sirgog's page

How long is a "day"? All the downtime activities, particularly crafting, measure things in days, and yet it's never clarified how long a day is. Is it 24 hours of work? Is it 8 hours? If its 8, can I do two 8 hour "days' of work in a single 24 hour day?

This question is the reason it's not posted in hours, but in days.

It's taxing enough work that between performing the work and recuperating to be in a good enough position to still repeat the task the next day, this takes the overwhelming majority of the hours of the day.

If the task is physical and requires superhuman endurance (e.g. forging a warhammer that requires heat beyond a normal forge) this might entail six hours actually performing the task, eight hours resting between swings, seven hours sleeping and three hours of recreation.

If it's a mundane task such as auditing the books of your shipping empire, it might be thirteen hours actually performing the task, eight of sleep and a couple hours of leisure.

In some tasks it might overwhelmingly be preparation, e.g. a bard doing a comedy routine might only spend two hours doing the public facing aspects, and eleven or twelve writing material.

In any case, the task is the dominant factor in your day.

I'd love to see a single-volume compilation of this published once it's all been out for a few weeks. Single volume editions are much more shipping friendly over here in Australia, and they look better too, IMO.

I just wish that non-US customers had a better way to get watermarked PDFs along with physical purchases. At the moment we're charged an exorbitant amount for shipping; for example, if I were to buy the Core Rulebook I'd pay $60 for the book and $48 for shipping to Australia, which is bananas. This makes getting subscriptions completely unfeasible economically, and also means that if we want PDFs, we have to pay for the book from another merchant (and incur their shipping, markups, etc) and then pay $20 for the PDF from Paizo. Either way, we're incurring a wild "overseas tax".

The only way I've been able to get PDFs at a reasonable price is to wait for Humble Bundles, and since Book Depository was shuttered by Amazon, getting the physical books is even more expensive than it was. It's very frustrating and expensive being a Paizo supporter who doesn't live in the US.

Yep, also Australian, I have to buy the books on Amazon, it's the only reasonable option.

This is a decision I cannot agree with. Drow are second favorite version of elves and to see them just cast aside like this is just WRONG. I've already told people at my table and game groups I'm doing the opposite and will be banning serpentfolk and instead expanding the Drow lore and such even more.

I love Pathfinder, I love the drow, and see them cast aside like this in all honesty almost feels like a good friend being dragged away to never be seen again by another friend who is trying instead to shove what feels like a stranger into the group and acting like nothing has changed.

It's not Paizo's decision, it's American copyright law.

Drow cannot be used without the OGL. WotC made using the OGL no longer viable. If Paizo print something with Drow, WotC will sue and an American court will seize all the product and destroy it.

Is there some kind of post somewhere that explains exactly what mechanics are covered under the OGL? Like it makes sense that ability scores would be, but I had no idea that they were until reading this post. All I know is that alignment and some monsters and spells and stuff are all changing or out completely. I'd love to read more on this.

I'm not too sad to see ability scores be replaced by modifiers as I think just having the modifiers will be more new player friendly.

This can't really be answered without a court of law deciding one way or the other. The concept of measuring physical and mental capacity through numbers is clearly not copyrightable, but the concept of measuring through the exact set of six attributes 'Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma' combined with an expectation that humans without supernatural enhancement are almost all in the 3-18 range and... at this point a court would PROBABLY decide that is OK, but they might not. So Paizo is being careful.

CorvusMask wrote:

...B-but I like alignment :(

I don't like alignment personally, but I don't think its a matter of your preference versus my preference. Chances are that alignment is considered a mechanic that might be indefensible in the court if Wizards decided to sue Paizo over using their brand identity. The concept of, "a mechanic that measures your goodness" is definitely a game mechanic that probably couldn't be sued over, but using that rule and calling it alignment could be argued as D&D product identity, and it's probably easier to trash it as a result.

Yep I think this is the cause. Especially with the names, and the nine element grid.

Using just three categories for each axis and giving them the names D&D has historically used is probably on the edge of copyrightable expression.

I did like alignment when it was used as a partial descriptor, not a straightjacket. But it was always very limited, failing to separate those with dedication to their ideals from those who were more pragmatic.

I'd always added a Pragmatic vs Zealot third axis for that reason. Pragmatic chaotic good meant a kind hearted free spirit, zealous chaotic good means a committed revolutionary who is always looking for the next tyrant to overthrow. Pragmatic evil foes will commit atrocities only in persuit of a goal, zealous ones will do so because they think the atrocity brings the world closer to an ideal state.

Is there any intention to make a combined Gatewalkers book like the Fists of the Ruby Phoenix compilation? Love those.

If you consider most people to have a 3d6 in each stat, a score of 7 represents a score where 85% of the population are better than you.

Take Constitution (and specifically the distance a person can run at a moderate pace (18kmph = 11 mph) before serious fatigue sets in, forcing them to stop). Assume 85% of non-injured adults can run 400 meters (¼ mile) at this speed, and the least fit 15% cannot complete that run. In this case, that's what a 7 Con means.

OTOH, a 14 Con would imply that you are more fit than 85% of the population. If only the most fit 15% of uninjured adults can sustain that pace for a mile (that's a 5 minute 20 second mile), then a 14 Con implies you can *just* make the mile at that speed, then are unable to continue running.

So I'm asking you:

What does Psionics mean to you?

How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?

What is an absolute deal-breaker?

Thanks again for the give-and-take.

--Erik

As to how to get me to buy it and use it - print it, that's pretty much all.

Psionics, to me, must encapsulate the feeling of 'mind over matter'.

Whether it be a telekinesis spell, a psionic warrior fortifying their defenses with a shield crafted of pure will, or a psion unleashing the power of their mind in a devastating cone of force, it needs to fit that theme.

As for mechanics, some form of spell point system (either the 3.5 system or something redesigned) fits this perfectly - using the power of the mind to overcome matter is exhausting, but doesn't require the preparation of specific spells in advance.

The closest thing to a deal-breaker, to me, would be having large amounts of elemental attacks (these don't really make sense for a psion to have IMO), or having major balance issues with the content.

Having run a 3.5 campaign from 1 to 23, I found there were several key problems with high-level play, some of which are not hard to fix.

1) Save-or-die effects - Pathfinder's '10 damage per caster level' is a nice change, I think this should be dropped slightly so that Slay Living is devastating but survivable when you first encounter level 9 clerics as foes (about level 7 or so). 2d6+1 damage per caster level, or 60 damage + 1 per caster level are both options. Let's not get started on Blasphemy or Holy Word.

2) Deletrious effects are easier to cause than cure - Insanity is a fire-and-forget level 7 spell that can be cast with no specific costs, but requires (at least) a Limited Wish to cure - i.e. a specific level 7 spell that may or may not be prepared and that has a particularly nasty additional cost. This is a problem at high level (where you have Insanity) just as much as it is at low level (where stat damage is dealt moderately often, is fairly debilitating and is tough to cure), and also at mid-level, where negative levels and ability drain are very difficult to cure.

3) Buff durations are a nightmare to track in complex encounters. 4E got this one right - having some buffs last until the end of the encounter, and some until the end of the next round.

4) Many spells are far too open ended - spells like Shapechange simply allow too much flexibility and power, making the Wizard more capable in melee than the barbarian, more resilient than the paladin, and so on. Pathfinder has some good solutions here.

5) (possibly most important) - Divination spells are simply too good at endgame. Pretty much every BBEG requires countermeasures to Scrying, teleport ambushes, and magical methods to discern information about them. In short, they need to be a caster capable of casting at least Screen, Mind Blank, Wish or Miracle - or else you need to arbitrarily rule that the rules do not work as written and certain spells do not work. Most high-level adventures do the latter, and use the Wish spell (cast by an ally of the BBEG) to explain this.