I'm with you here, Velderan. The biggest failing of Incarnum and the Tome of Magic was the fact that their systems required their own, special obscure classes that were spellcasters that didn't cast spells, but turds. And these abilities were largely (or completely) unavailable to other classes. Sadly, the same can also be said of psionics, divine magic or arcane magic. I guess for me, alternate magic systems have just kind of sucked. Why create 7 systems of magic when 2 should do just fine within the game? That said, I'm always up for looking at new systems; I hope someday someone will come up with something good.
I know its still some time away, but I am stirred with anticipation for the next RPG Superstar competition. The last two have provided a great deal of excitement, entertainment and solid advice from the experts. With the Pathfinder rules finalized and out, I can't wait to see what this season holds!
Its a ditto for me on gnomes, and for all of the same reasons. Gnomes are kind of dwarf, kind of elf, kind of halfling, and lots of annoying. Various versions have tried to make something out of gnomes, and either made them a nuisance, over-the-top, or boring. No gnomes. Crunchwise, I think the half-elf has always been underwhelming, in every version, though I like the fluff.
Saw it midnight showing on Thursday, 8/13.
Saw it Monday, 8/17.
I'm going to buy this movie. Awesomesauce! The effects alone make it worthwhile, then there's the story, the acting, the directing and the writing. Very well-done, very good movie. I highly recommend it.
On another movie note - avoid the Perfect Getaway at all costs. I saw it free.
I want my money back.
I haven't bought any of the Reaper PPs, but from the pics on their site, they look better than the WotC ones.
Prepainted plastic vs. white metal: Although not everyone has the time/ability/patience to paint their metal minis (MM), they ultimately look better than prepainted plastics (PP). Personally, I'd rather see PPs of common things like orcs, goblins, etc., that one might need a horde of, and MMs for unique/special figures. I know that's probably unrealistic from a business standpoint two run two minis lines, so I'd go for the MMs, and pick up another comapany's PPs for the hordes.
Miniatures Subscription: While I am not much of a subscriber these days, I think a minis subscription would be good. Back in the day, Grenadier had a Dragon of the Month, and later Giant of the Month, line. Something like that could be really cool; a kind of "Iconic of the Month" line, each month featuring an iconic creature. That's something I'd subscribe to in a heartbeat.
Adventurer Minis: There are already a lot of adventurer minis out there, from Reaper and others. Yet there are always folks who want just the "right" figure for their PC or NPC. Easily modifiable minis for such figures would be nice to see. A figure that comes with optional pieces - different weapons/heads/accoutrements - in the blister would be useful for this. Also, Ral Partha used to make a line of figs where there were three versions of the same character - a low-level, mid-level and high-level version. That would be nice, too.
Just my two coppers...
Erik Mona wrote:
You know, I was thinking just this week that the next step in promoting Pathfinder should be a miniatures line...
Personally, I'd love to see more monsters. I have seen enough PCs, thank you very much!
I noticed some prestige classes aren't in the book: Archmage, Blackguard, Dwarven Defender, Heirophant, Horizon Walker and Thaumaturgist, all of which are in the SRD. The red wizard isn't SRD, so it makes sense it wasn't included. The prestige classes present are the same ones in the beta pdf, spiffed up. I'm wondering what the decision was to omit these. There are plenty of other changes, too, but this is the one I felt worth noting at this time.
A few people have mentioned wanting to see more Golarion themed material in the Pathfinder RPG support products. I, for one, do not. After all, that's what Pathfinder Companion and Pathfinder Chronicles are for. I would be more apt to buy Pathfinder RPG products as long as they remain generic. I want an RPG that can be used for any setting, not one filled with setting-specific material. No offense to Golarion, mind you. :)
I know I'm going to draw some 4E aggro here, but maybe you could adopt that strategy; each year sees a new rulebook with new options for the existing game, as well as a new monster book. Next year is "Pathfinder II" with psionics rules, epic level rules and options for classes and races at all levels. In 2011, "Pathfinder III", with still more options and variants, and so on. To expand on earlier comments by myself and others, variants and options could include variant magic systems, new combat options, rules for thieving characters, new uses of bardic magic, etc. Monstrous races seems to be a semi-popular subject; tack that into an expanded rulebook.
Erik Mona wrote:
I am definitely looking forward to new Pathfinder releases. I would like to see 3-4 books a year, but understand if its less. Now that said, here's what I'd like to see:Within the first year or two, I'd like to see updated, "Pathfinder-ized" versions of most of the core 3E/3.5 material - PHB, DMG, MM, ELH, XPH, class splatbooks, race splatbooks. After that, I'd like to Pathfinder take on a life of its own. Any book that features new options - alternate class and race abilities, ways to modify monsters, new "power sources", a la Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic and Magic of Incarnum (though not necessarily updates of those three books; just examples). Books that take the game in new directions, without just being updates of old TSR/WotC books. Books that give both DM's (sorry, GM's) and players options. I know that's a little vague, but that's what I'd like to see.
I definitely want to see hardcover books. They're more durable, and cheaper by the page than paperbacks. I'd like to see all material presented clearly and well-indexed. I don't want to have to hunt down rules. I would subscribe for good, useful books and would enjoy a free pdf of the books purchased.
New classes and races are occasionally useful, but rarely so. I'd rather see ways to alter existing ones, a la Unearthed Arcana. There are a couple of classes I can think of that I'd like to see - a knight and a pirate - but even these could be made using existing core classes. Likewise, pretige classes are an interesting idea, an have their place in the game, but I don't need nine thousand of them! A few really good/useful/iconic PrC's, please. Same goes for feats - feats are a great addition to the game, but I don't need so many. And I hate useless feats - x feat grants a +2 to x skill and x skill. Boring.
To sum up, I want to see a handful of "updated" 3.5 books, and then new concepts that give the players and DMs options, without a ton of feats, prestige classes, and spells. The occasional new monster book, too.
OK, I haven't read through all the posts here, so I may be repeating other's sentiments.
First and foremost, in the spirit of the PFRPG, I think a psionics book should be an updated, "fixed" version of the XPH. While I don't have a problem with that book, I know that others do. But I do not want a Pathfinder Psionics book that takes the name and concept, and then scraps the rules for an entirely new system. That, I feel, is not in the spirit of the Pathfinder philosophy of backwards compatability. Psionic power points have been the staple of psionics since first edition, and represent some of the "difference" of psionics.
As to what psionics means to me; a different magic. The powers of the psychic mind. The ability to control aspects of the body. The ability to read and influence the minds of others. The ability to ascertain information beyond the use of the five senses. The ability to create and manipulate materials and powers through the force of will. Now, admittedly, a lot of this is already covered in both divine and arcane magic. So what makes psionics different? In the case of divine magic, the power is granted by a deity. In arcane magic, through the recitation of arcane formulae. Psionics is the inherent strength of personal will. No outside force grants the psion power; it comes from within.
I want to see Paizo do a Pathfinder Psionics book. I want to see how you fine folks can improve psionics. I do not to see the current system scrapped and rebuilt from the ground up.
I've got second this: one of the things I hated about the 3E splatbooks was the overabundance of feats and prestige classes. Yes, they're neat options in the game, but I don't need that much. There is plenty of other things that can go into such books. I do want to see Pathfinder splatbooks on classes and races, but I want a lot of material besides feats, PrC's and "new core classes" that aren't needed.
Engaging in a little forum necromancy here, I just read the yahoo articel about the Iron Mountain Mine, and dug it up on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Mountain_Mine). Source of inspiration? Good to use for further development, at least. I especially love the acidophilic aerobic bacteria; gives me ideas for a unique ooze for the Stained Peaks.
Clark Peterson wrote:
Thanks, Clark. That's pretty much what I got from Sean, as well as your comments on my "Almost Also Ran" items. This is good feedback; it has let me know that I need to step things up for next year.
Gamer Girrl wrote:
I've always had the opposite problem; I'd create fleshed-out NPCs, and my players would ignore them. Even the important ones.
Back to the original thread, I'd like to see pre-made NPC stat blocks, yes, but I honestly doubt I'd buy a book on such. This falls into the "useful, but boring" category. Maybe a free web enhancement, or an appendix within a book.
Ooh! Ooh! Here's one that's even mildly gamer-related:
"That the cured Smurf not science and c'; the philosophy for examines is necessary an error was. These things are necessary the cold and impersonal investigator, qu'; parce it leaves? they offer to two also solutions tragic alternatives to them to l'; part lowland? Person of the feeling and d'; Action? s' desespérese? it loses in its surveying and the terror unausdrückbaren and s' inconceivable? it has of the happened one."
Hints: English to Spanish to Italian to German to French to Greek to English. A famous author familiar to many gamers, especially fans of pulp era horror.
The 8th Dwarf wrote:
Since this followed a bit of translation, I wanted to throw out the same passage translated via BabelFish from English, to Spanish, to Italian, to Greek, to French, to German, and then back into English:"Gatsby [etheorise] in the green light, at l' orgiásticozukunft the l' ? l' Year all' ? the l' support; Year approximately down before us. After this, we that' avoided, only; ? s under it l' Absence to be bent we faster to function tomorrow, this all' extended; ? Exterior at our payment, which is with distance…. And the penalty clause the morning l' grasses interrupted; ? the burn so, Barke against these activated, left acceptable rear part continuously past." ?
I would like to see Pathfinder do at least some work on the epic level rules. The big miss I feel on these rules is the lack of "epic" abilities for epic characters. Sure, a 35th level fighter is powerful, but all he's getting is new feats. An epic barbarian gets more DR and can rage more times per day. The epic spellcasters can get epic spells, if they take the right feats and have the right skills. It just seems that an epic level anything should get some unique, powerful abilities. Also, in another thread, I saw someone complain about adding "Epic" onto everything. I agree; that just seemed very lazy, like "This goes to 11!" (but not as cool). I'd like to see some revamp to the epic rules, someday...
Perhaps "Whisk of the Saucier"? A saucier is a chef specializing in sauces. Bon appetit!
I've been reading through a few more posts, and I've noticed people talking about psionic "novas" and at least one person even stated a problem of psions being able to augment without limit. This is not so; the rules on page 63 of the XPH clearly state that a power can only be augmented with as many power points as the character has manifester levels - "However, you can spend only a total number of points on a power equal to your manifester level." (XPH). Personally, I like the augmenting mechanic; it gives a different feel to psionics that magic lacks.
I've never taken a group to epic levels yet, nor have I played to epic levels. That said, I've read the 3E epic level rules and... I don't particularly care for them. I don't like the idea that once a character tops 20th level, everything changes. Suddenly, you use a different mechanic for almost everything your character does. I would like to see new abilities come into play at epic levels, abilities that aren't just "an old ability taken to the X!". More than anything, though, I'd like to see good epic level support; adventures, hooks, fluff and the like. I want epic level rules that make me really want to get into epic levels!
Wow, there's a lot of posts here; I haven't read them all. Here's my feelings on psionics. I have a love/hate relationship with psionics. I love the powers, the different style and mechanics, the "otherness" of psionics. I also feel its not appropriate for most fantasy settings, especially with arcane and divine magic around. I would still buy a Pathfinder psionics book if it made psionics more "fantasy", more like a strange magic. Green Ronin's "Psychic's Handbook" gave an interesting variation; in it, psychic powers were basically individual skills and/or skill boosts, the use of which caused "drain", represented by non-lethal damage. Unfortunately, going this route or something similar would entail a total rewrite of the psionics system, which is not really in keeping with the Pathfinder RPG spirit of "backwards compatability". There is a market for psionics, and I believe Paizo should produce such a book. It should tweak the current psionics rules, but I'm not sure in what manner. I guess I'd want to see is psionics move closer to a fantasy standard, and not a tacked-on bit of weirdness, in order to use it in my games.
Earlier today, I was going over some old issues of Dungeon, and I ran across an adventure with one of the lamest villain names I've seen in quite a while: Grubby Stinkhorn. Now, most halflings have humorous names - Stubby Proudfoot, Rosy Tanglehair, Tabby Brambleweed, and so on. But Grubby Stinkhorn? Why not Smelly Nosewart? Or Stinky McStinkerson? I mean, come on... If it had at least been Gruber "Grubby" Stinkhorn I could have accepted it a little better.
While in the real world few people will name their children "Arcanus Necrophage", and rarely would a "villain" give him/herself similarly sinister sounding appellations, we are dealing with fictional characters and stories. "Darth Vader" was not born such, as we all know, and few people would have accepted "Anakin Skywalker, aka Anni, Dark Lord of the Sith" as the villain of those works. In fiction, a subtle name can forshadow a villain, while an obviously villainous name can immediate invoke dread from the reader. Thus, while I doubt any NPC would knowingly travel as "Arcanus Necrophage, friendly shopkeep", I would expect to see "Arcanus Necrophage, Lord of the Undead" as the villain. As was pointed out in some of the judges' comments, one of the items that could help make or break a villain is the name. In the words of Ruby Rod, "It must, pop, Pop, POP!"
I haven't read all the posts here, but let me add some of the cliches I've seen in my 30 years of gaming:
And that's just my two cents.
Nerrat Dei wrote:
Happy (belated) birthday!
I think I'm sure I know what Clark's comments would be; I also value other's thoughts, though. Here's mine:
Aura Moderate Divination; CL 3rd
Thanks in advance...
The Book of Heavy Metal
Anyone whose name is written in this book immediately gains a +10 circumstance bonus to all Perform (Heavy Metal) checks they make. Also, that person's Charisma is treated as if increased by 2 in the eyes of evil creatures and young teen males (unless the person is female, then the effective CHA increases by 4).
See the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-pN8qAiZhQ