so i was just wondering, how come pathfinder doesnt have a famous mage's name attached to some special spells?
sure, there is "mages disjunction", but to me, it just doesnt have the "holy crap"! value as having a named spell.
and yes, i know that mordenkainen is TM/copyrighted to DnD. so spare the "duh" posts, please.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it is an IP (Intellectual Property) issue; WOTC owns Mordy and the gang.
That's ok, though as I am more and more pleased to see Greayhawk ( Greyhawk = Lame) go by the wayside. To me, Pathfinder is the better product, let's not hearken back to the bad old days of 1st ed :D
GNOME
|
sure, there is "mages disjunction", but to me, it just doesnt have the "holy crap"! value as having a named spell.
Because there's enough people to claim 'wizards are the best class' without calling out to specific 'uber wizards' for them to look up to.
Though this thread has inspired me to rename a couple spells. My players will love that.
BTW Gnome you seem to forget that FR was by far a larger offender on the 'uber wizard does everything' front. Best thing about 4e was retiring Elminster's Dbag self.
While its certainly understandable, honestly I miss the "Bigby's" line.You could always take his cantrip, Bigby's Offensive Digit, though it has a somantic component so you still suffer ASF chance.
hahahaha
but not nearly as fun as Ssas Tamm's Double offensive digits...... though its also a cantrip and suffers the same asf...
lol NotMousse
I was not refering wizard's Uber/Non-Uber status :) I was refering to simply being bored with Greyhawk as a setting.
GNOME
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*waits with baited breath* Oh! I am looking for Geb's "HOLY CRAP IS THAT A LOT OF GAS!!" ;)
GNOME
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmm... Tar-Baphon's Vile Draining? Karzoug's Golden Polymorph? Zutha's Feast? Krune's Procrastination? Sorshen's Cantrip of Disrobing?
so i was just wondering, how come pathfinder doesnt have a famous mage's name attached to some special spells?
sure, there is "mages disjunction", but to me, it just doesnt have the "holy crap"! value as having a named spell.
and yes, i know that mordenkainen is TM/copyrighted to DnD. so spare the "duh" posts, please.
like james said pathfinder is more neutral, if you design your own world thats ok they dont push you to play in Golarion like some othere companies. so pathfinder is neautral good instead of WoTC's neutral evil lol.
but seriously the main reason is your players haven't made there own spells yet. or you haven't made any spells created by your own famous spellcasters.
we have a couple named spells in our campaign, Calavans convulsive cadaver is my favorite ;)
Well, obviously, if anyone should get their own spells that would be Nex and Geb. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I vote for Kyra's Bringin' Sexy Back
:D
GNOME
|
That's ok, though as I am more and more pleased to see Greayhawk ( Greyhawk = Lame) go by the wayside. To me, Pathfinder is the better product, let's not hearken back to the bad old days of 1st ed :D
GNOME
Really? I love Greyhawk. The Theocracy of the Pale, the Scarlet Brotherhood, Iggwilv, Iuz the Evil, the Circle of the Eight it's all good stuff.
In fact you could argue that Golarion has a lot in common with Greyhawk. The Red Mantis Assassins are basically the Scarlet Brotherhood with a insect theme, the World Wound is similar to the Rift Canyon, Absalom and Greyhawk are basically the same as are both Taldor and the Great Kingdom and the Shackles Pirates and the Hold of the Sea Princes. Slavery is rife in both settings (although a little more accepted in Golarion) and of course there's the obligatory "ancient cataclysm" that buried powerful empires and shaped the world as it is today (having said that though, ancient cataclysms are pretty much obligatory in any fantasy RPG setting.)
If there is a major difference it is one of tone. Greyhawk is more didactic, the good countries are truly good and the bad ones truly horrible. The likes of Furyondy and the empire of Iuz are both exemplars of their allignments. Golarion has more shades of grey in comparison Andoran does some dodgy things for a good society and the citizens of Cheliax and Irrisen are proud of their countries despite their evil nature. This difference in approach doesn't make either setting better, just different...
|
how come pathfinder doesnt have a famous mage's name attached to some special spells?
Presumably there's at least Tashanna's Hideous Laughter :)
That's ok, though as I am more and more pleased to see Greayhawk ( Greyhawk = Lame) go by the wayside.
I shall respond in a restrained and measured manner.
*sics the Scarlet Bortherhood onto Mr GNOME*If there is a major difference it is one of tone. Greyhawk is more didactic, the good countries are truly good and the bad ones truly horrible.
Although there may be more black-and-white in GH than in PF, there's still plenty of grey around, and examples of "good does not mean nice".
The PF setting may have more grey, but it's still got some one-sided extremes -- the differences between (say) Cheliax and E.of.Iuz stem more from the latter being directly ruled by the psychopathically chaotic evil demigod of evil chaotic evilness (it's not really his fault, he came from a broken home), where as the former is governed by proxies of the patron god of lawyers; Nidal's probably a *lot* less pleasant place to live than Cheliax.
PF tends to avoid being too black-and-white by playing more to some prominent stereotypes (Galt, Andoran (f@$~ yeah), Taldor, etc), whereas many GH nations started as pretty generic fantasy settings that were then tweaked in various ways.
a big shout out to james jacobs for putting that tidbit of info out there, much appreciate it!!!
i never really got into greyhawk myself. my players only wanted to play in the realms. I had one player always play a sorcerer with the goal to be more powerful than elminster and totally destroy him. he would usually make it to 17th level and then teleport to minster and challenge him to a dual. guy never understood that el was an archmage...
|
|
i never really got into greyhawk myself. my players only wanted to play in the realms. I had one player always play a sorcerer with the goal to be more powerful than elminster and totally destroy him. he would usually make it to 17th level and then teleport to minster and challenge him to a dual. guy never understood that el was an archmage...
One of the key differences between GH & FR -- in GH at 17th level you're a king or nation-manipulating-archwizard; in FR you're probably one of the 3 or 4 most powerful people in your village :)
One of the key differences between GH & FR -- in GH at 17th level you're a king or nation-manipulating-archwizard; in FR you're probably one of the 3 or 4 most powerful people in your village :)
Even at the village level, it would have to be a pretty small village to that powerful compared to your neighbors.
shssssssssss mention his name to much, and WotC will need to write 6 books, 4 modules, 4 posters, 2 miniatures of how he lived and died, when they come out with 4.5 E.
Greyhawk is to lame what light is to darkness, infidel! ;)
Seriously, though, Greyhawk is a rich tapestry of cultures and history, including a wealth of in-game history regarding the first D&D players' characters, which have become distorted as all legends do over time.
Because so much of Greyhawk's recent history was player-driven (based on the actual exploits of dozens of early PCs), some of it sounds a bit corny at times, or suspiciously like what it was -- a game of exploring dungeons and killing the monsters in them for treasure. But when you consider the real-world exploits of medieval and rennaissance adventurers (I'm looking at you, vikings, and you, conquistadors), isn't that actually a pretty realistic portrait of life in a D&D world?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cayden Cailean's "Okay what did I do last night and where are my pants?"
Material component is a cup of coffee.
Seltyiel's Fire Familiar.
so i was just wondering, how come pathfinder doesnt have a famous mage's name attached to some special spells?
WotC stripped them from the SRD (for the obvious reason), and we didn't feel any pressing need to restore them.
The other reasons are twofold:
1) As James said, above, setting-neutral rulebooks shouldn't have proper-name based spells.
2) In the Pathfinder Campaign Setting, there are not any Mordenkainen or Elminister high-level archmages running around altering the setting. All the super-high level folks are either dead, missing, or ascended to actual divinity. The game, ultimately, is about the PCs.
Personally, I like it this way, because acid arrow is a useful spell mages the world over know. Not all of those wizards are going to know or care who wrote the first version of it (and many of them probably came up with a variation of it by themselves with their free 2 spells/level.) To sorcerers, dragons, and other innate spell casters, the idea of "inventing" a spell at all is strange.
And I'm as curious as you guys are about James's mention of named spells coming up.
2) In the Pathfinder Campaign Setting, there are not any Mordenkainen or Elminister high-level archmages running around altering the setting. All the super-high level folks are either dead, missing, or ascended to actual divinity. The game, ultimately, is about the PCs.
This is an interesting nugget, if you are accurately representing the thoughts of the entire development team. I wholeheartedly agree with the last sentence, and can understand how it might be unattractive to a lot of players to realize that there will always be someone out there (other than the DM) more powerful than they are.
However, I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea that, past a certain level, the PCs will be hands-down the most powerful beings in the world, with few constraints on their behavior. I kind of like the idea that there are other superpowerful beings around, even if they do not exist in abundance, to provide potential foils for the PCs.
It also seems logical to me. After all, if the PCs are able to do it, why couldn't others?
I removed a post that used unacceptable language.
This is an interesting nugget, if you are accurately representing the thoughts of the entire development team.
Full disclosure: I work as far away from the editing and development folks as is possible without actually leaving the building. My understanding of their opinions on these topics comes largely from the same sources as the community's: blog posts, messageboard posts, and the Tuesday night Paizo Chat. So, despite the Golem by my avatar, apply the usual grain of salt.
I wholeheartedly agree with the last sentence, and can understand how it might be unattractive to a lot of players to realize that there will always be someone out there (other than the DM) more powerful than they are.
However, I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea that, past a certain level, the PCs will be hands-down the most powerful beings in the world, with few constraints on their behavior. I kind of like the idea that there are other superpowerful beings around, even if they do not exist in abundance, to provide potential foils for the PCs.
It also seems logical to me. After all, if the PCs are able to do it, why couldn't others?
My understanding is there are other powerful beings out there, but they either:
1) Aren't adventuring types, because they have day-to-day responsibilities, are magically bound in some way, or just don't have the temperment to go around rearranging the setting. For instance, Geb is an epic-level archmage. But his singular focus on destroying Nex (the man, not the nation), and growing detachment from the world mean he's basically just a Gebbite deterrence weapon at this point. Or most Ancient dragons could radically alter the world, but they think in too long of timescales to really worry about humanoids (except the one running Hermea). Or Mendev has some really powerful Paladins, but they're too busy containing the Worldwound to go stomp on House Thrune or the Gorilla King.
2) Are some sort of rising power out to upset the status-quo, almost always for the worse. In other words, they are foes for PCs to thwart.
3) From another plane/planet, meaning they aren't of immediate concern to most Golarion residents.
Related to 2), there, is the fact that if there are too many powerful people/beings on the side of the PCs, there isn't really a reason for them to start an adventuring career, because why should they risk life and limb fighting off the Orc Horde when the level 15+ dude could do it without breaking a sweat?
However, I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea that, past a certain level, the PCs will be hands-down the most powerful beings in the world, with few constraints on their behavior. I kind of like the idea that there are other superpowerful beings around, even if they do not exist in abundance, to provide potential foils for the PCs.
Well, there is always a bigger fish in the pond. Even 20th level PCs would have a hard time trying to overthrow the power structures in Cheliax singlehandedly, if they were so inclined. The Masked God Razmir is said to have razed a whole city with his spells. But at level 20, there should not be that many folks that are able to stop the PCs - thats all right by me. If they do not handle their power responsibly, somebody or something will come after them to set things right, however.
Stefan
I don't mind them losing the names. Most of the names were specific to Greyhawk NPCs anyway. I would like them to replace it with something to keep the approximate alphabetical listing though.
Mordenkainen --> Mage's
Evard --> Eldritch
Bigby --> Bewildering/Bewitching/Big
Otiluke --> Occult
|
One of the key differences between GH & FR -- in GH at 17th level you're a king or nation-manipulating-archwizard; in FR you're probably one of the 3 or 4 most powerful people in your village :)Even at the village level, it would have to be a pretty small village to that powerful compared to your neighbors.
The average drunk bum passed out face-down in the gutter in the Forgotten Realms is a 60th level archmage. And at least half of those are Mystra's Chosen, with about a quarter of THOSE screwing her on an occasional basis. :P
Greyhawk is to lame what light is to darkness, infidel! ;)
While Gnome really went over the top with his statement there are lot of people who don't care for Greyhawk and prefer lots of other settings.
And when it comes to naming spells. I always prefered to have named spells that are unusuall or exotic or very complex in their working and not things that I considered basics that should be handed down from ancient times or even prehistory with no one capable of tracing their source.
This is an interesting nugget, if you are accurately representing the thoughts of the entire development team.Full disclosure: I work as far away from the editing and development folks as is possible without actually leaving the building. My understanding of their opinions on these topics comes largely from the same sources as the community's: blog posts, messageboard posts, and the Tuesday night Paizo Chat. So, despite the Golem by my avatar, apply the usual grain of salt.
I wholeheartedly agree with the last sentence, and can understand how it might be unattractive to a lot of players to realize that there will always be someone out there (other than the DM) more powerful than they are.
However, I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea that, past a certain level, the PCs will be hands-down the most powerful beings in the world, with few constraints on their behavior. I kind of like the idea that there are other superpowerful beings around, even if they do not exist in abundance, to provide potential foils for the PCs.
It also seems logical to me. After all, if the PCs are able to do it, why couldn't others?
My understanding is there are other powerful beings out there, but they either:
1) Aren't adventuring types, because they have day-to-day responsibilities, are magically bound in some way, or just don't have the temperment to go around rearranging the setting. For instance, Geb is an epic-level archmage. But his singular focus on destroying Nex (the man, not the nation), and growing detachment from the world mean he's basically just a Gebbite deterrence weapon at this point. Or most Ancient dragons could radically alter the world, but they think in too long of timescales to really worry about humanoids (except the one running Hermea). Or Mendev has some really powerful Paladins, but they're too busy containing the Worldwound to go stomp on House Thrune or the Gorilla King.
2) Are some sort of rising power out to...
Good explanations. My knowledge of the Golarion setting is limited by the fact the Worldbook isn't out yet. :( Our group just transitioned to Pathfinder less than a year ago, and it has been on the Product Schedule for pretty much that whole time, if I remember correctly. I'm too cheap to go out and buy the older setting material when the new and improved version is just around the corner.
In the games I run in my own custom world, I ask the players to give their spells interesting names, just to add flavor. So one guy throws Klafrin's Magical Flying Daggers, while another might use Kreskin's Amazingly Insidious Glowing Darts. Same spell, same effect, and to us, at least, both names are an improvement on "Magic Missile." In both cases the spells look a little different; we assume that the PC has customized the spells in some way, or otherwise imprinted their own personalities on them, so the spells are theirs to name.
They are also free to name the spells after great or famous fictitious mages from the world's history, and to help me create that history by inventing the mages' names on the fly.
2) In the Pathfinder Campaign Setting, there are not any Mordenkainen or Elminister high-level archmages running around altering the setting. All the super-high level folks are either dead, missing, or ascended to actual divinity.
As if it would stop them in any way from inventing terrible world-shaking spells.
Geb's village of the dead, Nexian pocket dimension or godkill of Tar-Baphon
I have to start thinking about some form of ritual magic for PF.
Ross byers, you da mammal!!!
that is interesting, with the major players being around 15th or so level, and the archmages being tied up or having ascended to godhood.
i wonder what'll happen when Raistlin invades the world...
|
I don't like focusing on similar aspects of the different settings.
I like finding and focusing on the differences between like places.
I want to really disseminate the differences between Absalom and Waterdeep; between the Amedio, Hepmonoland, Chult and Mwangi. Between the Horned Society and Cheliax.
This way, when I'm designing an adventure or campaign, I can more accurately choose the setting. If my concept feels more like Sandpoint than Safeton then I know where I want my game to be.
I guess I just don't LOVE one of the BIG 3 that much more than any of the others -- and by all means, sometimes Solace or Pax Tharkas is just the best setting and I'll temporarily leave the BIG 3.
|
|
Krynn archmages always get their lunch money stolen by Mordenkainen or Elminster anyway.
I think Raistlin or Mordenkainen would steal Schmuckminster's lunch money.
A wise man once said Schmuckminster is a cross between Willy Wonka and PeeWee Herman.
I've had bowel movements cooler than the bozo of Shadowdale.