When we get a ton of LGBT representation then I'll understand. Until then just let us be happy that we finally get some characters that look and love like us.
I don't begrudge you the other 99% of straight characters in RPG products.
I just received the book and did not recognize Kyra at first.
I do not like that she threw her veil out of the window and let her hair loose. Because I liked the idea that a muslim-looking female Cleric could go out adventuring with the best of them. I get a vibe of "No Islam here, not even a fantasy lookalike" that I did not expect from Paizo.
While I like the non-mythic version of Kyra better as well, I don't think the intent was to say "no Islam here" because if that were so, why would they have included that element in the first place? If I had to guess, it would be to show that, as a heirophant, she is, as the book says, "more of a patron of divine power than a mere devotee." Removing the garb associated with Sarenrae combined with her dropping the holy symbol shows that she is becoming a source of divine power in her own right.
Exactly. But then I always prefer not to jump to negative conclusions.
For one thing, we never want WizKids to do exactly-as-they-were-reprints of minis from previous sets, as that messes with people's value propositions. For example, if you spent a bunch of money or time tracking down a rare fig, and then WizKids dropped it as-is into a set where you can easily get it for a couple bucks, you might well be annoyed. So when we let WizKids reuse a sculpt, we always make them give it a very different paint app. Unfortunately, you can't really repaint the iconics in a way that they're visibly distinct from the original, yet are still clearly the iconics. Give Seoni a blue dress instead of red, for example, and she's no longer "iconic Seoni"; she automatically becomes "wacky variant Seoni."
One option - instead of making the *figure* different, make the *base* unique to the PACG set. Hence you retain the uniqueness of the original figure for collectors of that line, while being able to deliver the iconics to PACG players. It depends on how the figures are moulded to the bases of course, but I'm betting that a new tool for a base is a lot easier (and cheaper) to make than a whole new sculpt for the figure.
This is a good option, because honestly the Iconics shouldn't be behind a rarity wall, or subject to people's value proposition, as they being Iconics should be available easily and readily.
I would like to see "Copyright 2025, Paizo Publishing".
This. So hard.
I love this thread so people can vent and suggest, but I have ZERO interst in a new edition when there is so much yet to explore in Golarion. If I need to buy new books for a new edition, I'd rather just invest in a totally new game altogether and keep what I have with Pathfinder. No thank you, dear Paizo.
Very enthused for the AP after reading the Player's Guide. I'm of the mind set that APs are by their very nature "railroady" and tend to play better that way. I'm certain not everyone agrees with this, but nevertheless I'm quite happy with the traits and how they will resolve themselves later on. Fortunately, I share tables with others that trust in the story, and do not mind a fair bit of assumption and GM guidance. I feel every style deserves equal play and support.
I will say that there are more and more posters lately in this community that are not representing themselves well at all. Overall I'm very proud of this set of forums, but I'm of a mind to give some folks who cannot post with respect some time off to think about how Paizo boards should read.
I'm not willing to suspend my disbelief enough to accept that a melee fighter, no matter how heroic, could even come close to one who bends reality with words and gestures. It's a common genre trope to have the arcane more powerful than the fighting class, with a few exceptions. Ars Magica was based on it, and I'd make the claim that early DnD was as well. That didn't make all players want to play a wizard, or feel useless as a fighter type. It wasn't until PVP type games, where this was even a discussion point in tabletop gaming.
Even in ODnD or 1st edition where this was most true, I rarely played a Mage, and I was never jealous of the power differential, rather I loved my place in the scheme of things protecting the wizards. It felt like a correct representation of what I'd read growing up.
What is it about the mere mention of a non-hetero attraction between two consenting adults that somehow crosses the line into being harmful to impressionable players/readers? Yeah, it's your home game, do what you want... but why are LGBT people automatically censored in it?
I believe it's to do with our very existence being objectionable, a regrettable fact that they prefer not to be reminded of in their fun time reading. Of course calling it an agenda is a way to stigmatize and vilify: We act from carefully-considered principles; They have the agenda.
There are certainly things I don't want in my fun time reading, but I can't say that I always want it purged of, say, homophobes. A setting where nobody ever objects to LGBT people is very nearly as bizarre and impossible to relate to (if in a more positive way) than one where LGBT people simply don't exist. It's nice for an occasional break, of course.
But really I think Paizo did a great job way back in the original Sandpoint write-up. There's a closeted gay couple that everyone in town knows about and nobody cares except one guy that has an E in his abbreviated alignment. It strains my credulity a lot that a somewhat isolated small town (like the one I live in) is that broad-minded, but I'm willing to spot that as Sandpoint is meant to endear itself to the players and it comes from a world that does not have the same obsessive sexual hangups that ours has so often suffered.
Exactly, I don't need sexuality mucking up my D&D or Pathfinder fun. It's not supposed to be part of the game. I must say that I am extremely disturbed about this little tidbit about Sandpoint. They make the one guy that isn't okay with the homosexual couple evil? That truly is bigoted. Yes, let's villify everyone that has moral objections to homosexuality. That sort of thing definitely has no place in Pathfinder.
Just stop. You've been told multiple times to knock off your hate on these forums. Go out, experience more life, and grow up. The western world is steadily getting more progressive, and inclusionary and you'll find that you're going to be on the wrong site of history, just like the bigots were during the civil rights struggles in the US during the 60s saying many of the same things you're saying now.
Paizo, thank you for simply recognizing that us gay folks aren't anything more or less than straight folks.
Plus playing more than one chara get robs a new player from a really unique part of roleplaying games: experiencing the world from the POV of a single character.
Playing an entire party becomes more boardgame, than fantasy experience. Avoid this.
The Bullman posted this today on his Facebook page:
"For any who might be interested.. the Mythic Playtest document got turned over to the editors yesterday. Its going to take a bit to get it ready for release, but it should be quite soon..."
My ideal is and has been a full novel featuring the excellent characters from Mother Bears
by Wendy N. Wagner. Still my favorite Pathfinder Tales web fiction, not starring Count Jeggare and Radovan.
Have you considered posting the far future rules updates (I.e. those you would still have the time to alter, if needed) to the boards as a sort of informal playtest process? That way you may be able to head some of the potential difficulties off at the pass, so to speak.
Given all the time and development staff in the world... maybe? With the demands of a monthly line's development, though, it's just not feasible. I also really wouldn't want to disappoint folks by promising X and delivering Y, as so, so, so much changes from outlining to what an author writes and then from an author's work through development (you might be shocked). Sometimes we're tinkering literally up to the day things go to print.
But you know, we're not above revision and evolving our designs and rules sets.
For example, I really like how the squires in Knights turned out, so much so that we're going to take an upcoming opportunity to do something related for another book in this line (hint, it's the Dungeoneer's Handbook). But you can bet we're going to take what we learned here and use it that next thing.
Monthly product lines can totally be killers and lock us into an endless "Go, go, go!" pace, but they also mean that the next thing comes fast. It makes it easy--especially with a line as flexible as the Player Companion--to experiment. Things folks like can make it into upcoming outlines speedily, while things folks don't can be excised even faster.
So keep talking, folks. We're listening and it's our job to make these even better every time.
Totally understandable, and when I asked I knew it was a bit Iike grabbing smoke.
But a question unasked, is an opportunity stillborn. :)
Just google up Perram's Spellbook and enjoy. A print compendium would be worthless after a few new spells hit, while a web based service like Perram's is always viable.
Plus Perram supports the community via Know Direction podcast, and is a great guy.
After reading Dave Gross' amazing Prince of Wolves, I find myself hoping for a Blood of the Moon next with some were-options, specifically Sczarni options!
I have an idea. Let's take the Paladin out of this special category that he's somehow been put into, and treat him like any other character with motivations.
A code is no different than how any other character should see his/her motivations. Every character is living by their own codes, they just don't name them.
None of these are flaws to me. Class balance is nothing to strive for IMO. Back in the day, Wizards were the most powerful by far. My groups were never affected by this fact, and played what they liked.
In life, some things are inherently better than others and that's ok.
The artwork looks like something out of a third tier 90's Marvel comic. Sorry, but, ugh. I hate the heavily distorted faces, they look like they melted.
Totally disagree. It's not trying to be superhero art, but a stylized fantasy and it works great. One of our best artists, Frank Quietly has "distorted faces".
The storytelling/layouts are inventive and clear, and the backgrounds detailed. I'd say they got quite a catch as far as the art.
I know the writing is top notch as Skullkickers rocks.
There's no point in attempting to correct perceived imbalances unless you already recognize them yourself. They are all matters of opinion and circumstance; the most you could accomplish is create variants that you, personally, feel are balanced, because it is impossible to appease everyone's complaints. All those complaints are different, and as such asking the general community for things that should be addressed is futile.
First poster nailed it. Lists of perceived imbalances belong on the WOW boards.
Reading back I'm getting a lot of usage out of the list of expectations. I also have to thank Jiggy, et al for being as cool as you were to me when I first came to the boards and posted my thoughts on this topic without considering the fact that PFS charas are trained Pathfinder agents, and would have foreknowledge of these situations.
