RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I was updating Fortress of the Stone Giants yesterday, and noticed that the Taiga giant changed from CR 10 in 3.5 to CR 12 in the Bestiary 2. Was it upgraded for a specific reason, or was it more to fill in a CR gap in the giant subtype? For my game I'm just going to use the B2 version, since with 5 PCs I up the challenge often. In your updating for the hardcover, how are you handling situations like this?
Also, does Paizo have any in-house monster guidelines for various sub-types of monster that are more specific than the general guidelines in the Bestiary appendix? For example, is there almost a template like guide for say, linnorms, that says minimum of 12 HD, and 12-20 HD are gargantuan and have DR 10/cold iron, and 21+HD are colossal and have DR 15/cold iron? I've noticed some patterns like this, but wondered how systematic the process was.
|
Core races receive proficiency in their racial weapons for free, and those weapons are usually if not always exotic. New playable races do not have racial weapons. Do you think that it would be broken if catfolk, for instance, receive proficiency in a finessable slashing weapon with an edge on the inward curve, along the lines of falcata, or elven curve blade?
Creative Director
|
With the Monk Class, there's always been a bit of controversy in that despite the Monk's write-up declaring them as followers of Religious Doctrines, be they Gods or Concepts, the Monk does not actually manifest any Divine abilities on their own.
If you got the chance to re-write the Monk Class, would you remove the religious overtones or would you leave it as is? I recently approved for a once-off game a Cleric of Iori to swap out his Armor/Shield Proficiencies and his channel Energy ability for a Monk's AC Bonus, 1/2 'equivilent monk level' Speed Bonus and Unarmed Damage abilities without overpowering the Monk overmuch. Maybe it's just me and my wire-fu love, but the Martial Artist Archetype rocks, btw.
You don't need divine powers to be a religious character. In fact, I actually quite like the fact that the monk has some religious elements to it but no obviously divine powers.
I would not remove its religious overtones at all if I re-wrote it.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you were a captain in the Federation universe what ship would you command?James, if you had to join the military, what branch would you go into, and what job would you want?Navy; ship's captain.
It'd have a gorn chief of security, regardless of what ship it was.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was updating Fortress of the Stone Giants yesterday, and noticed that the Taiga giant changed from CR 10 in 3.5 to CR 12 in the Bestiary 2. Was it upgraded for a specific reason, or was it more to fill in a CR gap in the giant subtype? For my game I'm just going to use the B2 version, since with 5 PCs I up the challenge often. In your updating for the hardcover, how are you handling situations like this?
Also, does Paizo have any in-house monster guidelines for various sub-types of monster that are more specific than the general guidelines in the Bestiary appendix? For example, is there almost a template like guide for say, linnorms, that says minimum of 12 HD, and 12-20 HD are gargantuan and have DR 10/cold iron, and 21+HD are colossal and have DR 15/cold iron? I've noticed some patterns like this, but wondered how systematic the process was.
It was upgraded, as was the rune giant and the shemhazian demon, to fill a CR gap and to account for the sheer amount of damage all three of these enormous monsters do.
A CR 12 taiga giant is still certainly workable as a foe for that encounter in Runelords, though, since the PCs should be at least 10th level and might even be 11th level at that point. With 5 PCs, you're even better having the B2 version.
In the hardcover, I'm handling these situations as they come up on a case-by-case basis... for example:
The guidelines we use for monsters are those printed in the Bestiary appendix. It's important to note (and lots of folks seem to not notice or forget this) that when building a monster, it's a good idea to make it particularly good at ONE thing, be it AC or hp or damage or whatever. And by "particularly good" I mean "at the high end or slightly above what that CR expects." There are certain unwritten rules for some monsters, especially those that are parts of related groups like linnorms, but those are more philosophical design goals than they are game balance ones, and so they don't need to be in print.
|
Creative Director
|
Core races receive proficiency in their racial weapons for free, and those weapons are usually if not always exotic. New playable races do not have racial weapons. Do you think that it would be broken if catfolk, for instance, receive proficiency in a finessable slashing weapon with an edge on the inward curve, along the lines of falcata, or elven curve blade?
The reason newer zero HD races don't often have a racial weapon ability is because those racial weapons don't exist, and it's generally inappropriate (for theme and for word count) to spend time in a monster entry designing new weapons. It's got nothing to do with game balance at all. And in fact, some non-core races DO have something akin to this—such as the tengu's ability to use all swords. That's probably the best answer there for how to grant a zero HD race a set of free weapon proficiencies. It's also worth noting that, game balance wise, granting free weapon proficiences is actually a pretty low-powered ability that a lot of folks seem to think is really high powered, so it's a relatively safe way to get people excited about a race.
That said... the catfolk's already pretty good as a playable race; I wouldn't advise adding any more powers to them.
If you look really closely, you have two arrows sticking out of your neck. Who shot you, why, and what did you do to them in return?
|
Creative Director
|
If you look really closely, you have two arrows sticking out of your neck. Who shot you, why, and what did you do to them in return?
That would have been a couple of foolish explorers. They're not a problem anymore. (burp)
(The art my avatar's from is the half-page opener to the Mwangi Expanse in the Inner Sea World Guide—that picture shows the whole story. About 5 rounds before the event that caused me to burp above.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What would you like to see in 5e?Succubi going back to being demons.
Wait what!? Is this another reason for me to avoid 4e D&D in preference to Pathfinder? What the heck is a succubus if it's not a demon?
EDIT: Ok, I looked it up on Google... a devil? Seriously? HELL NO! Demon always has been always should be. Yeah, I'll stick with Pathfinder where they are demons. Thank you for that. :)
Wait what!? Is this another reason for me to avoid 4e D&D in preference to Pathfinder? What the heck is a succubus if it's not a demon?What would you like to see in 5e?Succubi going back to being demons.
.
.A Devil.
It'd have a gorn chief of security, regardless of what ship it was.If you were a captain in the Federation universe what ship would you command?James, if you had to join the military, what branch would you go into, and what job would you want?Navy; ship's captain.
Why a Gorn?
In the hardcover, I'm handling these situations as they come up on a case-by-case basis... for example:
** spoiler omitted **
|
Creative Director
|
Why a Gorn?It'd have a gorn chief of security, regardless of what ship it was.If you were a captain in the Federation universe what ship would you command?James, if you had to join the military, what branch would you go into, and what job would you want?Navy; ship's captain.
Because they're cool and criminally underused in Star Trek.
|
Creative Director
|
** spoiler omitted **In the hardcover, I'm handling these situations as they come up on a case-by-case basis... for example:
** spoiler omitted **
James, are you a fan of guns in your Pathfinder?
How do you think a campaign setting with three distinct timelines would work? I can't decide whether I want medieval magitek or 1890s industrial age steampunk with magic, or maybe something in the 1700s, so I thought I'd start out building the medieval world, then advancing history into the 1700s, then advancing it to the age of steampunk, so that the setting supports all three of the things I want. Basically, it'd be like deciding between a story set in the Crusades, French and Indian War, or American Civil War. Furthermore, I'm open to alternate history stories (I love them), so the fact that the later timelines say what happened in the earlier timelines isn't an issue. I can diverge if I have to. In fact, I think alternate history should be the default assumption when playing in the two earlier timelines.
So we were having a debate last night on if Mind Blank would cancel out the effects of Foresight, but the wording on Foresight says it just tells you what will happen to you, not who will do it. So, even though it says the character can not be flat footed, being feinted by a character with mind blank would catch that person flat footed. Currently its about 50/50 onthe ruling, what would you say?
|
Creative Director
|
James, are you a fan of guns in your Pathfinder?
How do you think a campaign setting with three distinct timelines would work? I can't decide whether I want medieval magitek or 1890s industrial age steampunk with magic, or maybe something in the 1700s, so I thought I'd start out building the medieval world, then advancing history into the 1700s, then advancing it to the age of steampunk, so that the setting supports all three of the things I want. Basically, it'd be like deciding between a story set in the Crusades, French and Indian War, or American Civil War. Furthermore, I'm open to alternate history stories (I love them), so the fact that the later timelines say what happened in the earlier timelines isn't an issue. I can diverge if I have to. In fact, I think alternate history should be the default assumption when playing in the two earlier timelines.
I am. Rob McCreary's playing a gunslinger in one of the games I'm running right now, in fact.
As for how much work a campaign setting with 3 different timelines would be... more than three times as much work as doing one campaign setting. Which is a paralyzing amount of work to think about.
|
Creative Director
|
So we were having a debate last night on if Mind Blank would cancel out the effects of Foresight, but the wording on Foresight says it just tells you what will happen to you, not who will do it. So, even though it says the character can not be flat footed, being feinted by a character with mind blank would catch that person flat footed. Currently its about 50/50 onthe ruling, what would you say?
Mind blank works against divination effects that gather information about whoever has mind blank cast on them. Foresight does not "gather information" about anyone in particular; it warns the person with foresight of danger, but not what that danger is.
Therefore, mind blank does not "protect" against foresight. Since foresight doesn't target anyone except for the caster.
Thank you.
James, are you a fan of guns in your Pathfinder?
How do you think a campaign setting with three distinct timelines would work? I can't decide whether I want medieval magitek or 1890s industrial age steampunk with magic, or maybe something in the 1700s, so I thought I'd start out building the medieval world, then advancing history into the 1700s, then advancing it to the age of steampunk, so that the setting supports all three of the things I want. Basically, it'd be like deciding between a story set in the Crusades, French and Indian War, or American Civil War. Furthermore, I'm open to alternate history stories (I love them), so the fact that the later timelines say what happened in the earlier timelines isn't an issue. I can diverge if I have to. In fact, I think alternate history should be the default assumption when playing in the two earlier timelines.
I am. Rob McCreary's playing a gunslinger in one of the games I'm running right now, in fact.
As for how much work a campaign setting with 3 different timelines would be... more than three times as much work as doing one campaign setting. Which is a paralyzing amount of work to think about.
Out of a desire for your advice, how so? I can use the same nations and basic cultures, I just have to update the history and technology, and change the cultures a bit to go along with the onward march of history and progress in the fields of science and magic. That seems a lot easier than three different settings, and allows me to use the same nations and races (and I like my nations and racial roles) instead of having to invent three different sets.
1) I noticed there is no Reflex based NPC class, why's that?
2) I thought about creating one based on the Expert, can't come up with a name, any ideas?
3) Why no arcane spellcasting NPC class?
4) AP/module for NPC classes?
5) If you made a "Noble" class, how strong/skilled would it be?
|
Creative Director
|
Out of a desire for your advice, how so? I can use the same nations and basic cultures, I just have to update the history and technology, and change the cultures a bit to go along with the onward march of history and progress in the fields of science and magic. That seems a lot easier than three different settings, and allows me to use the same nations and races (and I like my nations and racial roles) instead of having to invent three different sets.
I've spent decades detailing my own homebrew setting, and never felt like it was fully detailed. Doing that for three settings? Sounds like lots of work to me! :-)
|
Creative Director
|
1) I noticed there is no Reflex based NPC class, why's that?
2) I thought about creating one based on the Expert, can't come up with a name, any ideas?
3) Why no arcane spellcasting NPC class?
4) AP/module for NPC classes?
5) If you made a "Noble" class, how strong/skilled would it be?
1) Because NPC classes aren't built to fill rules holes—they're built merely to fill minor world roles. And none of those roles really fits a "reflex based class."
2) Nope... I think that there's too many NPC classes as it stands, actually. I can't really think of a reason to add one.
3) I suspect the theory there is that NPC classes are meant to represent the minor NPCs of the world, and being able to use arcane magic requires more work. Frankly, I think that the Adept shouldn't be an NPC class anyway... spellcasting should be only a PC class option.
4) NPCs aren't meant to be played by players, that's why they're called NPC classes and not PC classes. As such, we're not really interested in doing an Adventure Path or module for them.
5) I wouldn't. I'd use the aristocrat for minor nobles, and probably a mix of aristocrat with a PC class for major nobles who need to be significant PC antagonists.
|
|
If you look really closely, you have two arrows sticking out of your neck. Who shot you, why, and what did you do to them in return?That would have been a couple of foolish explorers. They're not a problem anymore. (burp)
(The art my avatar's from is the half-page opener to the Mwangi Expanse in the Inner Sea World Guide—that picture shows the whole story. About 5 rounds before the event that caused me to burp above.)
Do you realize that if you don't chew properly you can develop digestive problems?
Wanna buy a Sham-Wow?
Out of a desire for your advice, how so? I can use the same nations and basic cultures, I just have to update the history and technology, and change the cultures a bit to go along with the onward march of history and progress in the fields of science and magic. That seems a lot easier than three different settings, and allows me to use the same nations and races (and I like my nations and racial roles) instead of having to invent three different sets.I've spent decades detailing my own homebrew setting, and never felt like it was fully detailed. Doing that for three settings? Sounds like lots of work to me! :-)
That's what collaborative world building is for :-). I don't do it alone, I let the players make things up. It can work well if you have the right group. If you don't have the right group, though, OUCH.
Plus, it's really one setting. You know how it is when you write histories for countries or continents? It's like that, except you provide in depth technology rules and social coverage for three time periods instead of one. Imagine writing about the Inner Sea in Golarion. Now imagine saying "This is the cultural and technological view of the Inner Sea 2,000 years ago, during the Bronze Age, 1,000 years ago, during the Iron Age, and today". That's what I'm thinking of doing, but starting with the late middle ages (standard Pathfinder tech with some homebrew magitech thrown in), 100 years from this period (armor, bows, and crossbows are obsolete, swords are in specialized roles only, guns [breech loading muskets] are the weapons everyone uses, ships fight with cannons), and 100 years from that period (advanced guns such as multiple shot rifles and revolvers abound, steam technology is dominant with magical enhancements, we have now achieved steampunk Pathfinder). The main nations remain much the same (with a 200 year period to work with and the major industrialization already having begun in the late medieval period, the massive changes that happened IRL won't be as earth shattering here, and with magic available technology advances faster than it did IRL), though the cultures do evolve a bit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Eidolon is dead, but a resurrection or more powerful effect should be able to fix it anyway.Mr. Jacobs,
If an Eidolon was killed by a death effect such as a symbol of death spell, What would be the proper ruling insofar as to whether or not the Eidolon could be summoned again the next day?
My thought is RAW - Eidolon is croaked, RAI - It should be allowed to comeback or at the very least summons the body back so the party could cast a Ressurrection spell.
So an eidolon croaked by a death effect would not be able to be summoned at 1/2 hit points the next day? Isn't dying by a death affect considered "slain" as stated under the description of the eidolon? What is the difference between dead and "slain"? I am looking for clarification I am not trying to be obtuse.
A death effect pg 562 clarifies that it kills its victims instantly by reducing hit points down to equal or less than negative CON. An eidolon is not dispelled until it is taken to equal or greater CON damage. Is a death effect considered a permanent effect such as ability damage/drain from negative energy or petrification? There has been much debate on what happens to an eidolon that have these conditions as well as tactics of just killing your eidolon when it is below half hit points or has a permanent condition so that it comes back the next day at half hit points. Some say the conditions remain some say that they disappear when the eidolon dies.
"When summoned in this way, the eidolon hit points are unchanged from the last time it was summoned. The only exception to this is if the eidolon was slain, in which case it returns with half its normal hit points. The eidolon does not heal naturally. The eidolon remains until dismissed by the summoner (a standard action). If the eidolon is sent back to its home plane due to death, it cannot be summoned again until the following day."
When it says that Dhampir grow old and die aging at a rate similar to elves, how exactly is that meant? Do they grow up at a human rate then aging slows down like half-elves (though still living longer than half-elves), or are they kids for 100+ years like elves?
|
|
Do you ever miss writing adventures for and/or playing in the Greyhawk setting?
That's one of the things I feel sorry about losing Dungeon for, because it was one of the few places to get Greyhawk world material. But still, Pathfinder is a much better product than Dungeon was, periodicals trump ad-laden magazines...
|
|
When you originally came up with the shoanti, were they based on a real-world human culture?The original Shoanti lived in the arctic region, in a place called (creatively enough) the Icelands—an IMMENSE glaciar wedged in between inhospitable mountains. The Shoanti had large ice ships with bone/wood runners that they sailed around on the ice, but basically had a tribal society that was more or less based on a mix of Native Americans, Picts, Inuits, and a little dash of Scottish Highlander. Apart from living in the ice, they were really rather similar to what ended up living in Varisia, though. The names of the tribes all stayed the same (although I had a few more in my campaign than what made the transition to Golarion), and some of their weapons came with them, such as the klar.
Sh*t. That sounds cooler than the printed Shoanti.
Yes I know that response is ancient.
Have you guys considered including some alternate rules for a sword-and-sorcery variant ruleset, as the sort of opposite to mythic rules? You know, where Magic items aren't considered a source of character power? Like including some Iron Heroes and Conan-esque elements, as a possible option, while maintaining compativility with Pathfinder options besides magic gear?
:)
if no: could you guys ponder it over?
if yes: Is there one in the mix?
Yep. That would be the PF Book I'd enjoy most.
You mentioned you really like Pre-Spellplague Realms. So do I. Do you still run FR once in a while? Do you ever post on Candlekeep, what's your username on CK if yes?
|
|
The art doesn't have a black background, that's whatever program you are using filling black where the transparent pixels are. (I'm not a graphic designer, so I'm not certain I'm using the right terms.)It's called an alpha channel. There are a couple threads discussing workarounds for this; the best is probably this one. (As far as I know, nobody has come up with the perfect answer for Windows users, but Mac users can deal with them flawlessly.)
I am a Window user.
I am using a freeware program called Irfanview to mange most of my images. Nice little toy.Till half a hour ago I had the same problem, I tried a few tricks but was unable to clear the background. Then instead of saving as a JPG I tried saving the image as a GIF. Doing that I get the option to set the transparency value to 0.
That will remove the background black. It is not a perfect solution as it generate some white doth in the main image, apparently setting some of the black on the main image to transparent, but it work.
RecoveringCynic, you should ask the Rules Questions forum.
RecoveringCynic, you should ask the Rules Questions forum.
Thread was started in the rules forum here:
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz52ne?Eidolon-and-Death-Effects
I am coming here for clarification in response to post made by James Jacobs this forum.
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz2u4o&page=289?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Que stions-Here#14436
|
|
Because they're cool and criminally underused in Star Trek.
Why a Gorn?
Gorn seem under-appreciated in Star Fleet Battles as well, but since that's a game about ships, more than about the races that crew them, that's more a reflection on their ship design than their racial 'coolness.' (They look pretty buff in Prime Directive, which *is* about playing the crew, and not the ship, but I've never played that one.)
I think the amount of costuming required led to their being so under-used. Heck, Tholians have gotten more exposure in the various series and movies... These days, they'd probably CGI them up, which has it's own downsides (super-fake looking).
|
Creative Director
|
The Eidolon is dead, but a resurrection or more powerful effect should be able to fix it anyway.Mr. Jacobs,
If an Eidolon was killed by a death effect such as a symbol of death spell, What would be the proper ruling insofar as to whether or not the Eidolon could be summoned again the next day?
My thought is RAW - Eidolon is croaked, RAI - It should be allowed to comeback or at the very least summons the body back so the party could cast a Ressurrection spell.
So an eidolon croaked by a death effect would not be able to be summoned at 1/2 hit points the next day? Isn't dying by a death affect considered "slain" as stated under the description of the eidolon? What is the difference between dead and "slain"? I am looking for clarification I am not trying to be obtuse.
A death effect pg 562 clarifies that it kills its victims instantly by reducing hit points down to equal or less than negative CON. An eidolon is not dispelled until it is taken to equal or greater CON damage. Is a death effect considered a permanent effect such as ability damage/drain from negative energy or petrification? There has been much debate on what happens to an eidolon that have these conditions as well as tactics of just killing your eidolon when it is below half hit points or has a permanent condition so that it comes back the next day at half hit points. Some say the conditions remain some say that they disappear when the eidolon dies.
"When summoned in this way, the eidolon hit points are unchanged from the last time it was summoned. The only exception to this is if the eidolon was slain, in which case it returns with half its normal hit points. The eidolon does not heal naturally. The eidolon remains until dismissed by the summoner (a standard action). If the eidolon is sent back to its home plane due to death, it cannot be summoned again until the following day."
Eidolons change the fundamental way the game works in lots of ways, for good or for ill, and so to a certain extent, these types of things are and should be a GM call.
A strict reading of the rules as written, though, would indeed indicate that an eidolon slain by a death effect can come back normal the next day at half hit points.
|
Creative Director
|
When it says that Dhampir grow old and die aging at a rate similar to elves, how exactly is that meant? Do they grow up at a human rate then aging slows down like half-elves (though still living longer than half-elves), or are they kids for 100+ years like elves?
It means that when you're asking questions about dhampir aging... you treat them as elves. Do a mental find/replace of "elf" for "dhampir" when looking in the Core Rules for starting ages and all that.
Human and half-elf rates never enter into the picture at all.
|
Creative Director
|
Do you ever miss writing adventures for and/or playing in the Greyhawk setting?
That's one of the things I feel sorry about losing Dungeon for, because it was one of the few places to get Greyhawk world material. But still, Pathfinder is a much better product than Dungeon was, periodicals trump ad-laden magazines...
I still have a fondness in my heart for Greyhawk, yeah... but I don't miss it. The last 50 issues of Dungeon, plus being able to help write "Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk" for WotC, really gave me a huge amount of opportunities to write Greyhawk content. I pretty much got all of what I wanted to add to the setting out of my system with that adventure, the Demonomicon articles, Savage Tide, Age of Worms, and all the rest.
|
Creative Director
|
When you originally came up with the shoanti, were they based on a real-world human culture?The original Shoanti lived in the arctic region, in a place called (creatively enough) the Icelands—an IMMENSE glaciar wedged in between inhospitable mountains. The Shoanti had large ice ships with bone/wood runners that they sailed around on the ice, but basically had a tribal society that was more or less based on a mix of Native Americans, Picts, Inuits, and a little dash of Scottish Highlander. Apart from living in the ice, they were really rather similar to what ended up living in Varisia, though. The names of the tribes all stayed the same (although I had a few more in my campaign than what made the transition to Golarion), and some of their weapons came with them, such as the klar.Sh*t. That sounds cooler than the printed Shoanti.
Yes I know that response is ancient.
Have you guys considered including some alternate rules for a sword-and-sorcery variant ruleset, as the sort of opposite to mythic rules? You know, where Magic items aren't considered a source of character power? Like including some Iron Heroes and Conan-esque elements, as a possible option, while maintaining compativility with Pathfinder options besides magic gear?
:)
if no: could you guys ponder it over?
if yes: Is there one in the mix?
Yep. That would be the PF Book I'd enjoy most.
You mentioned you really like Pre-Spellplague Realms. So do I. Do you still run FR once in a while? Do you ever post on Candlekeep, what's your username on CK if yes?
Thanks for the compliments!
A setting where magic items aren't considered a source of character power would require a more or less total rewrite of the rules, as you saw happen with Iron Heroes and Conan. It would also require a complete revision of Golarion. Mythic rules, being additive, can attach onto a setting like Golarion relatively easy, but subtractive rules like what you propose are a lot harder to pull off. As a result, we don't have plans to do much in that area... but it's a challenge and an interesting idea that, hopefully, we'll try something with. Stay tuned!
I don't run or play in the Forgotten Realms anymore. In fact, I've never run an FR campaign; I've played in two really long-running ones though. I don't post over on Candlekeep.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because they're cool and criminally underused in Star Trek.
Why a Gorn?Gorn seem under-appreciated in Star Fleet Battles as well, but since that's a game about ships, more than about the races that crew them, that's more a reflection on their ship design than their racial 'coolness.' (They look pretty buff in Prime Directive, which *is* about playing the crew, and not the ship, but I've never played that one.)
I think the amount of costuming required led to their being so under-used. Heck, Tholians have gotten more exposure in the various series and movies... These days, they'd probably CGI them up, which has it's own downsides (super-fake looking).
Alas... you triggered my "CGI LOOKS FAKE!" rant.
Turns out, poorly done special effects of ANY medium looks fake. And you can still have artistic flair when your effects look fake, or when those effects look dated. Look at the original King Kong or Terminator 2 for examples of effects that now look dated but still pack a punch because they're handled well.
Or, for that matter... the original Kirk vs. Gorn fight. That gorn costume wasn't fooling anyone even when the episode first aired... it's really a pretty primitive costume. But the episode more than makes up for that shortfall with a great story.
The remake/reboot of "The Thing" is a great example as well. The problem with that movie was NOT the overuse of CGI effects—it was the fact that the story, the acting, the direction, EVERYTHING else was sub-par compared to the original.
Now that said... CGI art hasn't been around for NEARLY as long as, say, puppetry or makeup, or even stop motion. CGI artists as a result haven't had nearly as long to perfect their craft as an industry... but still, the fact that something's CGI doesn't automatically make it worse.
|
Is there any talk about miniatures becoming available based on the Dragon Empire's books? In particular the new PC races, the art for the iconic portraits look wicked.
Is there any thought or ideas going into Army based combat? (Party of 4-8 vs army)
Who is your favorite Pathfinder Grandmaster & which is your favorite Lodge?
If a skilled but unpublished amateur wrote an Adventure Path compatible with Pathfinder, would you ever consider publishing it?
Do you have a favorite Adventure Path?
Who do you like more Marvel comics or DC comics?
Who is your favorite character from aforementioned franchises?
Do you prefer people to ask you one question at a time or bulk question?
|
Creative Director
|
Is there any talk about miniatures becoming available based on the Dragon Empire's books? In particular the new PC races, the art for the iconic portraits look wicked.
We've not yet announced any Dragon Empires minis... but I suspect someday we'll do some.
Is there any thought or ideas going into Army based combat? (Party of 4-8 vs army)
Kingmaker has rules and guidelines for this. Beyond that, there's not much more to say about the topic yet.
Who is your favorite Pathfinder Grandmaster & which is your favorite Lodge?
Grandmaster? Do you mean Venture-Captain? My favorite lodge is the Magnimar lodge, in any event.
If a skilled but unpublished amateur wrote an Adventure Path compatible with Pathfinder, would you ever consider publishing it?
Sure! I doubt it'd ever happen though... I'd love to be proven wrong on this. But I'd also like to see proof that Bigfoot exists.
Do you have a favorite Adventure Path?
No.
Who do you like more Marvel comics or DC comics?
DC, I guess.
Who is your favorite character from aforementioned franchises?
Death, from Neil Gaiman's Sandman seires.
Do you prefer people to ask you one question at a time or bulk question?
Neither, but if folks ask bulk questions, I prefer them to be numbered.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What are your thoughts of Paladin becoming Prestige Class instead of Base Class?
That's how I wanted to do paladins in Pathifnder in the first place. But we got cold feet due to the desire to maintain backwards compatibility.
But forcing would-be paladins to qualify for the class by proving their adherence to law and good BEFORE they take their first paladin level is very very appealing.
Will you change the rules about duel wield shields since their is proof of it being a real fighting style, would it be a monk weapon as in the video a monk was wielding the two shield. monk double shield fighting for those who do not know what I am talking about. This came up in a thread dual wielding shield debate
Thanks JJ