thejeff's page

Organized Play Member. 29,988 posts (31,221 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 6 Organized Play characters. 13 aliases.


1 to 50 of 29,988 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Now I wonder what the "obvious reasons" for keeping a Lovecraftian grave's location secret would be?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
David knott 242 wrote:
BillyN831 wrote:
I recommend the Elric of Melnibone series by Michael Moorcock. What about you?

But don't stop there. Most of his other Eternal Champion books are also worth reading, although I was less than impressed with Jerry Cornelius.

I've described the Cornelius books as "my favorite books that I don't understand".

They're a very, very different style than the rest of his Eternal Champion stuff.

Drawdy wrote:
John Woodford wrote:

Maybe one time in fifty (if that), someone volunteers to GM, which is enough of a success rate to keep people doing

When I was younger I fantasized about getting paid to GM. I think that’s a great opportunity for GMs now. Supply and demand: get paid.

What would be cool is a website (like Healthgrades or Avvo) where GMs could advertise and be rated by players. Maybe some entrepreneurial web person reading this will do that.

There are definitely pay to play GMs listed on various sites. I've seen them on Roll20 and some places advertising Foundry games as well.

Haven't seen this yet, but I like the callback to the 60s FF idea. Off on some time-distorting cosmic exploration perhaps?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aberzombie wrote:

I’ve been reading the Saga of the Swamp Thing - the Alan Moore run. They’ve got it in a nice 6 volume collection. I picked up the first three volumes at my comic store. They also had volume six, but I refrained from buying it until I can get volumes 4 & 5.

Such magnificent writing. I think it’s safe to say Moore is one of the best writers ever to work in the comic industry. So very unlike a majority of the writers today (although that might not entirely be their fault). His interpretation of the character, which largely still defines Swamp Thing today, is very similar to how the Blade movies left an indelible mark on the comic book version of that character.

To be fair, so very unlike a majority of the writers back when he was writing Swamp Thing too. :)

7 people marked this as a favorite.
NightTrace wrote:
Is the position that didn't exist until Jim was on boarded going to continue to exist or will it be closed now that there isn't a need for a 'hire a friend' spot?

In retrospect, it might have been more a "hire a potential candidate for President" while you a) get him up to speed on the company and b) evaluate him to make sure you want to give him the job.

Irontruth wrote:
thejeff wrote:

At least to start with - you can bring in the gadgets to help cope with the more extreme supervillains that come along. Not like a jobs program would really help with the sometimes super-powered monsters that Gotham attracts.

Who was the super villain that caused Bruce Wayne to invent the character of the Batman in this movie? Maybe I missed it.

Falcone was ultimately responsible for some of the events, but Bruce was unaware of his actions until the end of the movie.

The Riddler didn't start his first crime spree until 2 years after the Batman started his night patrols.

The Penguin was just a small-time club owner.

The concept of super-powered monsters doesn't currently exist in this movie.

Which is why I started with "It would be interesting to see a take on Batman that didn't focus as much on the pouring money into his crusade."

I didn't say "And that's what this movie was."

Even inventing the character of the Batman doesn't require a billionaire's fortune - the combat and detective skills along with some basic iconic gear could be enough, costing far less than funding a jobs program.

Edit: I was responding to your specific comment about the failure of the Batman philosophy and common complaints along the same lines, rather than anything about this movie specifically.

Irontruth wrote:
There's still a failure in addressing that philosophy... investing however much money he spends fighting crime into a jobs program would likely reduce crime by several orders of magnitude more than one guy being a badass on the streets. But at least the movie looks at the efficacy to some degree.

It would be interesting to see a take on Batman that didn't focus as much on the pouring money into his crusade. Even if he's always been rich, money being his superpower wasn't really his thing until fairly modern takes on him. (Fairly modern for a character that's ~90 years old.)

At least to start with - you can bring in the gadgets to help cope with the more extreme supervillains that come along. Not like a jobs program would really help with the sometimes super-powered monsters that Gotham attracts.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Catgirl wrote:

I have no idea how us communists got dragged into this we're literally just over here minding our own business trying to grill

Anyways, I do try to be careful with terms like "nazi" and "TERF", but less out of any concern that calling someone a Nazi will turn them into one (come on) so much as just, well, I value those words more for their specific nuanced meanings than just as catchall terms for "bigot". I don't want to lose the nuanced meanings. Not every racist or homophobe is a Nazi. They just tend to, you know, eventually wind up on the same sides as the Nazis if they don't grow up first.

I don't know the OSR politics, but anyone objecting to "pronouns in bio" is clearly angry about increased trans visibility and acceptance. It's an objectively transphobic and often misogynist position. It's also such an absurd thing for those people to get mad at that you can tell they really want an excuse to yell at a trans person.

"Fascist" is generally more applicable than "Nazi" unless the person in question is using specific Nazi terminology or symbolism. It's probably still not useful, even if accurate, unless it's blatantly clear. More likely to provoke sympathy for the person being accused than anything. In the "Liberals will call anyone they disagree with a Nazi" - which is a fascist talking point, but one that works.

That said, a lot of these groups, even informal ones, are at least fascist-adjacent. With people with actual fash connections feeding talking points and sometimes funding. Even if most of the people involved wouldn't think of themselves as fascist, they can still be being used by fascists.

In this case it sounds like MadScientistWorking knows more about this harassment and the specific group involved than we do. I'll accept their judgement. It's not like transphobes having Nazi sympathies is all that surprising. I certainly wouldn't extend it to all OSR players are even Nazi-adjacent. Or even all transphobic OSR players. It definitely exists in that community, but overt Nazism still isn't common.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Belafon wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Belafon wrote:
I am going to request that you do educate me. Because I really can't see any advantage here. Please tell me what, if any, benefit accrues to me as a player or GM vs. the same system but with all records and sales hosted on a Gripnr server instead of as an NFT.
I can't even figure out what the advantage to me as a player or GM is to have all records and sales hosted anywhere? Why is monetizing roleplaying a good thing?

That is a philosophical question, one that I can see reasonable people disagreeing on. It's been a bone of contention in MMOs for well over two decades. However I sat that rather opinion-driven question aside to focus on one that should have a concrete answer.

My question for Themetricsystem is to explain what technical or gaming benefits are added by the NFT component vs. Gripnr hosting the whole thing.

The NFT is the part that I'm really taking exception to. Like I mentioned above, I actually thought of the basic buy/sell idea years ago. I think the safeguards that would have to be implemented would result in a game something less than a TTRPG and less than an MMO. I could be wrong about that, that's an opinion. But it's just really hard to see what the NFT component is adding other than a hope that people will spend money just because those three letters indicate a hot speculative market.

Which from a business perspective is enough of a reason.

I can't really see this taking off as a speculative bubble though, even enough to make a real profit for the owners. There's an awful lot of work involved in making an RPG setting and adventures that are good enough to attract a paying player base.

Hmmm, looks like they're planning to mint and sell those 10,000 NFT PCs long before everything else is ready to start. Guess that's where the grift comes in.

pauljathome wrote:

If I'm understanding this correctly it kinda feels like a Ponzi scheme (although I don't think it is in a legal sense). There is absolutely nothing there except hype but that hype may (emphasis on MAY) cause it to actually be worthwhile for some time, especially for the early adopters.

If (huge if) it gets enough people interested then it will succeed for awhile. There will be people willing to pay to start with a level 5 or 10 character and people willing to crank out level 5 characters.

But if it works at all it won't be for the long term. If it works it will attract competitors and somebody will come along and monetize Marvel or Star Wars or something like that in this way and drive Glimmering into nothing.

It seems like a lousy Ponzi scheme too.

It's a Ponzi scheme with a built in cap. People might want to buy 10th level characters to play (emphasize "might" there), but the way Ponzi schemes work is that you buy in thinking you'll be able to sell and profit big. Why would I pay big money for a 10th level character if I'm not going to be able to sell that character off for much more after a couple levels?
Assuming there's profit, there'll be more of it in starting at low level and selling off at whatever the optimal level is.

I guess you could make basic profit off grinding low levels, but I don't see how you get the spikes that drive NFT mania out of this.

It also assumes that the whole Gripnr/Glimmering setting and adventures hold up well enough that people want to pay money to play them at high level - which is a huge assumption for a new game.

Belafon wrote:

I am going to request that you do educate me. Because I really can't see any advantage here. Please tell me what, if any, benefit accrues to me as a player or GM vs. the same system but with all records and sales hosted on a Gripnr server instead of as an NFT.

I can't even figure out what the advantage to me as a player or GM is to have all records and sales hosted anywhere? Why is monetizing roleplaying a good thing?

As said, there are a lot of guides out there for the various platforms. Search around on Youtube, in addition to the two Doug suggested.

Personally, I've used Foundry and Roll 20 and I'd suggest Foundry - the set up of the platform itself is more complicated, but once you've got it up and running, the tools and content make it a lot easier - especially if you're not eager to either buy all the content again or commit to buying it only on the one platform. There's a Foundry module that lets you import most adventures if you own the official PDF. That takes care of most of the VTT specific GM prep, though you obviously still need to do the same kind of prep you'd do to run it in person. The maps and monsters and things are all in place and ready for you.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Catgirl wrote:
I would love to have a normal relationship with my PbPs not entirely dominated by guilt for hiatuses.

Wait. That isn't a normal relationship with PbPs?

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Leon Aquilla wrote:

Tondro was poached by Wizards of the Coast.

If they want to hire someone from Paizo I don't think they're going to be able to match whatever it is they're offering no matter how generous a contract is struck by UPW.

No, but often if you're happy where you are and content with both the pay and conditions, it will take a lot more of an increase to lure you away.

Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Game night has been pretty spot on for quite a while. By 'spot on' I mean we mostly get started an hour after we ostensibly start and things take forever to advance, but at least it is some gaming.

I mean, isn't that how gaming always works?

We're still playing remote and probably only starting a half hour late, but only 2 hour sessions, so it's not a lot of real play time.

Page 59. In the Special Terminology section.

Each topic has a level associated. Once the PCs research all of a topic, they get XP as if they'd defeated a creature of that level.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ansr wrote:
I almost wish free archetype was the standard. If only because it is probably the only way some archetypes would ever be used. IIRC most archetypes are considered to be weaker then normal class feats, but at the same time I want to play around with something like a Talisman Dabbler, but it can be hard to justify taking them when a class feat makes much more sense. And sometimes 2e fights can get brutal.

I'm not convinced it would lead to different archetypes being used. If it was built in as the standard assumption, it would be hard to justify not taking the most effective ones.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
dirtypool wrote:

8 years into its life and two years shy of its next edition refresh on its 50h Anniversary Wizards of the Coast just posted their most profitable year in history.

5th Edition restored D&D’s place as the #1 selling game, and it has grown to the point where the #2 game can scarcely catch it. Now in a class by itself, how long much higher can it go? Will the refresh lower sales or raise it to even greater heights in 2024!

This is a thread to talk about the perpetual success of the current version of D&D.

More importantly, from my point of view, than the relative positions - will D&D continue to expand the market for RPGs in general?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

Metatextually in something like a tabletop roleplaying game, you kind of have to avoid the "you are one of the chosen few special ones" trope because PCs can be all sorts of different kinds of characters and they shouldn't be treated as more "special" because they chose to be a Wizard instead of a Rogue (or a Jedi Knight instead of a Smuggler) since that has side effects of pressuring players to make (or avoid) certain choices.

The only places you really see it are ones where you're adapting something that already has a "only a select few are wizards" thing in the diagesis.

Except even PF has "chosen few special ones" classes like sorcerer where it's inherent to your genetics (or whatever fantasy RPGs use instead of genetics) or "chosen by the gods" classes for that matter.

What they should try to avoid is making those tropes mechanically advantageous so that players will be happy taking other options and not to gate them mechanically so that players can use them if they want.

Which is exactly what PF does. (Or tries to at least. Class balance issues aside.)

The mechanics of being able to be a wizard in the game system are independent of the lore allowing people to be wizards in the world. Any PC can choose to be a Wizard (or take a Wizard dedication), but any PC can also choose to be a Sorcerer or take a Sorcerer dedication, despite the lore restriction that only people with some kind of special blood can be sorcerers.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mechanically that's true, but is it true in a world/setting sense? Any PC can learn wizardry, given the teaching, but is that true of everyone in the world at large? Or is there some innate ability needed, as there is in much of fantasy?

I don't think there's anything in the mechanics or world lore that tells us. As such, there's no mechanical way to determine potential. Try to teach them the basics and see if they catch on, I guess.

Interesting to see that the "first 6 books" are the original Riftwar books themselves and the Empire Trilogy, which are very very different in tone.

It would be hugely jarring to switch from a faithful adaptation of the first to one of the second.

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Not really that easy to run away and regroup to handle this one, once you've triggered it. One of your party is not merely down, but active against you. Not face-tanking it at that point is tricky.

And even if you do, the odds are decent that you've not merely lost that PC permanently, but that you have to come back to interact with the trap just to figure that out.

Of course, it's more likely you spot the trap and just avoid or break it, but if it does go off it's a TPK waiting to happen. (Or just break all even vaguely suspicious mirrors on general principles, even if you fail the perception check.)

Which is all a shame, because the whole "fighting evil mirror duplicates" thing is a cool iconic encounter, but this seems a really bad implementation.
Playing out the whole thing, beating the evil duplicate, then finding the copied person is still trapped and doomed to be lost forever as soon as they failed that first save is just not a cool way to handle it.
Let them come back when the duplicate is beaten (or the body thrown through the mirror?), with the legendary thievery check being to pull them out beforehand?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Planning on being snowed in.

Which is fine, since I wasn't planning to go anywhere anyway. Unless I need to go dig my parents out Sunday.

Mark Hoover 330 wrote:

I didn't know where it was appropriate, but I'm going to throw this here: I don't like how much movie Spider Men take off their masks. I'm guessing this is a live acting thing, to fulfill a contract requirement or provide a visual for the audience on displaying the actor's emotional range, but honestly in the comics Spider Man would go so far as to put a paper bag on his head rather than reveal his secret ID to even close Marvel Team Up buddies (prior to Civil War), but in the movies its "oh no, this train is gonna crash and stopping it will be hard, better get my mask off for this!"

I hope now that SM: NWH has reestablished Peter's secret ID he'll keep his mask on like, all the time unless absolutely life-threatening situations demand it being removed.

It's common with all the super hero movies (at least for characters with any kind of nearly full face masks) and it always bugs me. Worse with Spider-man since he's even more focused on his secret identity being secret than most, but it always seems weird.

How many times does Iron Man open his helmet just to talk for a moment?

I get that it's done to let the actor act, but it's always weird.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Catgirl wrote:
I also dump stats for thematic reasons, of course. I dumped my SoT wizard's wisdom as low as it would go, because her whole point is that she's on a Sparrowhawk-type journey and she starts out reckless and arrogant.

Not having this kind of thing supported well in RPGs is a long, if fairly mild, irritation of mine.

You can't really go from bad to good at something, at least relatively speaking. You can certainly get better - and likely outstrip normal people just by virtue of levelling more, but you'll always trail your peers who started out better.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

Also Shocking Grasp.

I would make non-metal equivalent of metal armors and shields at least Uncommon. And very likely more expensive too.

Just to be clear, this was my thought when I considered what such an unusual armor would imply.

1- It's not common, at least in the Inner Sea area, so Uncommon or Rare rating according to its actual rarity in the game setting. If it's common where the game takes place, that's just fine.

2- If it's not common, how does the character maintain it ? How do they do the minor repairs that it needs ? Either they need to be able to repair it on their own (with Crafting) or they need to buy a new one, or at least replace some parts. If it comes from a faraway place, it is expensive just by virtue of the costs involved in getting it to the character.

Nothing impossible to get for a character, but increased verisimilitude IMO, as well as a balance I deem acceptable for the benefits it provides.

I'd hesitate to push the repairs thing. Plenty of classes or races have access to uncommon stuff and rely on it, so adding special rules for maintenance on that justification rubs me the wrong way.

Tristan d'Ambrosius wrote:
or plate armor was used into the 17th century overlapping with guns so if you have plate armor you can have guns since they were in use for some of their existence together, but watch out for dragons metal gets really hot you could get slagged.

I mean, sure. I never intended to suggest plate armor meant you couldn't have guns.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tristan d'Ambrosius wrote:
But having plate armor doesn't preclude adventuring with guns

I didn't say it did.

Oh I see: "demand that if you have plate armor you should be able to go adventuring with guns."
I meant "If plate armor exists, guns must also exist, because that's the historical timeline."
Which is nonsense not only because fantasy doesn't have to match history, but also because the guns tied to plate armor development wouldn't have been good for heroic adventuring, but would change warfare.

You can certainly have PF style firearms, but that's "because fantasy", not because they're historically accurate.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Cydeth wrote:

I generally don't like guns in fantasy games. There are exceptions (I prefer to play pirate games with guns and cannons, for instance, and I am working on a Victoriana-style adventure which includes repeating rifles and revolvers), but in general I really dislike it without specific buy-in. If firearms were ubiquitous in Pathfinder, I never would have bought the game to begin with. It wouldn't be the game I wanted to play, so I simply... would have discarded it entirely.

I suspect that's a good part of why things are separated the way they are in Golarian. Things are generally modular, so you can bring in the aspects you want more easily while excluding things that aren't part of the base assumption.

Now, my own attitude toward gunslingers and the like has softened a little, I allowed a gunslinger in my Night of Gray Death campaign that just started, but I generally dislike them in games of the sort. I think that the adventure lends itself to a feel that makes guns feel more acceptable to me, but that could just be internal quibbling.

Anyway, yeah. If Paizo ever goes all-in on guns everywhere in-setting, I'll probably stop buying anything set in Golarion.

And this is basically the reasons guns have the place they do. They're controversial enough that too much emphasis loses more players than it gains.

They likely didn't want to put a restricted/uncommon class in the core rules and wanted to work out the firearms rules along with the class design, so here we are.

Tristan d'Ambrosius wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Unless of course you ignore historical accuracy with guns the way Paizo has, but then there's no reason that everyone hasn't traded in their swords and bows for guns and that gives a very different feel than I want in my fantasy.
I hate this argument. Fireball ignores historical accuracy. Dragons ignore historical accuracy, why have huge castles and towers when dragons can fly over your walls and slag your castle? Buying resurrections from your friendly neighborhood temple ignores historical accuracy.

But that's not really my argument. My argument is that because this is how guns in history really were, you can't use the "historical accuracy" argument to demand that if you have plate armor you should be able to go adventuring with guns.

I don't have a problem with historically inaccurate firearms or effects of firearms on the world, but you can't argue that you need guns to be historically accurate and argue that you don't need to be historically accurate with those guns.

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Norade wrote:

Given that a default game of PF2 has a roughly 16th century level of technology*, it seems odd that firearms are generally excluded from the core rules. There was never a time when the knight in full harness astride a stead existed in a world without gunpowder or firearms. Is the distaste some people have for them simply a byproduct of early genre pieces and early fantasy RPGs excluding firearms or is there some other cause of this distaste? Moreover, should we simply accept that firearms are too 'spicy' for core rules or should we seek to correct the inaccuracy and include them fully and from the start of whatever the next big fantasy game/new edition is?

*Judging by the designs of plate armor available as well as the existence of the rapier and some of the polearms listed.

Lots of people aren't really interested in playing with firearms. Others are and they're available for them.

I don't think it has anything to do with "inaccuracy". Fantasy RPG worlds are generally a kitchen sink pile of weirdness anyway, so pushing to require firearms be ubiquitous based on "historical accuracy" seems weird to me. They're available, but walled off mechanically so those who don't like them can avoid them.

As for the inaccuracy itself, the game really is a genre-based game, not a reality based one and the genre has been full of knights in shining plate without guns since before it was really even a genre. (Think Mallory's Arthur.)

My problem with guns from a "realism" standpoint is that guns change the world and they did so long before they advanced enough to be useful for heroic adventurers. If you were emulating reality, you might have plate armor and rapiers and guns, but the guns would be mostly confined to cannon and slow firing arquebuses or the like. That makes the guns things that transform warfare long before they'd be effective for adventuring. You'd run into bandits or other humanoid enemies attacking you with a volley, rather than being able to use them yourself.

Unless of course you ignore historical accuracy with guns the way Paizo has, but then there's no reason that everyone hasn't traded in their swords and bows for guns and that gives a very different feel than I want in my fantasy.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tristan d'Ambrosius wrote:
Everyone duck hands are being tossed about.

I spent a moment trying to figure out what "duck hands" were.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:
Senko wrote:

That did used to be the case, can't remember the exact rules but to level up in earlier dnd editions you had to spend x amount of time training under someone of appropriate level to level up. It even varied in how long it took based on how well you roleplayed and I think by class. So you got enough xp to go from 4 to 5 but had to find a trainer, pay them and then spend time studying under them to develop your new skills.
First edition AD&D. From what I recall it was between a week and a month, depending on how well you did role play your class. Beyond a point, you didn't need the trainer (probably when you reached the name level) and you could self-train at the expense of more time.

The great part was that it also cost money and in at least some cases at low levels, since gold also gave you xp, it was practically guaranteed that you wouldn't have enough cash to pay for the training, meaning you'd have to continue adventuring without earning more experience until you could pay for training.

JoelF847 wrote:

Just watched it and I liked it quite a bit. Not in my MCU top 5, but that's a high bar. I don't really get why it didn't resonate with so many people though. I thought it did a pretty good job with a large ensemble cast, though I guess I can see some people finding it too many new characters to digest at once. Thought it was far more entertaining than Shang Chi

Some interesting questions left over though, like why did Cersei turn the celestial into stone and leave it behind, when presumably she could have turned it into air, ice and let it melt, etc. And what will the world make of it, especially just after dealing with Thanos and the blip. It certainly ups the ante of what Earth is dealing with - alien invasions and killer robot armies is more relatable, but wiping out half of all life followed by cosmically enormous statue out of nowhere gets into the super weird territory pretty quickly.

I don't know much about the celestials/eternals from the comics, but considering that Ego was supposedly a celestial, and he targeted Earth before the awakening of Tiamut, seems like odd competition there amongst Celestials. Wondering if that will come up in the future.

In the comics at least, Ego wasn't a Celestial (or really much like the movie Ego at all), so not much can be drawn from there.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's a game. None of it really makes any sense. Finding a spellbook doesn't suddenly let you cast spells anyway. In fact, as quoted above, you can't even use someone else's spellbook except for spells you've already written in yours.

None of it makes sense if you take it literally. Whether that's a rogue with no wizard knowledge suddenly being able to cast spells after sneak attacking enough people or a wizard suddenly knowing how to punch people like a monk after casting enough spells. It's an abstraction.

You're supposed to roleplay around it so it makes sense. Put it in your backstory. Talk about practicing in downtime. Or don't, if you and your group don't care, but it's easy enough to do. Just don't pretend there are supposed to be mechanical penalties.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Trokarr wrote:
I think the argument that you don’t get these items because it doesn’t make sense in the context of the STORY doesn’t hold water. Here’s a simple story explanation for the appearance of a spellbook in game; the spellbook has been handed down in the family for generations and has been in the characters pack the whole time and they were studying it in their spare time behind the scenes. There problem solved and it took me less than 10 seconds to come up with the solution. GM laziness/lack of imagination is not a valid reason to deny a player their class features.

Even more so - player laziness/lack of imagination.

If you're going for wizard at second level, build it into your backstory. Give yourself the excuse up front. It's not hard. Provide that reason to have the book. You've for time.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I so want to play in this AP, though it would probably have to be online, since I don't think my current group is interested - and we're in the middle of other stuff.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Kobold Catgirl wrote:
I am uncomfortably tempted by the WotC jobs on offer... even though I know there's no way I'm remotely qualified for them. Working in TTRPGs has been a dream of mine about as long as writing novels has been, but I didn't put in the work and other people did.
Like I always(used to!!!!!!) say in my employment meetings, dont' do their job for them(hiring managers). Let THEM be the ones to say no to YOU. Always apply. Always. Make them do their jobs, and their their data net act FOR you. Maintain contact with them if you can and have them them explain why you weren't selected for a job/project and file that reason away mentally and use it for the next application. Collect the rejection notices you get(indeed, if you get one at all!) and use them to make origami figures.
Also, put on the application somewhere "Can shave an angry bear with a skid loader" I've gotten every job I've applied for when I've put that on the application, even Toys R Us was so impressed I was hired before I had the application filled out.

Just be careful. They might ask you to demonstrate.

Again, that's Book 5. An adventure for 13th level characters (or higher, depending on when in the book that dungeon took place.)

That happens, but it doesn't happen regularly, because there aren't multiple 13th level parties facing level appropriate threats on a daily basis. Low level adventuring parties (or vaguely similar groups) might be common, but both high level parties and threats to challenge them are rare. Special events, not weekly occurrences in every city.

Even the Agents of Edgewatch are an exception, despite being police. That's not what most Absalom cops go through. That's why we play out their adventure, not the regular night watch rousting drunks and small time crooks.

Diego Rossi wrote:
thejeff wrote:
AwesomenessDog wrote:
The game does not assume the party just carries around 5-10 clw wands to burn through over the course of an AP, for example.
AwesomenessDog wrote:
The game does not assume its something that is done. It's not ignoring the possibility, it's recognizing that having an economy centered around supplying 20 CLW wands per week to all the adventuring parties in a major urban center is ridiculous.
The combination of these two leads me to think there are 2-4 AP scale events per week in every major urban center. That would certainly be ridiculous.

Do you think that the "magic market" economy lives on AP scale events?

People will buy potions of CLW to cure wounds after an encounter with bandits, the army and guards will stockpile some CLW wands for the events with a lot of wounded, like riots, fires, floods, avalanches, battles, and so on.

RAW, every small town (201-2,000 inhabitants) has a 75% chance of having a CLW wand on sale in a shop (and every other magic item with a price of 1,000 gp or less). That is hardly credible, especially for the niche items.
But with a bit of role-playing and GM input finding and purchasing a CLW wand from someone (the rancher that keeps one in reserve if something happens to his people, the local priest that has one as backup healing) is perfectly feasible.
A CLW wand is the equivalent of 8 months of a wealthy lifestyle. Something like 35,000-40,000 $ or €. It can be a reasonable investment if your activity has a risk of serious accidents and access to someone that can use it.

I think the "magic market economy" isn't really a thing. The

"economics" of PF exist for game balance with a bit of handwaving towards verisimilitude, not to reflect any meaningful economy.

But really all I was commenting on was the combination of "using up 5-10 CLW wands during an AP" with "20 CLW wands per week to adventuring parties in any major urban center".

Plenty of large non-adventuring groups might have one for emergencies - though in many cases a single low level cleric channelling to heal a large group would be far more effective - any mass injury event to low level NPCs.

But it's only high level parties that burn through them nearly fast enough to really count towards that 20 a week. And high level parties only do so when facing high level challenges. Unless major urban centers are assumed to have hundreds of lower level adventuring parties active at all times.

AwesomenessDog wrote:
The game does not assume the party just carries around 5-10 clw wands to burn through over the course of an AP, for example.
AwesomenessDog wrote:
The game does not assume its something that is done. It's not ignoring the possibility, it's recognizing that having an economy centered around supplying 20 CLW wands per week to all the adventuring parties in a major urban center is ridiculous.

The combination of these two leads me to think there are 2-4 AP scale events per week in every major urban center. That would certainly be ridiculous.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Just don't try to exploit it to get a mw weapon before taking the class. Find an excuse.
Not much of an exploit. Hurt your BAB to get a weapon you could probably afford at second level? And weapon is a terrible bonded object. It’s pretty aggressive to have to grab your sword every time you cast a spell.

It would be nice at first level if you had a free mw work. Not a long term exploit, but if you were headed that way anyways.

By rules you shouldn't get it until you take the wizard level. It would make more sense to always have it, but don't try to get mechanical advantage from that. Like it makes rp sense to have the spellbook around to study as you're preparing to take the wizard level, but don't trade the spells in it off to another caster, because you don't really have them yet.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you're planning to do this at second level, talk to your GM and set it up, rather than springing it on him to improvise and demand free stuff appear out of nowhere.

Getting the items is less weird than suddenly acquiring the knowledge, if you've never mentioned it before.

Just don't try to exploit it to get a mw weapon before taking the class. Find an excuse.

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

I've been reading LOTR to my girlfriend for a few weeks now. It honestly holds up. What an achingly ornate, beautiful series. The movies are wonderful, but I have honestly come full-circle on them vs. the books: the books have much more beautiful themes and characterization, even if the movies present it all a lot more clearly and easily.

Also, Tom Bombadil and the whole Old Forest sequence mostly sucks, but the Barrows more than make up for it. Absolutely terrifying.

Yeah. I don't really mind Bombadil personally, but I can't even imagine how to do him on film, but the price of that is losing the barrow sequence, which was a real loss.

We're still playing remotely and on weeknights, so nothing this weekend.

I've been introducing the group to PF2e. We've got one out with Covid anyway - too sick to want to play.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Anguish wrote:
Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:
It sounds more like an attempt to alienate more of their customers. I mean , how long should one wait for a response to an email?

How long is a rope?

Sorry. PF2 joke. But seriously, that's a non-argument. How long should one wait for a response to a forum post? It's the same situation; you type some stuff, click a button, and have to wait a completely indeterminate amount of time before there'll be a response.

At least with the forum post, you can see that it's there on their site, in the place they're supposed to check. It didn't completely vanish into the ether.

Which is why I suggested some kind of automated response, just to let you know it's in their system.

That said, my most recent took a couple of days. No big deal .

Kobold Catgirl wrote:
It's not necessary, no. It's also my setting and my story. :P

Of course.

My initial read was that you wanted them to be more benevolent in this regard, but thought that they should reflect the bigotries more directly. Since that seems to have been wrong, I'll stop belaboring the point. :)

5 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

I am also old enough to recall when there were months of delays in response to emails, is that going to continue?

The posts from Brian Bauman earlier in this very thread might alleviate your concern about this.

I know they alleviated mine.

One of the problems with emails is that they drop into the void and it's hard to know if it even made it into the system at all.

If they have a new ticketing system, even an automated response with an issue number or something would be much appreciated.

Or is there one and my recent email on an issue did drop into the void? I don't know.

I mean, yeah. Can't disagree with any of that. And it's certainly a valid way to go with creatures in your setting, if that's where you want to go with it. But I don't think it's necessary.

I do think there's a valid distinction between Satanism and Satan - or more broadly between the folk beliefs about a thing and the thing itself, even when those folk beliefs help shape the thing. Satanists themselves are shaped by the largely Christian culture around them and share many of its prejudices, even more than their ideas of Satan do. Those are likely shaped more by historical notions of Satan as Jessica suggests. That's not a foundation for a completely separate religion - though if it prospered, with time it could become one, in the same way Christianity separated itself from Judaism. We're talking generations here at least.

That's sort of an aside though. Even using Satanists as a parallel, although they're tied to Christianity and the concept was used to enforce social norms, that doesn't mean they (or a hypothetical real Satan or fairies) would also uphold those norms. It's complicated with Satan, since his role in Christianity is to punish sinners as well as to encourage sin. But even then, Satan himself and even more so Satanists, don't necessarily hold to social norms. Satanists might have lousy orgies, but they're not strictly enforcing Christian taboos on sex.

If the fae exist in folk belief as examples of deviation from those norms, then the actual fae creatures could well encourage such behavior, rather than strictly uphold the urban norms. That's why they're evil and dangerous in the eyes of cultural tradition. They're strange and wild, tempting the weak and leading them astray.

1 to 50 of 29,988 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>