Search Posts
But, in a more direct response to your question, ABSOLUTELY. Speak with your DM and research in whatever sources to which you have access; if the setting is Golarion, and with my particular... specialization, I'd make her family shopkeepers in the county of Sinaria in Ustalav, probably in Karcau, so that the hags of the Graidmere Swamp would have access. Of course, those aren't the only hags in Golarion!
So funny that this thread popped up today, as I'm sitting here on my day off attempting to novelize the backstory of the character I've been running across multiple campaigns for the past few years, Oreth.
Oreth Ustadoth, the Cudgel King: This is the tale of a good man.
Granted! Every difference you experience interpersonally will now be doubled! (Du*a*l is not du*e*l!) I wish for sane, reasonable, truly representative government of my country.
I actually don't think the "this camp of character type has this thingie, let's make an equivalent thingie for this perceived-to-be-opposite camp" approach is a good one for class/archetype/magic design. It's certainly not the most creative. There may be some situations where it works out, but for the most part (Oracles as "divine Sorcerers," for example), why not let each "camp" be MORE unique and quirky and different rather than less? I generally agree with your assessment, but thematically - as Helpful Harry seems to be alluding to, and avr is referencing specifically - the metaplot of "What exactly *is* the Black Blade?" fits very well, potentially even *better*, to the divine than the arcane. The only Black Blade character I've run to date was the Arcanist one, and we storied the Black Blade as an elven ancestral reliquary. Similarly, a divine character with a weapon that's a divine servitor seems pretty smooth to me.
The phantom blade spiritualist is a psychic black blade, and could be re flavored as divine with little effort. I can't think of anything that is actually divine though. I'll look it up. That probably is the answer I was looking for. Thanks! There is no equivalent for bladebound for divine classes. A bladebound paladin or warpriest would be kinda cool, though. That's kinda what I was thinking... The intelligent blade is actually a minor celestial or something.
Sorry for the multi-post. Cleaned up.
Is there a black blade (or comparable) archetype out there in any Paizo source for divine casters? I haven't seen one, but I recognize that I don't know everything or own every possible source.
Take this even further. BBEG has been a thorn in the PCs' side for all of levels 1-7/8; they finally gather enough information on his true identity and location to go after him. They launch their offensive and find themselves facing wave after wave of devilish defenders who create a window through which he escapes. He isn't heard from again for maybe 4 or 5 levels, when BOOM, the PCs are approached by a devil. "Hey, remember that guy we fought you over a few months ago?" Now, a devil insinuates himself into the party, guiding them toward their enemy whose minions are now undead. Who wins? Does the lich rise? Do the devils interrupt the ceremony? Certainly the lich will attack the PCs if he succeeds, but what if the devils do? Do they turn on the PCs?
Human, Dhampir, and then... Louis Porter, Jr's Obsidian Apocalypse dwarves. The final remnants of a race riding the attrition train to extinction, no new offspring born in a hundred years, choosing to either fall to depressed madness or obsessive pursuit of survival or passing on their knowledge or just living as well and fully as possible or etc etc etc.
Pharasma. Her dispassion and her silence are magnetic to me; the fact that she is a final final arbiter, the ultimate judge without an agenda of her own... She forwards no cause, she trumpets no virtue, she doesn't even punish those who transgress against her. Not, of course, until she finally, conclusively, wins the day by attrition, and those who have flaunted her displeasure stand before her and have to recognize that all of their refusal and bluster went by in the blink of her alabaster eye. Now, ambition will be met with indifferent but inescapable justice.
I wonder how many other customers are like me and would *leap* at the opportunity to purchase a Deluxe Map Pack of Briarstone Asylum; maybe divide the existing map up into quads or so, similar to the set made for Emerald Spire. Super-subtle hinting there. Taking 20 on my Diplomacy roll.
I can also confirm that RuyanVe's analysis is spot on. I didn't nail things down in the text because I wanted to allow for some GM flexibility, but I did keep a calendar when plotting things out so they'd make sense. (A) That's one in the "win" column, RuyanVe. (B) What would a poor, hapless GM have to do to procure that calendar, Adam?
Looks like there are a lot of us planning to do similar things. Here's my take: I am fully pregenerating the characters, but will not equip them in any way. At the first session, the players will have presented before them a character portrait, a very brief physical description, and the full text of the traits selected for the character. There will be no more specific information than this, and some of it will intentionally be at least somewhat misleading (there will be at least one character who is not human but appears to be, etc). I am taking full advantage of the Unchained "Removing Alignment" system, and no character will have a specific deity listed on their sheet (unless they have the Birthmark trait or similar). When the players have selected their characters based upon the information presented, the session will begin - still no character sheet, just the little "resume" (if you've read the first encounter, you know this is going to be pretty apropos). When they then awaken fully, they'll receive their character sheets: no equipment, no names, no spells prepared. The sacks of equipment will not be in such a convenient location, either; the characters have been in the asylum for at least some days if not a week or more, so I will have their actual belongings stored away elsewhere (in a bin, not separated, and in the form of equipment cards, just because they were never really intended to get it all back anyway). I'll be using HeroLab at the table in realtime to ease the process of having characters find and redistribute their goods and whatnot.
After Adam said, "Officially it's left vague so that GMs and players can construct their own stories and reasons," I feel confident in going forward with my first idea: I'm making all pregen characters. When my players come to the first session, I'll have a resume for each of the characters with a face pic, a brief physical description, and the full text of the PC's two traits. No more. I won't actually start the campaign at least until the 4th book comes out so I know I don't paint myself into any impossible corners.
I'm kinda the electronic supplement guy among all my gamers, and so I heavily recommend the subscription model of Syrinscape (https://syrinscape.com/download/). For $7 every 2 months, you get everything from them, and I'm getting more and more proficient at recompiling pieces and parts into custom moods. It's really, really great.
Does it get mentioned anywhere near enough how awesome it is that you and others hang out and answer questions on these boards? Man, it's a wonderful time to be a gamer. Thanks for the assurance!
What confuses me... The PCs are referred to as "thugs" in Count Lowls' employ. Given what we know about Lowls' descent into eccentricity over the past few years from Rule of Fear, how would any honorable sorts come to hold such positions? One of my players has expressed an interest in playing a Sacred Shield paladin, but I can't quite factor a means of working such a character into employment by this massively ignoble noble.
I only like the Tane as extensions of the Fey, personally. I have plans for Geniekind, and the dragons certainly have a place, but that place won't be as rulers. Thanks for the help!
So, in terms of a bit of world-building... If all the gods have already been expelled from a world, and a well-worded and liberally-interpreted wish furthermore expelled all of their servitors, what races might rise to fill the power vacuum? A few ideas are:
Any other suggestions?
Yeah, the derangement is real. Fortunately, Hero Lab's RotR fileset is going to knock down a decent chunk of the work for me.
Okay, so here's my in-progress campaign... and bear with me, it's in the Rise of the Runelords board on purpose. First, the world's background is LPJ's Obsidian Apocalypse campaign setting (post apocalyptic world ruled by the undead), but with a custom map (search for Artaria fantasy map on Google to see this marvelous piece of art). The village at the center of the campaign is a reskinned lovechild of Hommlett (yep, T1-4, folks. RPG history lesson) and Sandpoint. The Moathouse from ToEE is the point at which RotR gets scrambled into this omelette, with Nualia's misfit gang being the occupying force there (the encounters from the Glassworks and Thistletop will be laid in there). The events of the rest of ToEE will occur there, and when ToEE is laid waste, the events of RotR will proceed as printed, but supplemented with Mythic strands. Should the party succeed and defeat RotR, their path will lead them to a converted Dragon Mountain, then to A Paladin in Hell to recover the tragically slain Rufus from back in Hommlett. *phew* Just had to get all that said to... someone. I'm curious if it spurs any suggestions/ideas/recommendations/nerdrage. Anybody want to throw rocks at my glass house?
Because I'm That Old Guy, and this is my version of yelling, "Get off my lawn!," at all the little whipper-snappers in the apartment complex... So, the nice thing about social media in general and Facebook in particular is that, when something pisses you off, you can simply disassociate yourself from it. The Pathfinder RPG forum (https://www.facebook.com/groups/20416871387/) falls into that category for me. I am no longer a member of said discussion board. I wasn't a particularly prolific or popular member of said board, so I'm sure that my absence will not even be noticed, much less considered to be of any significance... but it is, because I left in protest of censorship. A short sequence of events: a meme, popular among roleplaying gamers, was posted to the group. It discussed the popular "Zombie Jesus" idea in terms explicit to the roleplaying community, countering that Jesus was, in fact of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game ruleset, a lich, not a zombie. Some members of the forum didn't like the meme and protested as such in the comments. The poster of said meme, in deference to the protesters, deleted it. I subsequently posted my objection to the deletion; I argued that the deletion was unnecessary and in itself offensive, because the discussion in the PFRPG forum was not an appropriate place to interject real-world religious objection. I'd quote my original post here, but the administration of that board deleted it. I don't even have the text I posted, because it was deemed so offensive, it had to be destroyed. In the spirit of fairness, I did compare the religious bullying by the objectors to jihad. Offensive, maybe; humorous, definitely, but fair, given the definition of "jihad" as "a struggle against nonbelievers." I spoke in defense of the original poster's right to free speech, and also to the right of the objectors' free speech, although I did (and do) object to the placement of said speech as being intentionally inflammatory. I don't understand the grounds of the deletion of my post, but I'm glad it happened. The administrators of the forum have made their statement very clearly: "People who think as Jason Thigpen does are not welcomed here."
Thank you, and thanks for the advisement. I'm insanely much looking forward to it!
Hey, all... About to embark on Pathfinder Society gaming, and need a quick hand. Remember the Beginner Box Bash? I GM'd that at a small store con locally, and as such, have the GM Boon that comes along with it. Having never played PFS before, and with no local support for PFS, I never thought about it again until a friend of mine certified and decided to run a game. Now, I have this boon, but want to make sure I'm legal in all necessary ways... Does the boon need to somehow be registered to me to be legal, or is the mere presence of the boon attached to my character sheet sufficient?
I'm good, thanks... and thanks for the assist, dragonhunterq.
So, I'm playing an eclectic human cleric/magus. His first 5 levels were in cleric, and he chose the spell penetration bonus. Can he continue to take the same bonus for his magus levels, or must he take a magus class bonus?
This is a diamond in a gold-dipped-in-platinum setting. Dunn may have just picked up a new trick.
Am I the only one that sees this game as an absolutely perfect base for modding into a game one might call "Pathfinder Miniatures: Battles"? The movement, the emphasis on cover/concealment, the mild RPG elements... sure, it wouldn't be Pathfinder, but as a tactical skirmish game with fantasy archetypes rather than scifi ones? I'd play that game into the ground.
My Pharasmin inquisitor is just now having the opportunity to return to civilization, and his key objective upcoming is to follow a cousin who was consigned to a Pharasmin monastery in Ustalav and has not been heard from since. There will be some heretical slaughter coming down, no doubt... Dunn is the strong left hand of the Lady of Graves, and he marches around like a black Santa Claus, handing out his deity's "gift" to all who are "deserving."
I love this thread. I absolutely agree with Lilith (as everyone should, always) that the right time to start DMing is when you have a story that keeps burning the backs of your eyeballs, scratching and clawing at the inside of your forehead. When it comes to a question of "My players know more about the rules system than I do," that's a simple one: Be prepared to learn, but in all things, remember Rule 0: The DM is the final arbiter of all things. If you don't like the way a thing works, tell your players. "Guys, this doesn't fit the story we're telling here. From now on, it's going to work this way." It is a game. If everyone's having fun, you're doing it right, and that's just all there is to it.
I know I'm coming super-late to this party, but I'm hoping somebody has the extracted text from this module somewhere. I need to do a full-scale conversion from generic 3.5 to Golarion (Ustalav, specifically) Pathfinder. I have my actual paper copy of the book, but I just can't bring myself to write in it. Any help available out there?
Best of luck, all: entrants and judges alike. As Michael Buffer says, "Iiiiiit's TIME!"
Perhaps it would help if you explained an instance in a modern game in which equipment trumped character (and, more importantly, why this is a bad thing). I no longer play any MMOs, and largely for this reason. I played Guild Wars casually for a while, but lost interest: there was very little sense of roleplaying in that game, and based on the conversations I have had with friends who play (and love) WoW, the same obstacles to my personal enjoyment in GW would apply to WoW. Since I know quite a bit more about playing tabletop Pathfinder than I do about MMOs, I'm going to keep my focus on answering your question from a Pathfinder perspective. Pathfinder characters grow in power and experience. The enchantments placed on their weapons, armor, and other items grow in a complimentary fashion, but their increased damage output comes primarily in the form of more successful attacks served by the character. This makes sense in an abstracted combat system: the fighter doesn't necessarily launch more attacks in the designated time, he launches more successful attacks in a given time because he is more skilled. He does not need his weapon to deal x points of abstracted damage in any one of those strikes when his strength of arms and skill with blades insures that he will deal that damage in successive attacks. The adage, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people," is the point for which I am striving: the gun is not the actor, the person is. If that same character would be profoundly hindered by setting that particular weapon aside and picking up another similar one, then those roles of precedence have been reversed. The focus of the game has ceased to be the playing of a role and become purely a game of acquisition. I've said my piece on this topic and am done. My hopes and fears for this game have been stated, as have those of countless others. The development team can do what they like with my requested and freely-given input: I'm not saying that I necessarily will play this game if all of my wishes are granted, nor am I saying that I will boycott it if none of them are. These are wishes, after all, not demands, and as with everyone else involved in this discussion (with, what, 3 exceptions?), the development decisions aren't getting made here anyway. And now? Off to run my biweekly Pathfinder tabletop game. Good day.
I respect your concession that this statement reflects only a representation of your thoughts and not an authoritative, conclusive, unassailable fact of game design. The point I presented in the micro rather than macro scale by discussing one specific, common-usage weapon type instead of every individual weapon type separately is that weapons are only a part of the entire combat equation. A character well-skilled in the use of a dagger can administer lethal damage levels with ANY dagger, ANY (proficient) character can wield whatever dagger they encounter, and should there somehow be a character out there with no proficiency in the use of the dagger, even that poor sod could take a stab at sticking the pointy end into an opponent. The definitive aspect of Pathfinder RPG play that I intend to convey the importance of in establishing the "Pathfinder feel" is that the specifics of the equipment do not trump the character. Thank you, Onishi, for understanding me and for attempting to clarify that for me in my absence. I apologize, Mr. Betts, for confusing you. Writing in a representative tone is more comfortable and natural for me than quoting, picking apart, literalizing and arguing with the words of others. Not warning you ahead of time that I would be doing so would have been a mistake on my part if you were the party to whom my thoughts were being addressed. Still, I'm glad you mapped out your confusion so thoroughly so I could clarify for you. In the future, though, if I've not indicated that you are the person to whom I am speaking, it's safe to assume that you are indeed not the person to whom I am speaking. Your individualized blow-by-blow commentary is not warranted or desired; if I'm not addressing you, then your specific understanding of my remarks is unnecessary.
CLARK'S BACK WOOHOO!!! Sorry. Welcome back, Clark!
This "daggers" discussion does speak a little to one of the original intended questions of this thread: "What will make this game feel like Pathfinder?" Well, daggers make Pathfinder feel like Pathfinder. Know why? Because anyone can use them and they deal 1d4 damage. If a dagger is well-made, it's 5% more likely to hit its target than if it's commonly-made and can be enchanted. It can be enchanted to be as much as 25% more likely to hit its target and to deal a fair amount of other magical damage. If you want to kill somebody with a dagger, you have to have a skill that facilitates that: backstab or similar/related. There are no 28th level instakill megadamage field controller artifact world-destroyer daggers. The idea of an intercontinental ballistic DAGGER is ridiculous and stupid to the point of not even being amusing. I'm comparing against the daggers table posted, not because I hate WoW, but because it provides an objective comparison. One dagger (Bachelor's Dagger, the lowest-level dagger on the table) deals, on average, 10.6 damage per second. The highest-level dagger, the Electrowing Dagger, weighs in at 743.5 damage per second. One chunk of sharpened material deals, on average, nearly 75x the damage of another similarly-sized chunk of material, and not because the wielder is any better at wielding it, but because... umm... it's better. Imagine that same disparity at your tabletop game. "Old Guy, we're not writing a tabletop game. Your point is tired. There are differences between tabletop games and MMOs." Yes, I know this. I understand this. I accept this as fact. However, Lisa Stevens stated on the very first page of this thread that it was her and Goblinworks' intent that the game called Pathfinder Online will "feel" like Pathfinder. It is my hope that, by demonstrating what about the MMOs on the market today have out of common from Pathfinder, we can demonstrate some means by which Goblinworks can achieve their intended goal (and, incidentally and thereby, actually entice my dollars into their MMO coffers as well as their tabletop RPG coffers).
Any and all races are available in any and all colors through any of the above-listed methodologies, or by any of the the following easy story-based justifications: Magic gone awry. Tattooing. Mysterious touch of any sort of outsider. Curse. Having unknowingly bathed in a magical pool. Cloth dying mishap. Or, my favorite... "My character's just blue. I don't know why. Maybe my GM will choose to weave this mystery into the current storyline!" Have FUN. Feed your GM seeds like that and see where you get taken.
Here are a few observations from which you might benefit: 1. If you are an expert in the field at hand, say so. If you are not, you should likewise say so. Owning your (verifiable) expertise will usually (but not always) garner you respect. Admitting your inexperience will usually (but not always) win you some tolerance.
2. Use words, sentences, and paragraphs clearly marked with punctuation. Your input makes more sense when it can be read and... well, made sense of. 3. Know the difference between facts (which can be objectively proven or disproven) and opinions (which are subjective, and are a lot like the orifices through which we excrete solid waste in that everybody has one, no one wants yours shoved in their face, and everyone else's stinks). 4. Ignore the jerks. You validate their existence when you respond to them. 5. Mind your own business. If you're having trouble telling whether you're trolling or not, here's a clue: If you're responding to a message that was not in any way intended for you, then you're almost certainly trolling. It wouldn't hurt you to be civil. Reference the following from the bottom of the posting screen:
Ninja'd by Thanael. Nice work.
The problem here is that, if PFO were made as the game I want to play, few other people would be interested: it would be too specific in some areas, too general in others, and would probably just be entirely too darned hard to code. With that said, though, here are some ideas. 1. Make the game accessible for casual players.
2. Implement some truly intelligent combat.
3. Social skills.
4. Graphics.
5. Golarion organizations.
Additionally, I want to second some of Ulgulanoth, DragonStryk72, and especially Elth's points:
I'm going to quit there, but... I fear this thing. There is so insanely much potential here, but for every possible win, there are a thousand potential pitfalls. I hope this game becomes something I can invest in, but well, I'll always have my dice.
... literally the only melee-exclusive class with no bonus to hit. Why do you see the rogue, or even the sneak attack, as "melee-exclusive"? Ranged attacks are eligible to be sneak attacks within 30', and always are made with the target at least being denied their Dex bonus to AC.
Personally, I think canning Sneak Attack would be a good idea to start with. It may be the iconic feature of the Rogue, but it's also rarely useful, as it is pretty difficult to actually get into a position where it can be used. As such, I think replacing it with other combat abilities that are useful more often may be a good idea. Of all the classes in the core book, the rogue seems to me to be the one least in need of help from tweaks. As Lockgo mentioned earlier, there are copious avenues for improving the sneak attack. The rogue in the primary game in which I play, he sneak attacks nearly every round of combat. If he's not rolling a whole box full of dice for damage, he's instead tripping and stealing something from the opponent. That's pretty darned rogue-y. Secondly, I think the Rogue needs something unique that other classes do not get. At the moment they do not have this. As for what that could be, however, I still need to do some thinking. What the rogue gets in spades, far more so than any other class (other than possibly the fighter), is versatility. The same character class, as written in the core rulebook, with no other supplements, can create more varied, functional types of character than any other. If you find your rogue can't do anything very well, then he's probably doing everything in the game not very well. A rogue can be built as a smart fighter (as in the case of my party member), as a magical trickster (through magic-use rogue talents), as a controller of environments (skill distribution), or as a Baggins-family lucky doofus. If I were looking for classes to pick on, I'd steer more toward the ranger, or maybe the wizard vs sorcerer.
I think I already know the very unfortunate answer to this question, but here goes: "A crossblooded sorcerer has one fewer spell known at each level (including cantrips) than is presented on" the table in the CR. Thus at 4th level (and each level at which he gains a new spell level), those spell slots are... wasted?
I am going to purchase these three titles, but I would so hugely prefer to have one unified hardback Book of the Damned.
Neil, THANK YOU. Seriously. I really, really appreciate the constructiveness of your feedback. It will be reflected in my next entry! RPG Superstar gives a great opportunity to us, the fans, but it also gives an opportunity to you, the professionals, to be ambassadors. In particular, you and Clark really strongly give off the vibe that you want more of us contributing actively and well to the industry of the hobby, and I thank you for that feeling of welcome.
Neil, you are a true gentleman, sir. To continue to hang around this board and offer a one-man writing workshop is either very generous of you or starkly insane. Either way, that makes you my kind of people. Was there further commentary available for my Bone Melter?
I can get the objection, Dragonsong. Makes sense. Not to argue, but it does throw me off a bit that you see The Crow as a hack of The Wraith. I had never heard of it, so I went looking. This was apparently a B list movie that released in `86... but O'Barr was working on The Crow 5 years prior to that.
I'm really very surprised that, in this assembled group, no one has mentioned The Crow, nor The Boys, nor the Fall of Cthulhu run. I know they aren't exactly Marvel/DC, but this is some brilliant stuff. Nightly News? Pax Romana? Anybody?
This is the way I would handle this. I was hoping someone else would already have done the work of typing it all out so I wouldn't have to. :)
Congrats, Cody. This entry was my absolute favorite of the field, and as has been mentioned by others, I can't wait for your BBEG.
|
