taepodong's page

I don't subscribe, but I've bought five of the APs so far that I liked. I would go so far as to say that I could not care less if the fiction were just removed and the page count reduced. The fiction is dead space for me. I've tried reading a few of them, and they weren't all that bad, but they didn't hold my interest for more than a couple paragraphs.

If any person tells you that as a GM they were never thrown for a loop in a session, they are a bald faced liar.
I expect to have huge chunks of whatever I planned for ignored or burned to the ground...and still have a moment nearly every session where I have to scramble the jets in my head and keep the poker face on to run damage control.

Stories like these are hilarious, but we all have them.

1) If the GM never uses the term "Rule Zero," then the players have nothing to complain about.
2) "Fallacy" (yawn) is a word that is used more by 3.x/PF players than undergraduate philosophy students.
3) Rule Zero is the only rule.

I have played every official version of Star Wars roleplaying games to come down the turnpike, and three homebrews based on BRP/Runequest, GURPS and d20 Modern. It's my opinion that Saga was the best implementation of Star Wars in a roleplaying game that has come about yet, and shelling out the twenty or so bucks for the main book on ebay is a way better allocation of time and resources than converting Pathfinder to fit with it.

Most games I play an and GM we only use the grid in specific situations. Outdoor combats rarely get drawn out. Indoor ones get drawn more, but usually they are only in claustrophobic situations to avoid really bad spellcasting decisions.
Try using it less. I had used one a handful of times prior to 3.x for D&D (there are some games that pretty much require it, like Battletech), so when they encouraged everyone to use the grid in 3.x, we gave it a shot. I think it is overused. It is handy on a case by case basis, but most of the time you don't need it, IMO.
I also think that in most cases the grid makes the people at the table's imagination of the events happening in combat less epic.

Quite a few of the Witch's Hexes say "Whether or not the save is successful, a creature cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day." or some variation. Does this mean that a witch can deliberately hex all their allies at the start of a day, let the hexes expire, and have them be immune to any OTHER witch using those hexes on them?

(Conversely, it also means only one witch can use Healing or Fortune on anyone in a given day.)

When I first started playing my current character, I suggested this as a joke...

I voted 15, but just as easily could have voted 12. Somewhere in that range is where the game becomes less fun for me as a GM because of the amount of information I need to have on hand, and prep time gets out of control. I have also noticed as a player that some time in that range the game is less fun because the GM is experiencing what I just mentioned, and it shows.
And let's face it, like someone already mentioned in this thread, you are a total package of badass by level 12 anyway, going much further is just overkill. Also, over a couple decades of gaming, I can say that 90%+ of the best times I had in D&D/d20/level based systems were in the range between about 5 and 10.

My son also plays with my thursday night Pathfinder group TBH He has stated that he is 'fed up with 4E, it just seems to be combat'

Your son will one day be a champion of men. I don't know if it will be a Wheaties box, a medicinal breakthrough, a solution to the energy crisis, solving world hunger or just having a superhot wife, but I expect great things based on his tastes this early in the ballgame.