Almighty Dinosaur, what is your opinion of Trader Joe's?
Search Posts
Almighty dinosaur, am I excited for Starfinder? My main campaign setting is a modernish technology setting where magic is widely known to exist. I've been trying to use Pathfinder as a system chassis for this game, but I'd like to inquire whether you think Starfinder could do the job if I erased laser guns and wrote assault rifles.
Almighty dinosaur, did you eat Gary Teter? Haven't seen him in forever.
Almighty Dinosaur, a while back there was a monster book that included stats for the Coatl, which was a Good outsider. I think it was in 3.5, and I am quite fuzzy on whether there is a Pathfinder version or what book it would be in. Might I call upon your superior knowledge base to identify the 3.5 sourcebook and answer whether or not there has been a Pathfinder version of the creature?
Aside from Golarion, what is your favorite published campaign setting?
No, I meant gun archetypes for classes other than the Gunslinger, like the Holy Gun.
When it comes to choosing a girlfriend, I wouldn't touch Merisiel with a ten foot pole. Did you have anything to do with designing Paizo's gun archetypes?
What is your opinion on Retrofuturism? Is it fascinating, humorous, or just stupid? Do you like works with a retrofuturistic feel such as parts of Fallout 3?
In the context of a fantasy analogue of Louisiana, would reskinning linnorms as giant magical alligator-like monsters be cool or overly cartoonish?
James, when writing up a fantasy analogue of Louisiana, how accurate should I be? Should I err on the side of popular myths or accuracy? For example, the popular myth is that sticking pins in a voodoo doll is done to harm a person. Should I go with the popular myth, or the correct usage (which is to bless by pinning names and pictures to the doll)?
Theoretically, could Golarion have modern firearms, computers, and vehicles (including fighter jets) in 800 years? Theoretically, could the mana wastes have healed in 800 years? Theoretically, could Andorran have an empire in 800 years? Theoretically, could Cheliax still be infernal in 800 years? Theoretically, could Alkenstar be much larger in 800 years do to a head start on firearm development? I'm not asking you to confirm anything, and I'm not asking for a modern Golarion to be published. I'm just asking whether any of these things would be consistent with how Golarion is right now. I have reasons to want to know these things. They involve me having a bit of time before having to move to Job Corps and me having just finished Modern Warfare 3 and in the mood for more spec ops modern combat.
James, what do you think Golarion will look like politically 800 years into the future?
Does Amiri prefer to conquer men or women?That's something you'd have to ask her... IF YOU DARE! Would it smooth things over if I let her conquer me, oh great dinosaur?
Could you please try to convince somebody to make and frequent an Ask Alain thread? Please?
James, do you like the Eldritch Knight? Ever played an Eldritch Knight? Ever made a BBEG that you love very, very dearly? Ever qualified for Eldritch Knight without any levels of Fighter or Wizard? Do you like the idea of a Ranger/Witch (Gravewalker archetype)/Eldritch Knight lich who fights with a scythe as a BBEG? Do you like Libris Mortis? Do you like the stitched flesh familiar feat (It's like a flesh golem, but a kitty!) from Libris Mortis? Do you like the idea of letting the above lich have a familiar instead of the poppet Gravewalkers normally get so that she can take the stitched flesh familiar feat? Is it bad for me, as a GM, to treat this BBEG as a character?
An interesting idea that I think would need to be playtested before one could say how it might work out. Players and the way they interact with and freak out about damage reduction is a weird arena of possibilities.... To be clear about something, guns can still bypass DR fully, as can melee weapons. The change is that melee weapons do an as yet undetermined amount of bonus damage whenever they do this, while guns don't. This also only applies to metal based DR, not any other type of DR. Can you link me to any past discussions I could read to get a better idea of how players feel about DR?
James, do you think it would be unbalancing to allow, on a case by case basis, Fey to have the Undead or another type and the Fey type at the same time, with an explanation of which features of which type override features of the other type (such as hit dice, skills, and BAB)? I plan to use Fey heavily, and I may stat out some from my books of folklore. However, IRL the lines between a Fey and an Undead were very, very blurred, and a lot of creatures classified as Fey in folklore would fit the Undead type as logically as they would fit the Fey type. Therefore, I'm considering allowing some Fey to multitype if it makes sense for the folklore behind them.
James, I wanted to run something by you to see if it makes sense. In my campaign setting, I'm considering making advanced firearms the most common weapons, with melee being mostly a secondary method of fighting. However, I want there to be some melee combat, so I came up with an idea to encourage it. Make metal based damage reduction common for magical creatures that favour melee combat. A blade is larger than a bullet, and therefore has more of the metal that bypasses the DR. Therefore, whenever they bypass DR, they get extra damage that a bullet wouldn't get, because they have so much more of the harmful materiel. Does this explanation for why melee weapons are deadlier against creatures with DR make sense? Do you think it would encourage melee combat it certain circumstances while leaving firearms as the more common weapons?
How do you feel about use rope as a function of survival? any reasons you can think of why its a bad houserule? I have a solution. Variable governing attributes to skills, depending on what you are trying to do.
:D Give it! Such a thing for classes once existed as 3.5 homebrew, and it worked, so this is doable.
Do you like steampunk? Do you like D&D/Pathfinder with steampunk in it?
IANJ, but I believe your new interpretation is correct.
I don't smash expectations completely. The underground-dwelling, clannish dwarves one expects still exist, and if you want to play one, they are 100% playable. I just add variations I think would be interesting, because I think the dwarven race really needs a bit of variety to make it more interesting. I really want dwarves to have something besides the traditional things they've always had. We seem to be on agreement when it comes to subraces. I have numerous ones for dwarves, but they all share identical mechanics. It's lifestyles that make my subraces different. I'm glad Pathfinder is like this. I don't want to see elven subraces for every terrain. That annoyed me in 3.5.
I prefer tradition. No arboreal dwarves or brooding gothy halflings in my games, as a general rule. When I DO break tradition, it's on a specific eccentric character by eccentric character basis. I like to mix tradition and new ideas together instead of preferring one over the other. For example, in my world dwarves do often live underground, some in mountains, some in caves below sea level. This is pretty traditional. However, I see the reason that dwarves do this as being a skill with architecture, and they use this skill in many environments, not just underground. There are tree dwarves who suspend cities between hundreds of trees, and some never step foot on the ground, spending their whole lives in these treetop communities. Other dwarves live on ships that are floating cities, capable of sustaining entire communities at sea for generations and constantly under some sort of construction. Basically, instead of making these tree dwarves or sea dwarves to be edgy and non-traditional, I take the traditional dwarves and add non-traditional dwarves to the mix, so that both traditional and non-traditional forms of the race exist side by side. Do you like this sort of approach? Do you have a problem with 3.5's endless subraces for player races, such as wood elves and desert elves and arctic elves and so on?
Mighty dinosaur, have to ever read a Legends and Lairs book? Have you ever heard of their book Necromantic Lore? Have you heard of the Necromentals in this book? Did you like the idea?
O Magnificent dinosaur How closely to traditional race roles do you hold when creating places to adventure? Do you stand by tradition as much as possible, or do you like to change things up?
I want a version of Unearthed Arcana. Unfortunately, the mighty dinosaur has denied this request for a book of alternate rules more than once.
Oh magnificent dinosaur, Do you enjoy PF games involving heavy use of undead as the primary enemies?
Could you extrapolate on this comment? Oh great dinosaur, do you forgive my imperfect grammar?
What about a hard cover environment rulebook? It'd cover adventuring in deserts, forests, jungles, mountains, tundra, cities, naval adventures, and so on. Please? Can we have this? There is so much stuff that it could have.
O Benevolent Dinosaur, Can we have a Pathfinder rulebook all about how creature types act? It'd be like Libris Mortis, Draconimicon, Lords of Madness, and so on all rolled up into one book, but without many new creatures. |