And BTW, crap denotes all the crap I own, even the stuff I like, so don't think I'm calling only the stuff I don't like crap because it's all crap. I'm not trying to offend anyone buy calling the stuff only you like "crap".
Despite intimations otherwise, nobody here is that prickly and sensitive. :D
Or they shouldn't be.
You've taken a sentence fragment without context and reverse engineered to come up with an interpretation where I have insulted you. I could spend a great deal of time trying to step through the logic and sequence of everyone's respective posts to show where that wasn't my intention..
But I'm going to pass.
You're going to have to read the whole thread and consider the overall tone of everything I said. I defended the Item Cards, but I also tried to put myself in the place of those who might consider it an extra expense they can't afford. Empathy and a balanced perspective.
If you can't see that, then nothing I'll say now will dissuade you otherwise. As I mentioned in my previous post, perhaps my words were a little inflammatory too, and you have my regrets, but that's all I can do for you.
That wasn't what I said, or intended. Those who like to use them, use them-- fine. Others who dont use them but have an urge to complete collections may struggle to resist getting these items. To the extent I gave offence I retract my statement- on reflection the implied imagery was a little inflammatory.
And I'll apologize if I was also infammatory (unconditionally I might add). Yours was the last post in a short series and it sort of summed it up. You might have gotten the brunt of some of my frustration that Coridan's players find no other use them to torment household pets, and Geraint thinks he'll throw them away.
I honestly don't care what people use them for, and if someone doesn't want them for no other reason than "they don't want them"- they don't owe any explanation to me. Chuck 'em at the cat or toss 'em in the rubbish, I'm not a cop. On the other hand, one doesn't have to depict the product as garbage either. There is a balance between two extremes, wouldn't you agree?
Anyway, I have harbor no ill will against you. Even in light of your next post to which I am going to reply.
Heaven's Agent wrote:
I agree fully. It just makes me think they're keeping a bit of information, vital to this discussion, to themselves.
And I can respect your perspective on that. To a degree, till they cough up something concrete we are throwing darts in the fog with our speculation.
I guess I just would like to see something more.. 'modular' about the what we have seen from that post. A clear way to make them more customizable to any campaign setting. From that one article I don't see it, but I'm not a game designer either.
You, the poster only have a finite amount of time to edit your own post, then it's stuck.
He was asking for a moderator to do it for you, probably realizing that at this point you couldn't do it yourself.
No hard feelings, I'm sure it will occur to you next time.
And it was a good idea!
I suggested the 12 Iconic be evil because I vaguely have this idea that in a special Dr. Who episode, allegedly the Doctor's 12 regeneration is evil..
I didn't post that because I don't know if it's actually true or not, and I didn't want to embarrass myself if I was wrong. (Never got to see that episode) But the whole "12th guy is a baddie" struck me as kinda neat.
Just to interject on the "Do the Gamemastery Modules first before trying Pathfinder" comments...
GameMastery is now fully Golarion. The modules just don't interconnect to each other like Pathinder AP's do, but they're still the same campaign setting.
I think it poses a risk to do one without the other.
Heaven's Agent wrote:
I take your point.. I just want to remark Wizard claims it will maintain Eberron's atmosphere. That statement is entirely subjective to however they want to define "maintaining the atmosphere." Their idea of adherence to the setting could be a lot different than what you and I considering maintaining the feel.
With the disclaimer's made in my previous post, I remain skeptical. "Neat trick, now show me you can do it."
EDIT: Saw this posted right before I posted:
Heaven's Agent wrote:
WotC, on the other hand, indicates that they will be able to accomplish this task rather easily, without extensive changes to their setting.
They say that, and I'm not calling them liars, but with the amount of change that was in that post/article that was linked to above.. they may have to show it, in order for it to be believed.
Heaven's Agent wrote:
EDIT: Provided Paizo ever gets a hold of the 4E rules, of course.
On the serious side.. I dunno. I'm not a game designer, but it looks like a severe set of changes to me. Perhaps this is why there is talk of 'campaign changing meta-events' to help rationalize these changes.
I guess we'll have to see what the Paizo Designers think when they get something concrete.
James Jacobs wrote:
Lemmee guess, Iomedae is one of Erik's? Hence the Starstone connection?
Come on James, she's got a hawt paladin!
(meant in the spirit of fun)
Andrew Crossett wrote:
I'm with ya buddy. I'm like a caveman thawed out from 1st edition, so I have very little invested in terms of dollars in 3.5, so there's been no motive for me to hate 4th edition blindly, but I do love Golarion too. I call myself a Golarion GM on my own local gaming community boards.
If this post is reliable and legitimate.. Geez oh pete, they're going to wipe the board clean of a lot of existing campaign concepts.
Actually, I always thought Alignment failed in that people chose it before they ever played the character. That the actual playstyle and group inter-dynamic would reveal the PC's true alignment after the player achieved a level or two..
But that aside, this eliminates Protection From Evil/Good, the Holy Avenger.. Spells designed to deal with creatures of alignment. Certain damage resistances..
I'm not playing Chicken Little.. and I don't know if this post is reliable or not..
But rather than blindly follow tradition for it's own sake (not that tradition is bad in the least), I run everything through the filter of "Can the Pathfinder Campaign continue to function with this ruleset?
I don't know, but it made my eyes open a little..
Andrew Crossett wrote:
Strange stuff.. thanks for the link.
No schools of magic, because you're going to replace them with foci instead?
Fighter 'stickiness'? That sounds a lot like drawing aggro in a MMO.
I'd love to hear your comments in context though Andrew. Do you think these changes would prevent Paizo from presenting it's new campaign world in the way they have already started?
Gleemax Abomination Site wrote:
Alignment: One major change to this system in 4 E is the fact characters can choose to be “unaligned,” having no significant impulses towards good or evil. Characters can still choose to be good or evil (law and chaos are not mentioned), but most characters and monsters will be unaligned. Unsurprisingly, most spells and powers that revolve around alignment are now gone.
ADVANCE APOLOGIES: THREADJACK!
Thanks for the link!
Mr. Jacobs, take note- that is how a drow is supposed to look! Awesome!
I saw that because I've seen a few that look like Beyonce in a bad mood. Not that she isn't a lovely young woman, but she not a Drow.
EDIT: But maybe not - from the chat on 11-20, from James Jacobs: "The wizared iconic and the dwarf iconic (and the paladin and the bard) will probably show up as pregenerated characters in Pathfinder 7."
I seem to recall the paladin was mentioned as female, and a worshiper of Iomedae.
Edit: If James comes on and says I'm wrong, then my response is that he needs to cough up some Iomedae data so I'll shut up!
Yeah, I know, but I still didn't like it and almost took out the entire prison section rather than have to punt to magic. Thankfully, with regards to the zombies, I had them be the smugglers that initially found the place, and didn't have to suffer any brain damage justifying their existence.
I chalk it up to a failed SAN roll for the GM. They haven't noticed any difference.
I like your fix. Out of curiosity, what did you do about the catacombs of wrath? I struggled with the wooden platforms in the prison - I had to do some hand waving and say "uhh...it's magic...that's why they haven't rotted into dust..."
Not to threadjack- but yeah- I got busted on that one too. "uhh...it's magic"
Well, the way I see it is that most magic items my players will buy, they will know what they are buying and how it works. Same thing if they recieve magic items as gift from NPCs that employed them or want to reward them or want to help them.
No disagreement there Djoc. You pay for it or receive it as a gift, you also receive the means to activate it.
I don't think it's unreasonable for a society to place rules on merchandise. It would be like a smithing guild requiring that all sword be made with a certain quality ore.
I take your point Tiz, but I think you have to consider how specialized the skill set of manufacturing magical items is. There's no wrong or right answer here, but a society that regulates the production of certain goods, must also set certain standards (which is what you're getting at), but that also implies that the goods are common enough that a "industry standard" can be applied. And then enforced! I can see that with a smith, but when you see that applied magical items, the setting is more like Eberron than Pathfinder.
(Disclaimer: I am only familiar with Eberron in so far as I've read comments on this board that implies it's a magic-tech society)
I don't quite get your intuitive comment. The 'law' I'm proposing would only allieviate some of the requirements for identifying items, and only help with those items with command words. It's not going to help the PCs identify a Holy Long Sword +2, for example.
What I meant by intuitive was actually quite different, you're correct. What I meant was.. if you're going have society and organizations that forbid magic items not having commonly labeled command words, you could just dispense with command words altogether and just have the item (a wand for example) work with a simple flick of the wrist. The knowledge on how to use it is "intuitive and innate" to any individual who can use the spell. No messy command words to regulate then. I'm not advocating this by the way. I'm saying, if the Law demands all magic items be labeled with command words, it's so easy in a meta-game sense that you could dispense with the command words entirely.
As much as my players would probably like not being tapped for a 100+ gps for every identification I would be told I was being too easy.
I don't disagree, but that is a setting and style issue for me. A society that does that with magic is.. not quite how I envision the Golarion/Pathfinder setting. It's not that someone couldn't do it, but it says something about the society that does.
And you make a good point with theft, there would other better ways to defend against stealing magic items.. But I see the Command Word to an item sort of like the registration code or password to a piece of software. It's one more obstacle to prevent unauthorized use.
Thanks for the discussion in any case!
There was never an actual final episode...at least not at the time. Cartoons were not made with endings at the time. I think one of the lead writers eventually wrote an ending (and that was what was included) when he kept getting asked about it, but it was after the show went of the air.
Ah! I stand corrected but blame second hand information.
Yeah, I recall cartoons of 'that time'. ;)
HA! That made me actually laugh out loud.
You know, somebody geekier than I told me that they picked up the DVD set of that.. And there's actually a final episode that wraps things up (I don't know if it was ever aired on TV.)
The kids get sent back home after saving the universe or something, but not before it's revealed that Venger is actually DungeonMaster's son. Lol
I have almost finished Chapter One, and between the actual Chapter One Book and the Player's Guide- it contained everything I needed.
The free forums here also filled in a lot of gaps----- let me rephrase that! :) There weren't a lot of gaps! But.. when I had questions, I found all my answers on the Forums. It's an additional resource.
You've made some fine points Geraint, which is why I hesitate to say that anything you're saying is wrong, or actually needs to be lobbied against.
It's good that they hear how you feel.
Having followed the boards, and having a decent memory- I know that at one point they wanted to have "different layers" of subscription for Pathfinder Chronicles. For example: a subscription that just included books, and another subscription that included anything and everything.
I don't think that it's greed that is driving this necessarily, because Gary Teter and Vic Wertz have both said that programming the ordering system and re-vamping the consolidated shipping has been very difficult. This inclusion of the cards might stem from a need to simplify.
And for all I actually know, maybe they will come up with those different subscription options after all, particularly when they see the feedback. Which is why your point of view is important.
It's a reference to how much distance you can get out your gasoline/petrol. It's an American cultural slang phrase.
Or, "The value of the statement might have relative value to your particular circumstances."
Maybe I'm getting over-agitated, maybe not; perhaps a Paizo staff member could set me straight?
Mike wrote this in another thread. He is the Brand Manager for Titanic Games, which worked on the Harrow Deck. Hopefully this will help.
Mike Selinker wrote:
Everything else in the Chronicles subscription appears to be information; why throw an optional game-aid into an information bundle?
I don't propose that what you're saying is without merit or consideration. That's partially why I responded to Werecorpse's post and not yours.
If you're short on cash, and you want the PDF's, I can see where you're coming from. They might pose as an obstacle to getting those PDF's.
Yet some of the previous posts had the tone of "what good are these things?" and "who would use them?" That, my friend, is something to which I can reply, and thought was worth defending. If someone wants to chuck them at the cat and throw them away, that's their decision, but it doesn't mean that someone else couldn't find some value or use for the cards.
However, I don't disagree that they can be a luxury item for gamer on a budget.
While I am on board with making identification a little easier...
This seems a little too much like deus ex machina to get around a game mechanic. It might be simpler just to make many of them function on an intuitive level (bearing in mind that you still need the correct class to use) if you want to go this far.
For example: how would this law be enforced? Who would willingly follow it, since it makes the theft of magic items so much easier? Secret command words are like the keys to a car, such a law would be like mandating that people leave their keys in the car at all times.
Please don't take that as an attack, because I don't like to troll post. It's just honest feedback, and I appreciate that you're brainstorming.
Right now I have...
1.) Backed off demanding identification for simple +1 equipment, as long as Detect Magic has been cast. Might do this for higher bonuses so long as they don't have a secondary property
Plenty of the Gamemastery modules have prestige classes referred to. So in answer to the original question it wouldn't be too hard to go through my subscription and post the prestige classes that already exist in Golarion. I will do this later unless someone else does.
That would be cool if you did. :)
Pathfinder has had the Thaumatage (sp?) from a Green Ronin book referenced... And will have a couple from Plot and Poison referenced in the near future. Mostly evil oriented NPC classes it seems like..
I'm at work or I'd research it more thoroughly before posting.
I dont really understand the attraction of the cards, do you just give them out when players get magic items? Why? cant the players just write this stuff down? I know I am unlikely to trade them so they will undoubtedly just gather dust.
It's another level or layer of immersion.
I'm not going to harangue you or the other posters for not digging the cards, if you don't like them- you don't like them.. And that's fair, but let me make a few counter points-
Why make color maps either with software or printing them from a PDF?
Immersion, suspension of disbelief, better storytelling, and fun factor. Hell I buy Pathfinder AP's because I want something with an actual interesting plot and story, but there are plenty of cheaper adventures I could get somewhere else if that wasn't a priority.
The cards are an immersive inventory control tool. And I willingly concede they would appeal to some groups more than others. Some groups don't get as invested no matter how great the AP is, because "beer and pretzels" are where they choose to be, and that's okay.
I do take exception to the notion that those that get into them only do so because of a lack of ability to resist collectables. In a previous post in this thread, I gavce a link to another thread where I did tell Mike McArtor and Joshua Frost that the Heroes Hoard and Relics of War series of cards were more of less undesirable because they had to be collected instead of bought in a set. I don't want to collect them, I want them as GM tools. But that's another discussion being held elsewhere.
At the risk of sounding like a fanboi, what I've read into what has been said that use of the Harrow Deck is optional.
That is, every chapter allows you the "opportunity" to bring the Harrow Deck into play, but every chapter does not "mandate" that you do so.
I think you're projecting your fears concerning this product into making it more of a big deal than it actually is..
Having said that, because I am interested in the Harrow Deck, you could count me as biased I suppose.
Odonna Mirrin wrote:
Dundjinni is tricky to the point of being annoying. When last I frequented the site, they had a tutorial- but you couldn't complete the tutorial without the full version of the program (certain things were disabled in the free trial).
They don't have a manual, they have a Help file. It's not bad, but it's not good either. And I rarely like to be that harsh, but in this case I will be. The Forum Admins would pass my questions off with "read the manual" and when I told them it wasn't in the Help Files and defied them to prove me wrong, they backed off.
Last I checked, you can't run the current version of Java, but an older version. If you be the current version you have to uninstall it and downgrade. If you don't- the program doesn't work and the mouse won't drop anything where you need it to be. They may have patched that by now.
Resizing and printing is a chore, and just as tricky as folks on this board have found using .bmps and .jpegs.
You can move around certain art pieces in folders that you've imported manually, but if it's art that has been insalled through a self-installing file- you have leave it right where the program put it, or it won't work.
See what I mean?
I hear CCC is more difficult to use, but Dundjinni needs a programming overhaul.