The OP's page

LOL! Seriously, the manticore gets all the love. Not even the succubus gets this kind of treatment.

Maybe that's why there's no androsphinx. The poor guys couldn't keep up.

I can't believe this thread is still alive.

What have I done?!

Oh bite me. We've been neutered and rendered as meaningless as Half-elves. I for one don't appreciate your jubilations about it.

I wonder if Grubulabulatory feet taste any good...

Gurubabaramalamaswami feet tastes better than they smell.

As for neutered...I just don't see that at all. More like set free of an old trope in favor of greater variety.

To all "What was the rant about?" posters...I was actually started on said rant by the Seoni/Santa thing. I just assumed everyone would pick up the context from the hivemind. My bad.

Wait...intruders in the hive! Eliminate! Destroy! Biff!

I remember watching Wild Kingdom on TV and these two guys trying to wrangle a "normal" anaconda and pretty much getting their asses handed to them for most of the encounter.

Some critters should be difficult to grapple with.

Yeah, it is a joyous curse.

Until game night arrives and I realize that I've forgotten to stat up the evil high priest's spells and which ones he has active and how they change his statblock.

I'm a Paizo junkie.

At first I was very worked up about the PFRPG because I thought it was going to be the continuation of 3.5. However, it seems more likely that Paizo wants to go more in its own direction. The game clearly retains its 3.5 legacy and feels like D&D to me. No problem with that.

But I just don't need it for myself. Don't get me wrong; have no doubt that I will take some of the Beta and houserule it into my game. Like DMs all over the world I add a little of this and change a little of that to make my own D&D pie. My pie might look a little different than yours but its still yummy to me.

Damn. I'm hungry.

For me it's all the extra work. As a DM I just don't look forward to all the conversions. Don't get me wrong...it's the experience of doing just that (BoXM anyone?) that makes me leary of doing it more or again.

As a consumer I don't like the invalidation of all that I've already spent my money on. I love the Pathfinder campaign setting but not so much so the PFRPG.

Ultimately, I think I'm going to be in the minority: the group who is more or less satisfied with an entire shelf of books. Anything I add at this point will be for the purpose of cherry picking.

My final realisation was: I don't need Pathfinder. I just like it. So I can afford to go without it.

To the OP.

For me the deal has already been broken and that happened months ago. What I realized is that I am very happy with 3.5. I don't want a new game, not yet anyway.

I think what finally drove the point home for me was a post that I was reading of all the changes that had been made so far in pathfinder. A poster explained why pazio needed to make pathfinder a different game. All of these reasons made sense - for pazio. But I don't play D&D for any company. I play for me.

If I decide at some point to try something new, then I will give pathfinder a look, but if I do I will look at 4th edition as well. But at this point, it looks like I still have years of play left in 3.5.

Yep. You and Hogarth are thinking along my line. I've got so much invested in 3.5. Not just money but huge gobs of time working on my campaigns. Throwing it out the window for the next new thang is just not working out for me. Looking over at DriveThruRPG I can see that there's still plenty of 3.5 stuff waiting for my cash.

Paizo has me with the APs as long as they are 3.5. I think they're going to lose me when I'm required to invest in a new rules system to keep going.

I say PF should go far enough to handle the old problems, such as they are, but not too far to make it possible to use 3.5 material with only trivial update work.

So far, I say it worked out quite well.

Old problems? Such as....?

Wow. How did this get resurrected?

No...wait...it's hell. Sorry. Carry on.

Do any of you find Pathfinder to be needlessly complicating things?

For instance: Beta reintroduces the mechanic of: if your sword has enough plusses it will bypass certain types of DR. However, the description under Greater Magic Weapon says it can only bypass DR/magic. Despite it being the spell used to make a +5 sword or whatever.

That doesn't make any sense at all and seems to greatly complicate things in my mind. Even worse than golf bags.

That golfbag of weapons thing again.

I was initially against changing the 3.5 DR mechanic but I've noticed that it's one of the number one things that nerfs fighter types (i.e. they can't get damage through the DR).

Any thoughts on how the Beta "X plusses overcome DR/Y" mechanic? Does it bring the fighter back on par?

I admit I started this thread to see how long it would take someone to start flaming. Thank you Rumere.

These days on the Paizo boards you can't go into almost any topic without some pompous ass flinging crap at you. I'm getting tired of it and I'm tired of the Paizo crew for letting it slide.

I remember a time when we all came here because we played a game called D&D and we just wanted to hang out with other gamers and shoot the breeze. Now folks just want to shoot you down.

If I can't come here without getting a negative vibe every single time I'm going to start looking at other options.

So...incorporealism at 7th level. Anyone? Bueller?

I hate bumping myself. Help me out here guys.

Clarification: the gaze attack is usable only in the ghaele's humanoid form, not the incorporeal globe. Her primary attack in globe form is 2 light rays (ranged touch) that deal 2d6 damage each at 7th level. It can also use its SLAs in globe form.

While the ghaele begins to suffer from low HD around the mid levels my primary concern is that the incorporeality hits at 7th level which is low mid-level. That's a pretty big deal. Granted, its a highly visible ball of light, but that is overcome by its once per day greater invisibility SLA (which it picks up at 6th level..that's right...6th level; along with such gems as chain lightning and wall of force).

I can see so many potential pains in the ass it almost gives me a headache. But then my wife gives me the Bambi eyes and I totally fail my Will save (I'm pretty much forever charmed by her anyway).

Still waiting for some official ruling here. Don't force me to start another thread. I'll call it: "The Krome Hypothesis: Double Your CMB or Your Money Back".

Now, we carefully read the rules for maneuvers which says the maneuver makes an attack roll and adds his CMB to it.

Here is the fun part. Actually read what is an attack roll. An attack roll is a d20 PLUS your attack bonus, which includes your STR modififer+BAB+ size modifier. So our Fighter makes an attack roll of 1d20+4+3+0 (1d20+7). To this roll he adds his CMB of 7. This means the total to attack is 1d20+14 (1d20+4+3+0+7). A 3rd level fighter just needs to roll 10 or higher to grapple an ogre.

I know many players who say that is not correct and will say "An attack roll is an unmodified d20 roll." However, if you read the actual rules, you find that an attack roll is in fact a d20 plus the attack bonus. Always has been.

Combat manuevers vastly favor the...

Jason Buhlman, I summon thee. I'd sure like an official ruling on this. If Krome's interpretation is correct that really kind of throws a different perspective on things for me.

But I still like the opposed roll better. Feels more like wrestling.

Uhhh...back to our regularly scheduled program. Power attack: 3.5 version or Pathfinder version?

I can see how opposed rolls could slow things down a bit. Or do they? A DM and a player rolling dice and comparing results at the same time versus just the player rolling and the DM adjudicating the roll. How much more time are we talking here?

Having magical weapons enhancement pluses help penetrate DR is fine by me. (I prefer the higher-plus version to the OP's, so +5 weapons are needed to penetrate DR/adamantium. Although just bumping up the DR to around 3.0 values and having magic weapons cut through 5 points of DR per enhancement bonus would be acceptable.

What OP are you talking about? 'Cause the one who started this thread is in favor of 3.5 DR without change.

Just for the record.

--The OP (yeah you know me!)

I haven't played in an all-male group either, for the obvious reason. But in general I try to build groups that have a high comfort factor with roleplaying--I just enjoy the games more that way--which includes being able to clearly separate PC/PC or PC/NPC from player/player or player/GM interactions.

In our current one-player games, consensual romance is pretty much always on-board, at the detail level appropriate to its role in the storyline--usually you don't need or want to know just how Tab A goes into Slot B. We are much more light-handed with vile stuff like rape. Often the GM will just drop his/her voice and say, "They've been pretty badly abused" rather than going into any details.
Mary

In your game isn't your player also your husband? Wouldn't that qualify as an all male group? :P

In regards to your one player party: how many characters does he run? Does he concentrate on one character particulary or does he try to roleplay a whole group? What's his party makeup?

All off topic, but enquiring minds want to know.

For those of us who have used mature elements in our games...how did it go? Do any of you find that the reaction is different if you have a mixed gender group (as opposed to the all male nerd party)?

In my own campaign I set my party up to ambush a bad guy who was showing up at a location with a wagonload of kidnapped street urchins. When my party heard the half-orc bad guy threatening to further abuse one of the urchins my wife and a player who is the father of two little girls immedieately saw red and abandoned stealth in favor of an all-out assault with the half-orc their favored target.

In the aftermath, when it became clear that at least one of the female victims had been brutalized and raped by the half-orc my party members immediately excuted the half-orc on the spot.

Although the father of two was playing a LG monk (with exalted feat progression) I chose not to penalize him for the act.

And do keep in mind that I do use these elements very sparingly and not arbitrarily or with any intent to titillate. I was wanting to provoke a reaction of righteous outrage from my players. I got it in spades.

Share your thoughts and experiences my friends.

Obviously I vote for 3.5 DR as it stands.

I'm not above compromise however. Skjaldahowisitspelled?'s suggestion was pretty reasonable.

-The OP (yeah you know me!)