>>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

33,751 to 33,800 of 77,816 << first < prev | 671 | 672 | 673 | 674 | 675 | 676 | 677 | 678 | 679 | 680 | 681 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Creative Director

Albatoonoe wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

Chances of a book like that increase dramatically once we have a really robust system for mass combat. We have the start of something there, with the troop rules from "Rasputin Must Die!" and the narrative mass combat rules in Ultimate Campaign... but I don't think we're at a point yet where Armies of the Inner Sea or somesuch book would be doable.

Jumping off that, would you prefer to create new rules for detailed mass combat, or expand upon the existing system?

I'd prefer to let Jason do it. :-P

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

What familiar (regular or Improved) do you think is the most adorable?


What book would have the most info about the elves journey through the stars?


Hi James. Just reading Dragons Demand and the quests in that book are interesting. You call them out specifically right up front, something I have not seen before. The APs generally call out a particular accomplishment rewarding you with some xp but this is a new way do do it for Paizo (I think?). What is the idea behind this change?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
What familiar (regular or Improved) do you think is the most adorable?

Pseudodragon!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Glutton wrote:
What book would have the most info about the elves journey through the stars?

Distant Worlds

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Alan_Beven wrote:
Hi James. Just reading Dragons Demand and the quests in that book are interesting. You call them out specifically right up front, something I have not seen before. The APs generally call out a particular accomplishment rewarding you with some xp but this is a new way do do it for Paizo (I think?). What is the idea behind this change?

A few things.

1) The bulk of quests in the adventure are necessary to get the PCs up to a level where they'll have a chance against the dragon. Turns out, 64 pages isn't QUITE enough to go from 1st to 7th on its own, as I'd kinda hoped, but the introduction of those quests makes it possible.

2) We wanted to introduce a new product—the quest card. That meant that there needed to be enough quests in the adventure to fill up about a 3rd of a deck (the rest being item cards and face cards).

3) Quests allow us to reward play other than just fighting, and the presentation of these quests as cards for the players to track puts that front and center so there's no ignoring the fact that the game rewards you as well for fighting as it does for other things.

4) There are SO many quests in Dragon's Demand (24 if I remember correctly) that doing the sidebar format we've done in Adventure Paths like Kingmaker would eat up far too many pages.

Also: make sure to check out the new way we're trying out the presentation of cities in the back when we don't have the luxury of a larger number of pages to present the citizens and locations in a town. It gives the GM a large amount of info to riff off of on a single page!


The Movie, Pacific Rim. Yes or No. It's has dinosaur-like monstrosities in it.


BluePigeon wrote:
The Movie, Pacific Rim. Yes or No. It's has dinosaur-like monstrosities in it.

Check previous posts. Basically don't watch it in 3D.


Where do you think is the best place to ask rules questions about campaign setting material (like spells, etc)?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
What familiar (regular or Improved) do you think is the most adorable?
Pseudodragon!

Me too! I love those little fellas! :)


Tels wrote:
BluePigeon wrote:
The Movie, Pacific Rim. Yes or No. It's has dinosaur-like monstrosities in it.
Check previous posts. Basically don't watch it in 3D.

3D. an old theatrical/cinematic technique that should have stayed in the 1950s, but was saved do the the advancement of digital technology. IMOP.


Tels wrote:
BluePigeon wrote:
The Movie, Pacific Rim. Yes or No. It's has dinosaur-like monstrosities in it.
Check previous posts. Basically don't watch it in 3D.

But what if have to make a choice:

dubbed into my contry's language or 3D?

Because that is exactly what I'm faced with, i either watch it dubbed into German or i have to watch it in 3D, because the only cinema that plays it with original language does so only in 3D.


I heard you're idea's and their definately good.


You mentioned ( http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=562?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Qu estions-Here#28060 ) Opium was common in Golarion. Are any of the refined version (Morphine base, morphine and heroin) known?

I'd normally say they are too modern (and heroin has a relatively high tech level requirements), but Golarion alchemists have made lots of stuff real chemists can only dream of and morphine base isn't that new (17th century) or esoteric to make (boil opium, neutralize it and dry it).


Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
What familiar (regular or Improved) do you think is the most adorable?
Pseudodragon!
Me too! I love those little fellas! :)

They produce an astounding amount of dragon scat, though.

Mine fills up a haversack with dragon scat every adventure.

What is the best use of dragon scat? Depositing it in the BBEGs bedroom? Or. . .?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

BluePigeon wrote:
The Movie, Pacific Rim. Yes or No. It's has dinosaur-like monstrosities in it.

yeah. I need to re-watch it soon in 2D to decide if I love it or just like it.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Cheapy wrote:
Where do you think is the best place to ask rules questions about campaign setting material (like spells, etc)?

I'm fine answering questions about the campaign setting material rules. I might still send you on to the rules forum, but since I'm more likely to have had a hand in working on some of those rules (less likely if they were from a Player's Guide though), I can speak with some authority there.

That said, the BEST place to ask those questions is on the forum for the product in question. The developers of those books are generally pretty good about answering questions there.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

BluePigeon wrote:
Tels wrote:
BluePigeon wrote:
The Movie, Pacific Rim. Yes or No. It's has dinosaur-like monstrosities in it.
Check previous posts. Basically don't watch it in 3D.
3D. an old theatrical/cinematic technique that should have stayed in the 1950s, but was saved do the the advancement of digital technology. IMOP.

3D has made fits and starts every decade or so, but it wasn't until Cameron used it to GREAT effect in Avatar that it kinda stuck.

The fact that Avatar went on to be the biggest movie ever is pretty much why 3D is something the studios are still using so much, even though I say it's not the 3D that made Avatar such a success. It's James Cameron who did that—he makes movies that make money, due to a combination of raw talent and dedication and sheer force of will. When he wanted to make a movie about the Titanic, he had the world's largest tank built to film the underwater stuff, and saw to the invention of new underwater cameras and exploration gear that could actually go down to the real Titanic to film in high def film. And for Avatar, he saw to the invention of new cameras that capture 3D images in the same way human eyes work. On top of that, he made the movie SUPER vibrantly colored and bright, and made sure that a lot of the effects scenes were slow or static shots or wide shots so that thigns weren't too close to the action or edited too fast, knowing that it takes the brain longer to process images in 3D than it does normal.

Very few, if any, directors/studios seem to realize this, alas.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Threeshades wrote:
Tels wrote:
BluePigeon wrote:
The Movie, Pacific Rim. Yes or No. It's has dinosaur-like monstrosities in it.
Check previous posts. Basically don't watch it in 3D.

But what if have to make a choice:

dubbed into my contry's language or 3D?

Because that is exactly what I'm faced with, i either watch it dubbed into German or i have to watch it in 3D, because the only cinema that plays it with original language does so only in 3D.

Wow. In that case, I suppose I'd go with 3D, since dubbing is even worse than 3D. But honestly, at that point, given what I know about how 3D dampened my enjoyment of the movie, if I were in your situation I'd just wait to see it on a nice big TV with surround sound if that's an option.


ED-209 wrote:
What is the best use of dragon scat? Depositing it in the BBEGs bedroom? Or. . .?

Spell components. Or Ezren repellant.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

deuxhero wrote:

You mentioned ( http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=562?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Qu estions-Here#28060 ) Opium was common in Golarion. Are any of the refined version (Morphine base, morphine and heroin) known?

I'd normally say they are too modern (and heroin has a relatively high tech level requirements), but Golarion alchemists have made lots of stuff real chemists can only dream of and morphine base isn't that new (17th century) or esoteric to make (boil opium, neutralize it and dry it).

The refined versions aren't all that common at all, and probably don't exist at all. They trigger my anachronism alarms.


Do the ARG bonus races (gathlain, wyvaran, wyrwood, etc) appear in any canon materials?


I know this is the wrong forum but I cannot find the answer in faq. How do you start a new thread on the messageboards? Sorry but if anyone can enlighten me I will be grateful

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Voyd211 wrote:
Do the ARG bonus races (gathlain, wyvaran, wyrwood, etc) appear in any canon materials?

If by "canon materials" you mean "campaign setting products," then no. Not yet.


I asked a druid based question before and after that, something was bouncing around in my head for a while, so I thought I would get your opinion. Should any druid have access to the death domain just because the rules say they can? See I always thought that even a Blight druid, who is based around rot and decay and tend to be evil from what I have seen, would still follow the natural order of things and Undead would violate that. Does that make sense to you or should they be able to take the death domain? It just kinda bugs me because making things die, rot, and decay is still just how nature works and Blight druids still follow those rules. At least that is how I thought it was. If I am wrong, let me know. I've always felt the rules had to fit with the story and flavour of the world or they wouldn't make sense and i would take them out. If I am misreading the intent of what the blight druid is supposed to be, I would like to know.

I had another question about Carrion Crown but I forget how to put the spoiler button on.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Jaçinto wrote:

I asked a druid based question before and after that, something was bouncing around in my head for a while, so I thought I would get your opinion. Should any druid have access to the death domain just because the rules say they can? See I always thought that even a Blight druid, who is based around rot and decay and tend to be evil from what I have seen, would still follow the natural order of things and Undead would violate that. Does that make sense to you or should they be able to take the death domain? It just kinda bugs me because making things die, rot, and decay is still just how nature works and Blight druids still follow those rules. At least that is how I thought it was. If I am wrong, let me know. I've always felt the rules had to fit with the story and flavour of the world or they wouldn't make sense and i would take them out. If I am misreading the intent of what the blight druid is supposed to be, I would like to know.

I had another question about Carrion Crown but I forget how to put the spoiler button on.

I agree; rules should fit the story. And since the story changes depending on the GM and the world and the adventure... the rules need to be flexible. Death is part of the natural world, but undead are not. It's frustrating to me that the Death domain has undead stuff in it, since that also messes things up for deities like Pharasma. Frankly, I wish we'd done a Death domain and an Undeath domain... we could have replaced the Repose domain with Undeath, and rolled the non-undead Repose stuff into Death. In any event, yeah... if you don't like the idea of blight druids doing undead (and I don't), then feel free to swap out the undead spells in the Death domain with other spells.

OR: Check out the upcoming Worldwound book for an example of how druids and undead CAN mix. It's not something that non-evil druids get into, though...

And rules for how to format text are in a dropdown box just below the box you type your posts into.


Thanks for the info there. Alright I will ask my other question then.

Spoiler:
In Carrion Crown, he the heck did the MiGo capture a colour out of space? MiGo are plant (Fungus) creatures an colours drain the life out of plants quite easily from the look of it.


James,

how common/uncommon are void elementalist wizards outside tian-xia?

Say, for example, in Absalom and/or Quantium.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber
nick pater wrote:
I know this is the wrong forum but I cannot find the answer in faq. How do you start a new thread on the messageboards? Sorry but if anyone can enlighten me I will be grateful

Go into the subforum you want to create the thread in (i.e. Off-Topic Discussions, General Discussion, Customer Service, Gamer Life, etc.), and "Add New Thread" should be at the top right of the list of threads.


James,

In the tabletop games industry, it's not uncommon for games to miss their release dates. FFG, for instance, has gotten a bit of a reputation for late games. I can't think of any games that released early. Is there a reason why publishers pick a release date which they sometimes miss rather than picking a more conservative date and possibly shipping early?

Thanks.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Jaçinto wrote:

Thanks for the info there. Alright I will ask my other question then.

** spoiler omitted **

Actually... that's more of a Rob question, since I wasn't the developer on that adventure.

That said... there ARE ways to catch and contain those monsters—they're affected by force effects, after all.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Ral' Yareth wrote:

James,

how common/uncommon are void elementalist wizards outside tian-xia?

Say, for example, in Absalom and/or Quantium.

Common enough that their presence won't bat eyes or otherwise surprise anyone any more than any other wizard, but uncommon enough that they're not in every town and city.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mandor wrote:

James,

In the tabletop games industry, it's not uncommon for games to miss their release dates. FFG, for instance, has gotten a bit of a reputation for late games. I can't think of any games that released early. Is there a reason why publishers pick a release date which they sometimes miss rather than picking a more conservative date and possibly shipping early?

Thanks.

A combination of underestimating time needed, lack of resources, and bad luck are the general causes.

A lot of things can and often do go wrong during a product's production cycle, ranging from a freelancer or artist being late or just failing to deliver product to an editor having to take twice as long to delays at customs or at the printer. Dozens and dozens of people touch an RPG product that passes through Paizo's system, and if any one of those dozens misses a cue, the whole project slows down.

There's also a tendency for game designers to keep tinkering with a product all the way to the end, rather than honoring a "pencils down" and no longer trying to adjust things after primary design ends. That can result in a better game in the end, of course, as these last minute adjustments and designs usually improve the game, but they can cause significant ripples in the production of a product's editing, layout, printing, etc.

And finally... although we all love the industry, keep in mind that it's really small. Paizo is one of the largest companies out there doing tabletop RPGs, and we're less than 50 people in all. More folks work in a large hotel at an airport than at Paizo, I suspect. But the types of products we put out are VERY complicated—comparable products would probably be art—heavy school textbooks. A company that publishes art-heavy school textbooks has a LOT more employees, and with more employees comes faster turnarounds.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Barong wrote:
I had some questions about the rakshasa. It's mentioned in their write-up in 'Escape From Old Korvosa' that when they die they're reincarnated to continue their life of sin and debauchery as a new rakshasa. But that same source mentioned, in very rare circumstances, a good-aligned rakshasa. Would such a creature still be reincarnated, even if it worshipped a god? This ties in with my next question: a sorcerer with the rakshasa bloodline eventually becomes something like a lesser rakshasa. Are they now subject to the reincarnating of true rakshasas? I'm sorry for the long question, it's just that I have a character with that bloodline and I'm wondering what his ultimate fate would be.

Here's something you might want to use in a home campaign for flavor. In 4th Edition, Rakshasas were those Devas who were reincarnated into that form because of their various sins. You might want to look up the relevant information on Devas both from the 4th edition material or look up Hindu and Buddhist sources on the term for Wikipedia.


Mr Jacobs,

The Stunning fist adept is a feat from the dragon Empire primer. As written there is no reason to take this feat, Since it bonus do not stack with anything, and worst, the ability focus feat give a higer bonus.

I would like to present this feat to the dev team consideration, but Since there is no ambiguity in what Stunning fist adept do I do not know if a FAQ thread is appropriate.

What is the right procedure in this case?


In the event of a total party wipe, as a Gm what should I do? I've held their hand through three points where they were about to die and pretty much "let them win" in skulls and shackles. I informed them that I wont help them any more like that and they need to start actually thinking things through in an encounter. Fight smarter not harder and all that. If they get in a point where they all die, should I just say campaign ends or what do I do? I don't want to just smack them down but the chance of failure needs to be present or there is no real challenge. Just looking for some advice here because I have very little faith in my players.


James Jacobs wrote:
Mandor wrote:

James,

In the tabletop games industry, it's not uncommon for games to miss their release dates. FFG, for instance, has gotten a bit of a reputation for late games. I can't think of any games that released early. Is there a reason why publishers pick a release date which they sometimes miss rather than picking a more conservative date and possibly shipping early?

Thanks.

There's also a tendency for game designers to keep tinkering with a product all the way to the end, rather than honoring a "pencils down" and no longer trying to adjust things after primary design ends. That can result in a better game in the end, of course, as these last minute adjustments and designs usually improve the game, but they can cause significant ripples in the production of a product's editing, layout, printing, etc.

Parkinson's Law at work!

Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 4

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Thorri Grimbeard wrote:

Hi! I have a question about a spell in the Advanced Race Guide.

"Ancestral Regression," which allows drow to magically disguise themselves and other drow as elves, is one of the drow racial spells. It's available to many spell-casting classes but not to bards. I was wondering whether this was an oversight or deliberate? It seems like an oversight to me: it seems like a theme-appropriate spell for bards, bards get similar spells like "Disguise Self", "Alter Self", and "Unknowable Alignment", and it seems a natural spell for drow spying on the surface world, and bards a natural class for drow spying on the surface world. Or am I missing something?

I wasn't involved in the design or development of that spell, but it absolutely soudns to me like not giving it to the bard was a blunder. I'd let bards in my game learn the spell.
Maybe whomever designed the spell didn't like the concept of drow bards? That's not a particularly good argument, but it could be some justification.

Let me clear all this up. It was me. It was an oversight. I come from a 1st edition AD&D tradition and pretty much know nothing about the versions of drow that would follow the"D" series. I 'knew' drow could be bards in Pathfinder, but it just didn't connect. My mind was focused on cleric, wizards. And fighter-thieves as we used to call them.

Thieves. Not rogues wearing rouge. :)
I don't even know how to spell Drizzt? Or why people hate/love him. I left when Dark Sun was coming out and came back with Runelords.

So gimme a time machine and I would gladly make it a bard spell. there was no agenda behind the oversight.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Nicos wrote:

Mr Jacobs,

The Stunning fist adept is a feat from the dragon Empire primer. As written there is no reason to take this feat, Since it bonus do not stack with anything, and worst, the ability focus feat give a higer bonus.

I would like to present this feat to the dev team consideration, but Since there is no ambiguity in what Stunning fist adept do I do not know if a FAQ thread is appropriate.

What is the right procedure in this case?

Honestly? This kinda thing happens now and then—a feat that essentially does nothing gets invented and makes it to print. Happened before with Prone Shooter, and it'll happen again (although hopefully not soon!).

My suggestion is to just not use the feat. There's PLENTY of other feats to choose from.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jaçinto wrote:
In the event of a total party wipe, as a Gm what should I do? I've held their hand through three points where they were about to die and pretty much "let them win" in skulls and shackles. I informed them that I wont help them any more like that and they need to start actually thinking things through in an encounter. Fight smarter not harder and all that. If they get in a point where they all die, should I just say campaign ends or what do I do? I don't want to just smack them down but the chance of failure needs to be present or there is no real challenge. Just looking for some advice here because I have very little faith in my players.

I've had these before, and you really have 3 choices, I think. Assuming you're past the point where you as the GM can fudge things to make it miraculously NOT a TPK.

1) "It was all a dream!" Play it out, then have the PCs wake up and tell them the whole thing was a vision of one future and go from there. I hate hate hate doing this, but it might be the only option depending on the situation.

2) "That's that!" Let it be a TPK and have the players roll up replacement characters or start a new campaign. I've done this before quite a few times, but not really for a Pathfinder-type game. For Call of Cthulhu, this actually works okay.

3) "James' Favorite!" Play it out, but don't kill the PCs. Instead, have the bad guys capture them and put them in prison or whatever. The "Escape from the prison and reclaim your apprehended gear!" is one of the classic adventure plotlines, and it can be really fun and rewarding, but it's a TERRIBLE way to start an adventure by hard-coding something like that in the form of read-aloud text. But if you find yourself in a TPK situation, you can reign in the killing blows and have a PERFECT chance to do this adventure by having the bad guys capture and imprison the PCs. I've done this one a few times, and in fact did this twice to my two groups here at Paizo in varying degrees. In one, they managed to have one player escape and recruit the other player who wasn't at the session and they were able to rescue the TPK before the monsters finished the captured PCs off. In the other, the entire party got caught and ended up being put into a gladitorial blood match and then bought by an enemy who turned out to be an ally in disguise who gave them back their freedom and then hired them to do more adventuring. In both cases, they ended up being VERY memorable sessions.

NOW THEN

It sounds like you've either got a group of players who aren't super experienced, or simply got hit with lots of bad luck, or maybe both, combined with the fact that the first Skull & Shackles adventure is a tricky one if you have players who aren't willing to eat a dose of humble pie now and then when they start out press ganged, or who try to rush things TOO much at the end. I'm playing through that AP, and it had a few close calls as well with a few near TPKs and 3 character deaths. It's a really tough adventure, in other words, that first Skull & Shackles adventure.

You should judge how the players are feeling; if they're sick and tired of losing all the time, it might be a good point to start a different campaign. But if they're still eager to be pirates, I say keep on going, but next time around let them build 20-point-buy characters instead of 15-point-ones or whatever—let them create slightly more powerful characters so that they'll have a better chance to survive.

And keep in mind that what a GM sees as "not a challenge" is not always the same as what a player thinks. If the players have a fight where they all manage to make their saves and avoid getting hurt due to big tactics, but the fight was against a banshee or a medusa, they might see that as a SIGNIFICANT and hair-raising challenge, even if you as the GM knew that the PCs were never really in danger due to their AC and saves. It's all about perception. If you aren't sure, don't be afraid to ask your players after a session if they felt the encounters were too challenging or not challenging enough.

But if you've had to hold their hand 3 times so far to stop a TPK... my suspicion is that there is plenty of challenge and you shouldn't be afraid to either dial back the deadliness of the encounter or perhaps give the PCs a bigger than expected pile of treasure so they can gear up better.

FINALLY: I'm a little concerned at your final comment: "I have very little faith in my players." That almost sounds like you want to run a game at a certain challenge level, but your players either aren't able to play at that level or don't want to play at that level. Are you sure you're running the type of game your players want to be in?


Are you moving away from your Bigfoot Country blog or have you just been too busy to do any kind of updating?


The T-rex snack that got away- I thought you might like this report


Well James, they are about to start book 3 and they have had 5 character deaths. The other PCs refuse to pay for a raise anywhere and would rather hoard their money and gear. Of the original party, there is one character left. I try constantly, through NPCs and their hero point usage for info, to let them know what they should be doing and how but they always disregard and get themselves killed. That's why I am losing faith in them. However they say they are enjoying the difficulty and I should not reduce it. I don't want them to keep dying though out of fear of the "killer GM" reputation, but sometimes there is nothing I can do about it. But even though the keep dying and I keep warning them of the difficulty and give them hints, they say they enjoy it. So should I just keep it going the way it is and hope they smarten up? I would tone down encounters but they said not to do it.

Also one player keeps arguing alignment with me. I point out the ultimate campaign's definitions but he keeps fighting with the "neutral evil doesn't work that way because I say so" argument. At what point do I tell a player that they need to suck it up and that's the way it is or they can always go find another game?


Mr. James Jacobs,

What would be the benefit of adding the good descriptor spells that don't otherwise have them?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Shadowcat7 wrote:
Are you moving away from your Bigfoot Country blog or have you just been too busy to do any kind of updating?

Been a combination of too busy and too wiped out to do stuff for the blog. What the convention season doesn't take from me, freelance writing does.

I suspect I'll get back to regular updates in late August.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

The NPC wrote:

Mr. James Jacobs,

What would be the benefit of adding the good descriptor spells that don't otherwise have them?

There's a fair amount of archetypes, classes, prestige classes, feats, monsters, and stuff that augment or otherwise enhance good spells.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Jaçinto wrote:

Well James, they are about to start book 3 and they have had 5 character deaths. The other PCs refuse to pay for a raise anywhere and would rather hoard their money and gear. Of the original party, there is one character left. I try constantly, through NPCs and their hero point usage for info, to let them know what they should be doing and how but they always disregard and get themselves killed. That's why I am losing faith in them. However they say they are enjoying the difficulty and I should not reduce it. I don't want them to keep dying though out of fear of the "killer GM" reputation, but sometimes there is nothing I can do about it. But even though the keep dying and I keep warning them of the difficulty and give them hints, they say they enjoy it. So should I just keep it going the way it is and hope they smarten up? I would tone down encounters but they said not to do it.

Also one player keeps arguing alignment with me. I point out the ultimate campaign's definitions but he keeps fighting with the "neutral evil doesn't work that way because I say so" argument. At what point do I tell a player that they need to suck it up and that's the way it is or they can always go find another game?

Well... if the players say they enjoy the game, you must be doing something right, so I wouldn't worry about it. It IS frustrating from a story viewpoint to have constantly new characters cycling in, but if your party isn't bothered by that... you might be okay with a super killer game.

As for players who argue alignments with the GM, that's a different problem that basically boils down to disrespect for the GM. That's not something I can really help you with, but if a player's disregard of alignment or arguments with the GM are making the game less fun for you or for other players, it's time to ask that player to leave the group, alas.


James Jacobs wrote:
The NPC wrote:

Mr. James Jacobs,

What would be the benefit of adding the good descriptor spells that don't otherwise have them?

There's a fair amount of archetypes, classes, prestige classes, feats, monsters, and stuff that augment or otherwise enhance good spells.

So in your estimation is a class feature that adds the good descriptor to spells equal to a class feature that grants a +2 to overcome spell resistance?

Silver Crusade

I've always thought that being level 15 or higher was meant to be that you are among cool legendary guys of history. However, the mythic adventures have come up. What is the difference between being just a high level character and being a low level character with mythic levels? Could you give some examples of famous people of Golarion?(either high-level non-mythic or low-level mythic)

33,751 to 33,800 of 77,816 << first < prev | 671 | 672 | 673 | 674 | 675 | 676 | 677 | 678 | 679 | 680 | 681 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.