiative was tied, the person with the higher INT acts first under the idea that they're able to take in the scene and make the mental connection required to act just a little faster than the other guy.

Also gives the high INT person a bone from time to time :)

I'm interested in the Pathfinder APs and the Pathfinder RPG. I've been playing D&D since 1E AD&D, but I am completely unfamiliar with Pathfinder. I've flipped through some issues of Dungeon and Dragon from time to time, but I really don't know much about Paizo.

How does an AP work? Does it take characters from level 1 to high level, and then you start over at level 1 with the next AP? Or does this change from AP to AP?

I'm wondering if I want to start a Pathfinder AP campaign, whether I need to go back to AP#1 and move forward sequentially. Also, looking at the first AP it looks like you go from level 1 to 14 or 15 pretty quick. Is each monthly release designed to be completed within that month, or do groups usually lag behind the Paizo output?

In summary, where the heck do I start?

:)

Been playing since the 1E AD&D days, but I've never used any Paizo products. Pathfinder interests me, and I'm very much interested in keeping my 3.5E games alive.

I'm also going to be playing some 4E, I expect, and I'm glad to see there is a place to discuss 4E here as well. The WotC forums have become dominated by a bunch of argumentative idiots. Unless that's the case here as well, I'm going to make this my new home and I suspect I'll end up subscribing to/buying quite a few Paizo products as the coming weeks and months unfold.

Nice to see an active community here!