drumlord's page

Lots of great discussion here. It makes me hopeful people outside and inside Paizo want things to get better. Fingers crossed.

There seem to be some assumptions made regarding history and morality. History does not show that the further back in time you go, the less moral and more savage everybody was. It's nice to think the older human civilization gets, the more progressive and good to ourselves we are. In general, I think that's slowly happening, but that's not a straight line nor is it guaranteed. There are many bumps in the road and massive setbacks.

For example, people generally consider the Holocaust to be one of the most evil events ever and that was less than a century ago. The Atlantic slave trade was particularly devastating. We've had several genocidal wars in the last few decades. The list goes on.

Slavery in particular has a complicated history. From the different types to the various reasons slaves were used, to race or religion being a factor, etc. When going for history authenticity/realism/accuracy, what is even the target for fantasy RPGs? Medieval Europe? Good luck capturing the nuance just from this barely-scratches-the-surface wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_medieval_Europe.

What it comes down to for me is this: have you ever experienced a fantasy story and thought, "You know what this needs? More slavery."

And the idea that people have had bad experiences with assault/murder so maybe those should be out of the game as well doesn't fly. Unlike slavery, these have existed in every society in human history and have affected everybody. More importantly though, slavery has a horrible history in Paizo's home country and we are all even today benefiting from the suffering of slaves of our nation's past.

But if you really are concerned with non-slavery topics, this is exactly where lines and veils, x-card, and Monte Cook's Consent in Gaming forms shine. Everyone should use at least one of them.

Irori only stops living creatures from remembering you. Your golems and intelligent undead will still know you.

Egyptian gods have a history of existing in various D&D settings like Ravenloft and Forgotten Realms. Since no TTRPG decisions are made in a vacuum, I assume that was a factor for their inclusion in Golarion.

Some religions can't be integrated well because they are still actively worshiped. Others, like Norse and Greek/Roman, have much of their mythology already integrated. We just don't have beings named Thor or Zeus walking around as well.

These accusations are concerning. I believe the victims and those that witness harassment. I was a victim myself when I was a teenager. I didn't say anything. Silence is not consent. Not wanting to involve police is not consent.

There's nothing stopping this Return including Runelords that weren't the last ones. Could be undead, traveled through time, or some other mysterious reason for their prior absence. Ancient empire of wizards leaves a lot of options open.

Not every Adventure Path is going to be the best Adventure Path for everyone...

Count me as excited and must buy. It will be a while before I can play it because I'll be running Starfinder and Crimson Throne next, but we'll get there eventually!

Strangely enough, this may be the only adventure path where I'm looking forward to the sidebars. I'm interested in seeing the ideas for encounters with previous parties and for how surviving NPCs can be involved, like Shalelu, Vancaskerkins, Brodert Quink, etc.

If Pathfinder was going gangbusters and Starfinder was doing well, they could hire more creative staff. If they are shifting resources from PF to SF it could be indicative of the drop in demand.

I don't claim that it's definitely true though - I know Paizo have been historically leery of growing beyond a certain size, so perhaps they are deliberately crimping PF production in spite of demand to diversify.

Without being in the staff meetings, it's hard to know. To give a counterpoint to the drop in demand theory, it might also be that Paizo believes Pathfinder is so healthy they can afford to shift some resources away temporarily without harming their customer base. Then they can spend a few months post-Starfinder release and evaluate what would be the best plan to go forward (more/less Pathfinder, more/less Starfinder, staffing, release schedule, etc.)

Both of the quotes from the Creative Director in this thread are about whether or not undead are evil and how many of them aren't evil. They're very interesting points, but they don't address why the spells would have lost their evil descriptors. Since the "shift" hasn't been explained in-game, it seems we won't get the answer yet.

I'm putting together a one-shot for friends and giving them some pre-gens to choose from in case they don't have the time to make their own. They include some common knowledge because some players are new. Below are their mini-backgrounds (forgive my corny but totally serious names).

Please share your ideas. I can provide stats for any/all of these if desired.

Ripachip, Ysoki Spacefarer Operative
Ripachip didn’t fit in with the rest of his kin. He believed in justice, faith, and righteousness, leading him to follow Iomedae. Unfortunately, outside of working for the church, there aren’t many jobs that reflect his beliefs. So he joined up with a crew of odd job bounty hunters he made friends with along the way. They may not have much in common, but they share a special bond, and Ripachip hopes he can rub off on them.

Alex, Half-elf Ace Pilot Envoy
Alex grew up in a family of pilots. Boring pilots who flew freighters for corporations from point A to point B and back again. As soon as she was old enough, she entered into as many racing contests as she could. As good at social manipulation outside of the races as she is at piloting, she managed to save enough credits, and curry enough favors, to get her own ship. She takes no nonsense from anyone and knows how to get things done, though her adrenaline junkie side occasionally takes over and she throws caution to the wind.

Lee Getties, Human Icon Technomancer
From a young age, Lee knew he was destined to be a star. His parents didn’t see things the same way. They forced him to focus on his studies and enrolled him in only the best schools. His teachers recognized his talented mind and taught him about computers, creatures, engineering, and technomancy. But he put all his spare time into his music. He stayed up late every night practicing, skipping dinner by telling his parents he needed to study. At the age of 7, he began streaming under the name Arclight42. Upon reaching adulthood, he got his own place, half of which is just a lab. He built his crowning achievement, the Starcaster Mk 1, a combination electric guitar and laser blaster that lets him use music to focus his technomancy. He seeks adventure and any chance to show off his talents.

Note: there is no righteous guitar in the rules; it's just a laser blaster with the guitar added for flavor

Selith, Lashunta Mercenary Solarion
Selith took a vow of silence in recent years. After a decade as a hired gun, often for the wrong sorts of people, he decided to make amends for his past actions by sacrificing his own voice. Upon doing so, he realized some of the cosmic truths of the universe and his solarion powers manifested. He now serves as a bodyguard for his trusted friend, someone else in the group.

Bolts, Android Outlaw Mechanic
Bolts awoke in their android body in an apartment on Absalom Station. Unfortunately for them, the body’s previous soul was an outlaw, and they almost immediately had to run. They barely had time to learn about society before it was their enemy. So they took to the outlaw life. They became good at hiding, and traded their machine and computer skills for food and shelter. They eventually came upon their preferred illegal activity, hacking and rigging vidgames. This put an even larger bounty on their head once they were discovered, but they had amassed a wealth of information and contacts, and blackmailed a high ranking security official that spent his spare time gambling on vidgames and cheating on his wife. Now all but their smallest charges have been dismissed and they are more careful than ever. They spend their spare time augmenting themselves and making a living as a bounty hunter. They resent the society that once made androids their slaves, and that made them a criminal from birth. They don’t identify with any culture or gender or organization and they are grumpy to a fault, never having anything positive to say and making no friends. Despite this seeming lack of empathy and devotion, they spend all their time with a close group of companions and have no plans of leaving them.

I realized halfway through I was writing close to the iconic android but went with it anyway

Pak’Sha’Th’Tak, Shirren Priest Mystic
Pak grew up in the traditional Shirren ways. Order, discipline, and loyalty were important. Upon reaching adulthood, she chose to become a female member of society, and she quickly became addicted to choices, as many Shirren do. She left home, and journeyed to multiple worlds. Upon learned of the faith of Desna, she realized her true calling. Her love of travel, adventure, and the stars were a perfect match. And her faith was rewarded with the powers of a mystic. She is unusually exuberant about new experiences and always has a positive attitude, even with the odds stacked against her.

Rem, Kasatha Bounty Hunter Soldier
Rem, short for Remu Taldaloka Fansari of Clan Ketl, House Bandalin, Scourge of the Beast, is a large Kasatha out in the universe for his Tempering, the phase of all Kasatha’s lives where they leave their families and traditions to explore other cultures and worlds. Rem was never great at his studies, but he appreciated the balance that Kasathas see in the universe and the peace that brings. But he lost his appreciation for that the moment he began studying some of the barbaric fighting styles of old Golarion. Now he lives for the spirit of battle, the joys of victory, and the thrill of the hunt. Fiercely dedicated to his friends, he sometimes takes offense on their behalf unnecessarily.

“Voidwhip”, Vesk Xenoseeker Solarion
Voidwhip, once known by a more traditional Vesk name, was one of the cultural elites that shirked off the Vesk militant nature. He and his siblings sought to understand other races better, to search for peace, and to expand their horizons. It was on a trip to Absalom Station where it all went wrong. Their ship was attacked by void wraiths, incorporeal undead that pierced through all of their defenses. The crew’s energy weapons only did so much, and Voidwhip was unarmed, at least at first. Hiding in an escape pod, preparing to flee for his life as soon as one of his siblings joined him, he looked out into the void of space. The stars really were beautiful, and the space between them equally so. His Solarion path was laid out before him. His vision blurred and a bladed whip of pure black darkness emerged from his left arm. Without thinking, he rejoined the crew and fought back the wraiths. Nowadays, he still seeks peace, but he knows he has a purpose on the battlefield, and with his Vesk might and Solarion abilities, he knows he is nearly unstoppable.

Paizo makes the most money from selling books. I'm not sure the value proposition works out for hiring a full time game balance person. In other words, how many people will stop playing the game because of not enough FAQs? I agree that it's possible unanswered questions can hurt the game, but does that affect most tables out there?

This is essentially what brought about the "Paizo needs to get its house in order" thing that happened a few years back. After that, they adjusted how they do things and how their people speak publicly about rulings, which may be why you don't see many "unofficial" answers on rules.

Pathfinder is now a massive game. That's a gift and a curse. It's a lot of moving parts and interactions.

I don't think there is an easy answer to your concerns, unfortunately. Let's say you did have a full time game balance person answering questions and writing errata. Since this person is dealing with all the hotly contested and controversial aspects of the game, you'd probably want your best person doing this job. You don't throw your rules intern at that or you risk making things far worse. Except, wouldn't you want your best rules person designing new parts of the game? It's a tough problem.

(side note: I also suspect creating Starfinder has probably meant everyone is busier than usual)

The real question is how do swords used by medium creatures even do significant damage to colossal creatures anyway.

This is something that can be fixed without even changing the ruleset. Just give ever-increasing DR to size categories.

Not really, the spell affects a single target, and the target is now vulnerable to your FE bonuses and abilities. Probably why it's an Enchantment spell.

If you have FE: Human and you cast IE on a Elf you don't all of a sudden have Favored Enemy: Elf, you just get to use your FE: H bonuses on it.

I agree that that's how the spell reads. I'm just saying to me, it seems like an error (or just not thought out thoroughly). There are some unusual interactions the way it works now:

- It doesn't work on Taiga giants (though this could easily be considered more of a problem with Taiga giants having enchantment immunity)
- It doesn't go through globe of invulnerability or anti-magic field
- My favorite: if you use it on an enemy with spell turning or a reflecting shield, you now get your favored enemy bonus against yourself. You are your own worst enemy

It is odd, to be sure. @drumlord: I pointed them to the website link like you suggested. Unfortunately, it didn't even faze them. They said I needed actual written permission. An e-mail would suffice.

That being the case, do I need an e-mail from Paizo Publishing, or the author(s) of the AP, the illustrator, or a combination of the three?

That's certainly odd, but they just don't want to be sued. I've had a lot of good experiences with Paizo customer service. While it should be unnecessary, I'd try emailing them: customer.service@paizo.com

And mention the specific PDFs you want to print int he email, just so they can't counter that you didn't get specific permission.

Side note: I'm not a lawyer, but even if the authors or illustrators retain some rights to their work (for example, many have permission to print their work on their sites/deviantart), you should only need Paizo's permission to print their publications, hence the FAQ being enough permission. If you aren't lazy like me, it may be worth telling the store manager that their employees are ignoring perfectly legal guidelines.

The Starstone is not something that the average person can see or interact with. As far as most people could say, it might not even exist. His largest church in Absolom is now an Chellish embassy, and Chelliax is overwriting his history on a daily basis with "Alternative History".

See or interact with directly? No. But it's not exactly hidden either. It has a temple that mysteriously grew (and still grows I believe) around it right in the heart of the city. Anyone can go look for it if they like and many have tried. I think there is a shrine nearby that names all the failed attempts at godhood.

You may be right about most people not being sure of its existence around the whole of Golarion, but the Inner Sea region around Absalom doesn't leave much question. Its existence is part of 3 of the 20 core religions. Faiths and followers can certainly be wrong, but I think the Starstone's existence is accepted knowledge. No guarantees. I haven't read everything either ;)

But Aroden actually wanted to advance Humanity and yet very little stands as a testament to his work. Yet the Runelords have dams and crumbling bridges and arcs that still stand.

I'm all for learning more about Aroden and how his death shaped Golarion. But it's not fair to say very little of his work remains. He raised the Starstone. The existence of multiple gods is a direct result of Aroden's actions, as is the existence of the largest city in the Inner Sea. Additionally, there are plenty of churches, monuments, art, and other miscellany in Cheliax [at least] from Aroden's time.

Group hug?

Group hug!

I put forth the theory that Aroden wasn't really dead, and had actually done the Metro Man thing (see Megamind).

THAT got shot down by James Jacobs himself, but NOT as a response to my post (wierd, huh?).

Aroden's dead, but what does that mean for his soul? Did he become a petitioner somewhere? An angel? Get absorbed into the cosmos? I believe Pharasma judged him, so he had to be sent off somewhere, right?

A mystery, like any story, is as strong as your emotional investment in it. I added Aroden stuff to my first years-long Pathfinder game. Ironically, the real investment my players had was with some servants/allies of Pharasma, who they were allied with, and some villains, all of whom I designed. It didn't really feel like an Aroden story until the end, but that's alright.

Like James said, the Aroden mystery is probably not the right story for some. I am in favor of this particular mystery being solved. Partially because we know there is an answer, and partially because hints continue to be dropped here and there, so it's like a bread crumb trail that just loops back on itself. Hansel and Gretel remain lost in the woods forever.

But ultimately, even though setting books hyped it up a lot, it doesn't have much impact on campaigns. At least the published APs I've read (note: haven't read all of them). Even the elves, dwarves, gnomes, and other critters that lived through Aroden's death don't bring it up and it isn't noted in their backstories. My Mummy's Mask game is about mummy stuff and that's awesome and doesn't need any non-mummy mysteries to be solved.

I think the disconnect some are having (including me, depending on my mood) is that the event should have great importance if only because of how much Paizo emphasized it in early books. But in practice, this one dead god only comes up in play as often as the gods that died protecting Golarion from the Starstone (Acavna, Amaznen). Lost/forgotten deities come up multiple times (peacock spirit, Lissala) and most definitely can have an active impact in play. But Paizo making Aroden have real impacts on published adventures would likely just make more people request the solution to the mystery, so it's a catch-22.

Except it's not a thread about LGBT Gaming issues. It's an Community thread "where members of the LGBT community who are also gamers could come and share their life stories, experiences as gamers, and struggles (whether in dealing with their sexuality in relation to our society or not)." (To quote the first post.)

There have certainly been posts about gaming, but there's been a lot more supportive community & life story kind of posts and a fair amount of "political bs", depending on what you mean by that. But you really can't have "healthy discussion" about LGBTQ issues without at least political overtones. How do you avoid politics when they're passing laws against you?

The reason some folks have a hard time seeing LGBTQ issues as political is that they are right. They shouldn't be political. To oversimplify things, progressives see LGBTQ people as deserving equal rights and privileges as everyone else.

Social conservatives see essentially any progress on the LGBTQ front as inherently political, an agenda being pushed by someone. If that weren't the case, we wouldn't still have politicians argue about where people can go to the bathroom. Heck, some politicians still don't want LGBTQ to see their loved ones when they are in the hospital.

My understanding with Arazni is she was written into Golarion's history before a "herald" was fully defined. I think it was closer to the transition to Pathfinder ruleset that Paizo decided they wanted every god to have a herald that could be called by a cleric.

As someone who doesn't participate in political threads, my opinion may not mean much. But as someone who previously ran nerdy websites for over a decade, maybe that gives it some weight.

The way I see it, if it was alright to have political threads a year ago, it ought to be alright to have them now. Discussions may be heated, and the threads may be difficult to moderate, but that's politics. There's a reason it is taboo in regular conversation (or was, at any rate). I think these are questions worthy of being asked by Paizo's forum decision makers:

1) Were Paizo around during the heart of the civil rights movement, would political discussions be taken offline because many got angry about the idea of minorities getting whites-only rights and privileges?

2) Do you believe discussing politics on paizo.com has value beyond just venting or arguing? If so, recall Kennedy's famous moon speech: "We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win." To paraphrase, if it has value, do it, even if it's a pain in the butt.

3) Even if taking down the political discussions is the right decision for the site, do you believe doing so is allowing the bad elements of society to win? (note: bad elements doesn't mean a political party, but rather people who choose not to have civil discourse)

I was not a great site runner. If I was, I would just offer you the right answer, something I don't have. But I do know attempts at silencing your fans rarely goes well. And silencing will have to happen often since many topics relate to politics, especially since the new president is planning on removing many things we took for granted the past several decades.

Some topics that are by default banned simply by disallowing political discussion:

- Funding for the arts
- Climate change
- NASA
- Education
- Mortgages
- Protections for animals and the great outdoors
- Civil rights
- Guns
- Video games
- LGBTQ and women's rights and equality
- The list goes on...

Good luck. I don't envy this position

He was just as much a god back in the 3.5 days as he is now, with domains and everything. Not to mention he isn't a "god" god, he's a lesser deity, and if we can stat Pazuzu and Hastur and Nocticula then by golly we can convert ol' Achy. Who's with me?!

He is a "god" god. All the gods are in Golarion. It doesn't have the split of different levels of gods. The next step down from gods are demigods and we have stats for those. There is an implication that the older the god, the more powerful, but even that's not true in all cases, especially where there is disagreement on how old a god is. We just know for sure gods don't get their power from worshipers like some campaigns.

I think the only rule that actually specifies different levels of gods is Contact Other Plane, and James Jacobs suggested using the intermediate level row of that chart for all Golarion gods.

Just to play Devil's Advocate, he does Dual Wield Sword and Improvised Weapon (Torch) once in the movie at Weathertop. But no clue if he's using TWF Feat or just eating the attack penalties. He certainly couldn't hit crap till he took the standard action to throw the torch!

He can switch between the two on his iterative attacks without taking penalties. We'll have to rewatch and time his attacks over 6 seconds ;)

Contrary to my original post, I'm now hoping the design team does have to look at this, if only so they have to read this awesome thread.

It damn sure isn't for me. I have yet to see a 20th level character in Pathfinder.

I've had two groups, one I played, the other DM'd. The passive capstones were used (monk, barbarian), but the active ones didn't see much play, discounting 9th level spells and grand hexes.

That said, I like the idea of capstones. I also like the house rule that James Jacobs mentioned in his thread a while ago: if your campaign ends at 17th level, give your characters their capstones then. It might not work for a campaign ending below 11th level, but your standard adventure path ends around 17. I'll probably try that for my Mummy's Mask campaign.

With all due respect, the GM and/or group was coddling the fighter. Either enemies weren't being played to their potential, or the GM deliberately structured encounters [and possibly gear distribution] to favor the fighter.

I appreciate the respect. Two things: it's a team game. In a one on one, you're right many high level enemies. For my high level games, each martial had fly and haste on them every fight at a minimum. They also commonly had shield other (barb) and greater invisibility (fighter/rogue), and things like that. A life oracle with every status removal spell and constantly absorbing more than half of the party's damage is very strong. 2nd thing: they weren't full fighters; you said non-magical simple martial class in this case.

When the supposed non-magic guy is hamstrung by AMF or Disjunction we have a big problem.

Those come up more often on forums than in games. I mostly do APs right now and those spells are maybe used once a campaign. Also, I don't really use Disjunction anymore anyway. The first few times I used it, it took over half an hour before we could start playing again. I haven't banned it yet, but I really don't like things that slow the game down like that.

The only AP I've read through the end is RotRL and the tone shift is huhe. Smaller than the levels suggest, but huge nonetheless.

It is. We finished that one. Our sorcerer and life oracle kept buffs on the martials pretty much constantly because of how many spells they had at that level. There were wind walls nullifying the archer and will saves setting the barbarian's sights on the party. In general though, the archer went first and took out the most powerful, or nearly did. Then fireballs and charges finished him off or went onto the next most powerful. The campaign already gives out good loot and I let the party craft what they wanted (within WBL) in that game so they were quite strong.

Also, if you have a chance, read or skim some more APs. They're good reading. You also may be surprised at how Paizo handles scope and adventure design. Runelords has a lot of wizards and the loot is clearly aimed at having a wizard in the party. But to take essentially the far opposite, Shackles is still just swashbuckling through to the end. Devils and krakens and whatnot show up, but even the highest level NPCs are planning on swashing some buckles, not opening with a timestop to set up a prismatic sphere, wind wall, and delayed blast fireball, and then out of time stop using two wails of the banshee to start things off, while his monsters he called earlier team up with his constructs to destroy you (that's pretty much the Karzoug fight). That said, many of the enemies have silly battle tactics as written so I do what's smartest instead, assuming the enemy has intelligence.

Only demigod? He's adbenturing with Jehova and Doctor Strange, demi-god dpesn't cut it. Odin and Zeus might make the cut, just barely.

I think that's a distinction without a difference. Also, I think Marvel Odin with the destroyer armor fights using the power of every Asgardian at once so he makes the cut just fine. Squirrel Girl would still beat him though.

Quote:

A typical Core fighter's job is to do some combination of giving and taking damage and they can do that for all 20 levels.

Wrong. They have hit points and potemtial damage at all levels but no ability to deploy them to the party's advantage without GM hand-holding or a Control Caster doing the real work for them.

Like I said, it's a team game. This is the way it is designed to work. And that doesn't mean I think the fighter is good enough as is. People in my games (besides me) don't dip more than 3 levels in fighter.

what are you declaring the flavor of the class to be?

I'm not the designer, though I am busy making more own set of rules. I defer to the core rulebook which starts with flavor. It's too big to post in this already long post, but here is the "role" entry:

Fighters excel at combat—defeating their enemies, controlling the flow of battle, and surviving such sorties themselves. While their specific weapons and methods grant them a wide variety of tactics, few can match fighters for sheer battle prowess.

My fighter change gives them talents instead of feats. It's still early in design, but I want to give them more ways to deal with bad saves, more ways to move around beyond move actions, and unique abilities, like being able to use a shield to deflect a spell or block a breath weapon as if he had evasion, or use a sword to cut through a force effect. Basically, if you see "real world" guys doing it in novels or movies, I think it's fair game for a fighter.

I totally agree, hence my suggestion of Saitama for simple high level martials, or Path of War for skilled martial artists.

I think we agree on much of this actually, but are approaching it from different angles and different assumptions. I sadly don't know anything about Path of War. Is it like the upcoming Spheres of Might? I looked at Spheres of Power (for casters) a bit and that seemed really interesting.

Respect, and I'm sorry I talk too much lol

The only way to have a completely non-magical, simple martial class actually achieve level 17 is if they basically become Saitama from One Punch Man

I've had several break 17. They did fine and were crushing things all the way til the end. Unless you mean with no magical gear either. That would be unwise.

Saitama does have supernatural abilities. Doing 100 push-ups, 100 sit-ups, 100 squats, and then running 10km?

Maybe he started off doing less and built up? ;)

Ironically some of the people holding the fighter down love the concept, they juat lack understanding of how the game changes over the levels and what a level really represents.

(note: this part isn't just responding to this kyrt-rider comment, but some others as well)

A typical Core fighter's job is to do some combination of giving and taking damage and they can do that for all 20 levels. A wizard may be creating their own demiplane and the fighter isn't, but neither is the rogue, monk, barbarian, inquisitor, paladin, brawler, bloodrager, gunslinger (etc. etc. I'm not listing all 50 classes lol).

The fighter just needs to be on a more level playing field with those classes and I think creativity is needed more than some (su) tagged abilities. If the answer to a weak fighter is that high levels he becomes an anime character, or wukong, or someone from crouching tiger, we've failed the [admittedly limited] flavor of the class. I don't think that's holding the fighter down; it's trying to keep them on concept, especially since those characters tend to make better monks, brawlers, or ninjas. I don't believe in badwrongfun, so I have absolutely no problem with those being options in the game or for the fighter; I just don't think they should be the default.

I think it's actually more exciting that some "real world" person is able to fight, through skill, luck, and gumption, with these other supernatural classes. The mechanics just need to support it.

Color Spray, Sleep, Deep Slumber, Hold Person, etc. are all spells available in E6.

That's why we use E0. Nobody has levels and you just roll opposed d20s to see who wins

I used to avoid caster-martial disparity like the plague, largely because it usually isn't a problem in my game. But I've been working on some custom rules so recently I've been reading them more. Still no posting though. I just like to see people's concerns about the game.

I'm also all for wandering discussions. IIRC, some of the bigger FAQs came out of rules discussions that went weird ways. It's more about what the tangent is. Certain topics (caster-martial, RAW vs. RAI, tiered classes, edition wars) are as productive as having Tennessee and Texas folks argue about who has better BBQ. It's possible to live a world where different folks like different BBQ, and some like it all.

Usually I just skip over the rehash threads. The real problem in rehashes is when they seep into related threads. Fake example that has probably actually happened (more than once): someone starts a thread talking about the rogue maybe being underpowered. 6 posts follow with productive discussion. 600 posts then follow discussing caster martial disparity. And let's add 10 more posts demanding a FAQ just for good measure

It both can and can't, so long as nobody is observing the swarm.

I didn't mean to suggest that. That's why I said your suggestions were good. They are. Especially for real life.

And speaking of real life, I suspect even the folks who seem like jerks would be quite courteous at the game table. I've never been at a sanctioned event where people were rude. That just makes it more complicated and makes me worry more about whether I should have posted anything at all. Sorry for the train of thought post :P

I was going to make a new thread for my thoughts but this one has the perfect title already.

As some posters mentioned here, this community has gotten more hostile. I've been here for years, almost always lurking. I've seen the change. And the more I post, the more I see it. Maybe I'm just bad at the internets, but in many threads where I post things get heated no matter how diplomatic I and others try to be. Heated is being gentle in some cases. I don't even post in the worst threads.

Jessica Price's advice is good, but here's the problem with community self-policing in this case. The forums are becoming riddled with jerks and trolls. They are slowly taking over and they tend to be particularly noisy in threads for newer players. The perception some new posters are getting from Paizo.com is that this is not a welcoming community. You come here to get into flamewars and be told that you don't play the game correctly and you are wrong about everything.

Don't get me wrong. It's great that these forums have rare instances of hate against minority groups, LGBTQ, etc. That means you're already better than 99% of the internet. Instead of being so obvious (or "extreme" as Jessica said), you just have people merely skirting the lines of breaking the rules repeatedly.

But I just want to talk about games. Not just games, but the one I play every week. And I particularly like to talk to new players/posters. I don't have an answer to how it can be better; I just know I don't enjoy posting here any more.

Note: This isn't one of those "OMG I'M LEAVING" posts. I just had to rant somewhere. I'm wary of even posting this because I feel like I'm about to get jumped on by 10 people for using the forums wrong.

...

For someone with a heart in their name, you sure aren't very nice. You're just being belligerent for fun. I'm done with the trolling. Have a good one.

When you as the GM simply shut down all of the attack surfaces except hit point attrition because "it's boring if combat only lasts one round," then characters will focus only on attacking hit points, and every fight will become a hit point grind.

Nobody is suggesting that only hit point damage should be effective. Removing a few SoD/SoS games (which isn't what most are suggesting anyway) leaves thousands of spells and abilities that target something other than HP. Nearly all SoD/SoS rules are in the core rulebook. So the lion's share of Pathfinder simply doesn't have them.

Side note: there are a few more "surfaces": wisdom mod for intimidate/antagonize, opposed charisma checks for certain spells, SR, and some abilities always work so there is no surface needed to target. That's all I can think of

Which is even more boring than seeing a clever and lucky player one-shot a boss from time to time.

Picking dominate or slumber or phantasmal killer is not clever. I'm not saying it's a bad thing and it can certainly be smart, but it's not clever.

This entire thread is premised on the question: My players are having fun. How can I stop this? My suggestion is very simple. Do not stop your players from having fun.

This is not true. Nobody has suggested this. I and others suggested that while it may not be fun for the GM, if it works for your players, just go with it. I've GM'd for many years now. In that time, I've had a many miniboss/boss fights end in a single PC's turn, whether through a very broken martial build or very broken caster. My players initially were very polite, but they got upset and bored quickly. When I used tactics like those mentioned in this thread, everyone was happy.

Just because something is right for you and your players doesn't mean you can assume everyone else is the same. This thread is for those that have had problems with SoD/SoS and want Advice. That's all.

This is only a palatable idea if you're handing out the M&M hero points and not the Pathfinder ones.

It took me til the end of your post to realize you didn't mean candy M&Ms lol

I'm not sure 5e's solution is the best, but I can say from lots of Pathfinder experience that extra enemies is not the answer either. Extra enemies definitely makes boss encounters more interesting and longer, but my optimized players still immediately focus the boss and take them out in one round, sometimes before the boss can go. After a full campaign of this, I actually asked them nicely to just not make characters of that strength in the next game and that worked, believe it or not.

The one shot effect also isn't exclusive to SoS/SoD spells. While a typical martial needs something like pounce to have a chance, an archer can do it just fine. I had an extremely powerful archer in my Runelords game (anniversary edition) that routinely killed major challenges before they even acted. If I put in countermeasures, other party members would undo those and we'd still be back to square one. For Karzoug, I needed the fight to be epic. He put up a wind wall that looped back in on itself. So round 1, the archer didn't hit him, round 2, the archer only moved up enough to get past the first wind wall. Round 3, karzoug still had some DR and he had protection from appropriate energies and a globe of invulnerability to deal with the rest of the party. The encounter went perfectly and everyone loved it. Nobody complained about removing player agency.

Making solo encounters fun and lengthy is something I'm working on in my custom rules. These are my basic feelings on the techniques mentioned in the thread:

- Extra enemies: great! But unfortunately it isn't a solo encounter any more
- Clone/simulacrum/illusion: These are some of the best solutions for solo encounters in my eye. Two problems though. Not every solo encounter has these as options; in fact, most don't. Also, repeated use of these techniques will get old fast.
- Increasing saves/AC: this feels sneaky. My main issue though is that it encourages even more min-maxing and punished those who don't min-max at all. I'd still like Bards and other 6th level casters to have a chance to have their attacks and spells do something.
- SoS/SoD spells do percentage hit point damage. This is a good idea. I kind of like it. But I think we can do better.
- Hero Points: this is the best solo encounter official Pathfinder rules solution, IMO. I have used it quite a lot.

My WIP solution:

Miniboss Template

Challenge Rating: Same as base creature +1
Requirement: Creature must be encountered alone
Shrug it Off: Once per encounter, can convert a failed save to a success. Doing so on a spell with no secondary effect applies the shaken condition to the miniboss. If already shaken, applies sickened. A GM could alternatively apply an effect appropriate to the effect. For example, a failed petrification could have partially succeeded and act as a slow spell

Boss Template

Challenge Rating: Same as base creature +1
Requirement: Creature must be encountered alone
Shrug it Off: As miniboss, three times per encounter
Two initiatives: Boss rolls initiative normally. After the surprise round, the boss acts normally on their initiative, and also gets an extra standard action each round once half the PCs have acted. This extra action should not be the same as their normal action unless they have no choice. For example, no stacking wails of the banshee to easily wipe out a party.

-----

Perfect? Probably not. But it feels alright to me. I need to think on it more. In the meantime, as this is the advice forum, my tl;dr is to use hero points. And you know what, sometimes your PCs have earned that one shot. Maybe it's the end of a long night of gaming and you're already running over on time. Boom one shot. It won't be fulfilling as a GM, but judge how your players are feeling.

preface: I've been putting together my own set of house rules that I will implement in my future campaigns. I like a lot of the things done in Kirthfinder but I have differences in my goals for the game. If I become happy enough with the result, I'll share them here.

actual query: I've been thinking that moving through threatened spaces could function better as a combat maneuver rather than part of acrobatics. I'm curious if anyone has done that or what potential benefits pitfalls you can foresee. My take:

benefits:
- to me, it just fits with other maneuvers like overrun and dirty trick
- focusing on it could be done with similar feats to the combat maneuvers (and classes that get combat maneuver benefits) rather than having to max acrobatics and take skill focus, etc.
- it puts a lot of classes that can do well in melee without acrobatics as a class skill (alchemist, cleric, druid, fighter, inquisitor, magus, oracle, paladin, and ranger) on equal footing with those that do (barbarian, bard, monk, rogue) without burning a trait or feat

pitfalls:
- the game doesn't necessarily need more combat maneuvers or maneuver feats
- CMB falls off at high levels due to CMD scaling better (though to be fair, acrobatics also falls off. I should probably compare the numbers in excel or something)

Thoughts? Am I nuts?

I made the mystery part of my first Pathfinder campaign, integrated right into character backstories, partially solved in the campaign itself, and then continued with the party using mythic and divine power to partially resurrect him (and not even really on purpose) as a human. I had many disparate elements tied together with a witch who thought she was seeing the future through an oracle child's drawings, Pharasma being sort of ticked off about the whole Aroden dying unexpectedly thing, certain dark forces involved in it all, and a monk seeking to reach godhood through an unorthodox method. I'm happy with how that all turned out.

I'd love to see the official explanation in print though. I don't think it would take anything away from my campaign or others. But at this point, I also won't be upset if it doesn't get revealed.

My first campaign occurred at a time when Golarian was fresh (they had 4 APs I think) and Aroden was the most interesting part to my players. Now that I own a bajillion dollars of Paizo books, I have many more interesting things to play and discover. And with Starfinder looming on the horizon as well, Aroden just isn't on my mind much any more. And I don't mean that in a negative way toward him or his creators! Golarion is just a big cool place now with a ton to do and explore.

I'm a big believer that if you (as GM) allow it as an option, you should allow players to use it. If it causes problems, adjust or ban its use or redesign adventures to compensate. I think a force cage trip in a room full of monsters is a bit extreme; just ban the ability instead. But here are some ways you could redesign:

- As folks above said, force effects or forbiddance can be used to stop him
- Other mysterious magics could exist to stop him; you don't always need to explain things. For example, in Rise of the Runelords all the ancient buildings are magically reinforced. Do they specify the spells and techniques for making this possible? No. I just said everything has a transmutation aura and left it at that
- Use more creatures that can follow an ethereal monk; other ethereal creatures, undead like shadows, creatures with earth glide
- Use the fact that the monk may not be able to see things; use invisibility, traps he can't see, monsters he can't see, to make it so that the monk may know the room layout but doesn't know what dangers it contains
- Separate parts of dungeons with long corridors; he only gets a minute per ki
- Design something that allows him to get lost, like moving/turning corridors or magical effects that makes creatures get lost. Just make sure this isn't a way of forcing him to fight alone vs. something he can't beat

Hope that helps. Advice from a GM whose players usually have overpowered abilities that I have to design around. And don't forget you always have the option of just doing nothing different at all. You may find it doesn't ruin the adventures at all

It's important to have distinction between simplified as in less options and simplified as in easier to play and run. A GM could offer few options but have those options only be needlessly complex. And vice versa. Pathfinder offers easy and hard to use options.

While I don't play E6, my understanding is that's part of its goal. It keeps the game relatively easy to play.

Grappling, transmutation/wild shape, archetype stacking, overly similar conditions, some feats/spells/items, original summoner, environmental rules, floor type rules which most don't even know about, having a ton of buffs and debuffs active, and I'm sure other rules as well, are all cases where I believe things are too complex for their own good. I don't want to see those things removed from the game, but I see room for improvement.

Ultimately, the arguments of whether it's time, whether the system needs it, whether Paizo has learned a lot from Pathfinder, or in the future from Starfinder, none of that will be the primary reason for doing a 2.0 or not. Paizo is a book company so the biggest factor is whether they are making enough money on their books or not. Perhaps that's a cynical way of looking at it, but I don't mean that in a negative way. I heart Paizo!

And only Paizo knows what enough money is. Yes, the growth in previous years may have been faster but they may be perfectly happy with profit/growth right now and I suspect they are since they are still taking on new things (Starfinder) despite past missteps (PFO and that online tabletop thing that disappeared).

IMHO, what's best for a game system will never align with what's best for a book publisher. Life is full of compromises. A game system can theoretically become feature complete and only be adjusted for balance. You could have enough classes, spells, feats, and call a game done. But a publisher needs a stream of income. They can't just stop publishing rules and only publish setting material; they make the most money doing both.

To me, an entirely online rule set that references other rules via links, not page numbers, and that can be corrected, adjusted, and added to with the click of a button, is healthier than having rules stuck in dead trees. But that makes the game system either free or a subscription service. Maybe that's the future and someone at Paizo (don't remember who) addressed this and said the book model is still doing quite well for them.

-----

As a GM and player, I'm pretty happy with unchained. I think that's the best compromise for 2.0. There are two key problems with unchained and other optional systems:

1) PFS can't be everything for everyone. The more optional systems there are, the more people will be upset either because PFS is using them, or because they aren't.

2) Massive barrier of entry. I'm a hardcore Pathfinder player/fan and I don't even know where all these optional systems are. Some in hardcovers, some in adventure paths, some in companions, etc. Even if you know of all of them, that doesn't mean you know which ones will be right to you.

For example, I suspect very few people are using piecemeal armor, words of power, and several other systems that were neat ideas but didn't really work. But Unchained really did well on a lot of systems. I know that based on using some but also reading a lot of feedback on the forums.

When it comes down to it, you can't hand a new player the Core Rulebook and tell them "with this you are getting the best of Pathfinder."

-----

I know that all makes me sound cranky. Oh well :P I have confidence that Paizo with its current leadership will do the best they can for the game. And if that means eventually we get Pathfinder 2.0 with a new Core Rulebook to start it all off, I will buy it. And if I like it, I'll use rule zero to update Pathfinder 1.0 content I'd like to use, which is I suspect what Paizo will say to do right there in chapter 1.

Wouldn't a reach weapon fix the share space issue?

drumlord wrote:

If I may offer another mitigation suggestion, put a cap on how much magical armor it can pass through, like making it through 5 armor AC total, or saying it goes through all armor except the enhancement bonus. That way you preserve an in-world explanation (magic armor is magic) and still reduce the power against humanoids.

Why would we want to make it even worse?

I didn't put down every possibility. The main problem is the mitigation actually nerfs it further for some classes.

My suggestion would go best with a reduction in +X cost, or by letting you activate/deactivate as a free action.

Don't mind me though. To be honest, I don't think many of the weapon properties are priced well to begin with. Speed, for example, is really nice in a party with no haste and no boots of speed. But since every campaign I've ever GM'd or played in had haste, it's just a big waste of money.

I've mitigated it somewhat by making it something you can 'activate' as a swift action until the beginning of your next turn, but it still seems vastly overvalued to me.

You may already have thought of this, but that mitigation is a lot stronger on classes loaded with swift actions like inquisitors, monks, and warpriests.

If I may offer another mitigation suggestion, put a cap on how much magical armor it can pass through, like making it through 5 armor AC total, or saying it goes through all armor except the enhancement bonus. That way you preserve an in-world explanation (magic armor is magic) and still reduce the power against humanoids.

I (as GM) have a few rules on leadership:

* I write the characters myself now, potentially with some suggestions from the player
* No crafters, no healers (I guess I'd add party face/knowledge role but nobody has tried that in my games since they like to do those)
* I leave it up to the players how to divide loot and I only add a bit extra treasure here and there
* I add an enemy to most encounters since as Chess Pwn said, pathfinder is a numbers game
* Leadership is not allowed if I have 6 PCs and may not be allowed with 5 PCs if they have pets (druid, summoner, etc.). That's just too much good guy to manage

Maybe all that makes me a meanie GM but I find it addresses almost all the concerns without too much effort on my part.

There are a couple of ways to address this. Besides the things mentioned above, there's the civil technique of simply asking your group: "Please don't have detect magic up all the time. Instead, use it when it seems appropriate."

If that doesn't work, don't forget a rule that is commonly forgotten: hustling, which is double moving or taking a move and standard action (concentrating on detect magic) in a single round. If a character hustles longer than an hour, they take nonlethal damage and become fatigued. Now, not many dungeons take an hour to traverse, but keep track of any time they are rushing and count it as hustling. Tell players they are exhausting themselves in character by detecting magic constantly.

Yes, they can remove the fatigue with any kind of healing, but at some point your players should realize they are trying to play a video game instead of an interesting fantasy storyline. Imagine if in Lord of the Rings, every other sentence was "Gandalf scans the room for magic. They walk 10 feet forward. Gandalf scans the room for magic."

I don't know about the rest, but it's your GM's responsibility to make sure the party is always at the proper wealth by level. What that means varies by campaign, but the the core suggestion is on this page.

If I were GMing this game, you would still feel like you were wasting money getting rid of medium gear, but I would be giving out enough wealth to make up for the loss.

One other suggestion. In a couple levels your wizard can prepare haste and you'll be able to afford boots of striding and springing. Both should help alleviate the movement speed woes.

It can be if that's what Ameiko prefers it to be pronounced as. Just because it's not a "fantasy" name doesn't change that.

Just like how names can have variant spellings, they can have variant pronunciations.

Aka it's Ameiko's name and she can say it however she likes :3

I acknowledged that. And it wouldn't make it any less ridiculous if someone named Bob insisted their name was pronounced "Boob" or a House of Wine was pronounced "Hoe-ooo-sey off Wee-ney". These are words we already have accepted pronunciations for and for those who know foreign language pronunciations, it can take you right out of the experience.

In the Ameiko example, if the desired goal was to make Tian characters remind us in the real world of Asian cultures, it makes sense to use the same pronunciation, no? I mean that from a design perspective, not as someone bothering her about her name :P

The only naming that bothers me is when real languages (such as Latin or Japanese) are brought into the game and then the official pronunciation doesn't match how they would be pronounced in real life. Fantasy names can obviously be pronounced however, but Ameiko is perfectly valid Japanese and would definitely not be pronounced "ah mee koh."

Honestly, 5 feet really don't matters, especially in long runs.

Actually, long runs are when an extra 5 feet on your movement speed matters the most.