simon withers's page

I'm going to be playing a Sorcerer with the Elemental bloodline in our next PF campaign. And i'm trying to avoid him using rays, and focus on area abilities, or things that don't require an to hit roll. However I get Elemental ray automatically. Are there any alternatives to this? Or variations that arn't rays?

Savage Tide included sidebars for allying with the evil factions instead of the good ones. You'd have to juggle a few of the events by following them, but the AP as a whole still works.

The savage tides looks good. Thanks

Kingmaker would be easily adaptable to an evil party as long as they can work together. The basic plot is to explore/map the Stolen Lands in the River Kingdoms and establish your own kingdom there. Can't see why an evil party would not work.

Doug

Unfortunately , one of my players wants to run Kingmaker himself.

I'm looking for a Campaign/Adventure path that would be suitable for a evil party. Or at least a party thats less than heroic.
Looking through the APs there seems alot that are "the party save the world " type. And i'm looking for something other than that.
Anybody any ideas?

4th edition desert/wilderness campaign. More combat/problem solving than role playing style of game.
We're a bunch of 30 and 40 year olds , who meet 7pm till 10 pm bi monthly , for a relaxed game of DnD.
We meet at my house in Niverville (12130) which is about 30 minutes south of Albany.
At the moment we're looking for one extra player. Knowledge of the rules not important. No drinkers or smokers desired. Any body interested in joining us , get in touch with me at witherssimon@hotmail.com

I wonder if people who self-identify as DMs are having a different set of reactions and goals for this new system than people who self-identify as players. It would seem that players have an incentive for the revised classes to have more cool stuff and more options. They only have to create one character or fix one character. It would seem that DMs would have a strong incentive to advocate for Pathfinder to fix persistent 3e design problems as simply as possible, rather than create new opportunities. They have to revise an entire world. They see the sorcerer's blood lines and see hours of work revising every last sorcerer in their world.

In short, is a lot of the arguing on these forums based on different incentives based on the poster's role?

And which group should get preference from Paizo: the DMs, who buy the modules and adventure paths, or the players, who clamor for them?

Is it possible to walk the fine line between these somewhat opposed incentives?

This is an excellent point.

I saw a post by Stefan Radermacher saying he'd spoken to Pazio about Pcgen supporting Pathfinder, and everyone was all in favour.

For me, to continue to use 3.5, as a DM. I need an improved version.So either its 4E or PRPG.

I feel like I'm more the target buyer for PRPG , whereas 4E I don't.

As a player I could probably stick with 3.5. As a DM I need to change.

Instead of making the DC 15 +the targets CMB, why not make it the targets touch AC +5 +CMB . This would reflect more the targets ability to avoid maneuvers. And perhaps call it the Combat maneuver AC.