For protagonists with magical gear check out Elric or any character from Forgotten Realms (or really any D&D world). Heck I'm hard pressed to think of a character who doesn't have some form of magical gear.Elric had one magic item: his sword. One. He did not have magic boots magic ring other magic ring magic necklace magic belt magic armor magic shield magic gloves magic hat - a g$&#$@n magic hat! Stupid magic hats are supposed to be a wizard staple and now everyone is wearing one! That's not going into his item that gives him flying and his rod to dispel magic and his other slotless items and his other wonderous items and etc, etc, etc.
One. Versus 15+.
Except for Rand 'Al Thor, Elric, Bilbo Baggins, Drizzt Do'Urden, Jarlaxle, ad infinitum.Rand 'Al Thor has a relatively small number of items. Bilbo Baggins has a magic ring and magic weapon and some sweet non-magical armor. Drizzt and Jarlaxle are D&D characters.
Professor, you omit that those characters tend to fight against people with no (or little) magic gear as a rule (a couple of special boss-fights excluded). In fact, what makes many of those characters special is that they have very special magic gear that practically nobody else has.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Beowulf, Cu Chullain, Roland, and Sigurd were all supernatural characters.
None of them used magic.
Actually, all of them used magic items. Beowulf had a sword (Hrunting -- he killed Grendel's mother with it), Cu Chullain had Gae Bulg a magic spear, Roland had the sword Durandal and the horn Olifant, and Sigurd had his sword Gram (and, iirc, a magic horse too). All magic items. I'm pretty sure they had other items as well but this is off the top of my head.
Elric had one magic item: his sword. One. He did not have magic boots magic ring other magic ring magic necklace magic belt magic armor magic shield magic gloves magic hat - a g&&%%*n magic hat! Stupid magic hats are supposed to be a wizard staple and now everyone is wearing one! That's not going into his item that gives him flying and his rod to dispel magic and his other slotless items and his other wonderous items and etc, etc, etc.One. Versus 15+.
Elric had several magic items. He always had Stormbringer and the Ring of Kings. The Actorios stone on the ring is key to his summoning the elemental lords. He also made use of demon forged armor, Mournblade -- Stormbringers twin, and summoned hundreds of incarnations of the black blade to slay a god. He used magical herbs and various items in different stories / books.
Secondly, you cannot use D&D characters to prove things about non-D&D characters. Really? That's your line? "Look plenty of non-D&D protagonists use lots of magic items, look at all these D&D protagonists!"Except for Rand 'Al Thor, Elric, Bilbo Baggins, Drizzt Do'Urden, Jarlaxle, ad infinitum. (Edit: ninja'd on that part)See above.
Rand 'Al Thor has a relatively small number of items. Bilbo Baggins has a magic ring and magic weapon and some sweet non-magical armor. Drizzt and Jarlaxle are D&D characters.
Don't know Rand 'Al Thor. Minimal knowledge of Drizzt or Jarlaxle. And yeah, Bilbo only had 1 magic item, Sting, and the most powerful artifact in Middle Earth...
See, I don't have a problem with fighters needing their Gram or their Excalibur. But Excalibur is meaningless when you're trading your third +3 flaming shock sword for it. And Excalibur is especially meaningless when it's "just one of a lot of others." Remember the part of the story where King Arthur rode up with his magic armor and magic shield and magic boots and magic ring and other magic ring and magic hat and magic belt and magic gloves? And then when he took Excalibur threw away his other magic sword that he had on-hand and no longer needed? Because I sure don't.
What you're really pointing out is that D&D / PF are much richer in magic and that it's heroes are more dependent on it. That's definitely true. They exist in an environment that seems to require magic to overcome threats on a much more frequent basis than most legendary or literary characters are confronted with (with the possible exception of Elric of Melnibone). Making it difficult to do without magic goodies without some compensating power. Something that several people speculated on above this post.
From Sean carefully avoiding discussion about if Ultimate Combat will include any help for the Monk in the regards Mikaze was talking about, I fear we have our answer to that, too. Disappointing.
I don't really find it odd at all that Sean isn't talking about the contents of Ultimate Combat about two months from it's release date. I would say that you are reading way into the response. Your answer will have to wait until they start releasing previews for Ultimate Combat. To do otherwise is premature.
From Sean carefully avoiding discussion about if Ultimate Combat will include any help for the Monk in the regards Mikaze was talking about, I fear we have our answer to that, too. Disappointing.I don't really find it odd at all that Sean isn't talking about the contents of Ultimate Combat about two months from it's release date. I would say that you are reading way into the response. Your answer will have to wait until they start releasing previews for Ultimate Combat. To do otherwise is premature.
+1
+1From Sean carefully avoiding discussion about if Ultimate Combat will include any help for the Monk in the regards Mikaze was talking about, I fear we have our answer to that, too. Disappointing.I don't really find it odd at all that Sean isn't talking about the contents of Ultimate Combat about two months from it's release date. I would say that you are reading way into the response. Your answer will have to wait until they start releasing previews for Ultimate Combat. To do otherwise is premature.
<sigh> You guys never even heard about the term "reverse psychology", right? :p
Alright, I'm just going to post some more of the stuff about Irori that popped out at me.
Many of Irori’s followers are monks, men and women who have dedicated their lifestyles to simplicity and purity in order to perfect themselves.Dedication to a lifestyle of simplicity and purity sounds awfully acetic.
His holy text is Unbinding the Fetters, a lengthy tome describing physical exercises, meditation, diet, and other methods to transcend the limitations of the mortal form.and has an ongoing feud with Asmodeus because the Prince likes to taunt the Master’s followers with shortcuts to perfection that are fraught with pitfalls.Seriously, I may be alone in this, but I think something like a Belt of Physical Perfection screams "shortcut to perfection" to me. Does Irori want his followers to become strong enough to overcome obstacles by following a strict regiment of physical exercise, meditation, and diet, or is he fine with his followers just dumping gold into magical gear such as a Belt of Physical Perfection +2 to help them overcome their trials? Buying or using looted gear just doesn't seem to really fit with the concept of a follower of Irori in my eyes.
Irori has achieved perfection and sees no need to cloak himself in mystery or augment himself with divine power, so, when he appears, his avatar is a physically fit man, looking exactly as his followers describe him, often sitting or kneeling patiently.Irori is very rarely depicted in art because his faithful believe that any icon of him cannot hope to live up to his perfect image. Instead, they describe him as a flawless Vudrani man, with no hair save a long braid, simple robes, and wooden sandals.Their god is portrayed in extremely simple garb. It's not what he wears that is important, it's the person himself. I really can't see his devoutest (and highest level) followers, who do their utmost to emulate their god, being pimped out in hundreds of thousands of gold worth of gear from head to toe.
Personally I'd understand Iori to teach his followers to rely upon themselves and inner enlightenment, but the problems starts when they are confronted with those that DO rely upon the crutches to power. They gain more power, but in a flawed way that doesn't lead toward enlightment. I'm not sure whether this god would frown upon his believers to take any items necessary to fulfill a quest given to them. Iori doesn't look like a god that would fail to recognize the meaning of the word pragmatism. The question is where necessity ends and overreliance begins
I don't think that Iori did compare himself to any power/level curve and neither are his followers obliged to that (the religion and game mechanics weren't considered together IMO). The power comes to them slower but they don't care because the reward isn't immediate.
Yet another concept study. A monk 12 duelist 8 with absolutely no magic equipment or allied buffs at level 20.
- AC 29; can combat expertise +5, fight defensively +5, ki dodge +4 for 43 AC
- piercing flurry +26/+26/(+26)/+21/+21/+16/+11 (2d6+8 20/x2)
- greater trip flurry +30/+30/(+30)/+25/+25/+20/+15
- several maneuvers (greater trip, improved grapple, steal and dirty trick)
Female human monk 12 duelist 8
LE medium humanoid
Init +13 ; Senses Perception +25
-=DEFENSE=-
AC 29 touch 24, flat 20
HP 143
Fort 12; Ref 20; Will 14
-=OFFENSE=-
Speed 70ft
Melee piercing flurry +26/+26/+21/+21/+16/+11 (2d6+8 19-20/x2) Type: Piercing; Size: Medium; Wgt: 0lbs
Maneuver greater trip flurry +30/+30/+25/+25/+20/+15
Other[/bi] improved grapple, steal and dirty trip at +30
[b]-=OTHER=-
Str 10, Dex 24, Con 11, Int 14, Wis 14, Cha 7
BAB +17; CMB +28; CMD +41
Feats toughness, weapon finesse, dodge, improved grapple, weapon focus (unarmed), hamatulatsu, improved trip, combat expertise, greater trip, improved critical, mobility, great fortitude, iron will, combat reflexes, improved steal, improved dirty trick
Traits reactionary,
Favored class monk
Favored bonus 12 hitpoints
Skills
Trained acrobatics 30(20); climb 13(10); intimidate 21(20); perception 25(20); sense motive 25(20); sleight of hand 27(20); stealth 30(20); swim 13(10)
-=Breakdown=-
toughness
level 1 weapon finesse, dodge [monk bonus]
level 2 improved grapple [monk bonus]
level 3 weapon focus (unarmed)
level 4
level 5 hamatulatsu,
level 6 improved trip [monk bonus]
level 7 combat expertise
level 8
level 9 greater trip
level 10 medusa's wrath [monk bonus]
level 11 mobility
level 12
level 13 great fortitude
level 14
level 15 iron will
level 16 combat reflexes [duel bonus]
level 17 improved steal
level 18
level 19 improved dirty trick
level 20
|
What Sean has created and continus to create is a game that nobody but himself and a handful of others wants to play - whether it be focused on the grind of magic item pursuit (as evidenced by this VoP thing and his interpretation of WBL wrt crafting) or his focus on gaming as heavily emphasizing combat time (as evidenced by our recent discussion of being blind vs. being deaf), his ideal game closely resembles an MMORPG - and that's fine for people who want to play that way. Many of us don't.
SKR isn't the lead designer of PF (thankfully). And it seems like somebody didn't get the memo that D&D, from day one, is a game of killing things that heavily empashizes combat time. That never changed between editions, and ironically 3E/PF is perhaps the most pro-noncombat edition, Skills and all.
Nobody's telling you you're playing the game wrong. I'm saying the game isn't built to do that.
One of us is the developer of the game, though. You entirely have the power to change this.
Actually, all of them used magic items. Beowulf had a sword (Hrunting -- he killed Grendel's mother with it), Cu Chullain had Gae Bulg a magic spear, Roland had the sword Durandal and the horn Olifant, and Sigurd had his sword Gram (and, iirc, a magic horse too). All magic items. I'm pretty sure they had other items as well but this is off the top of my head.
Elric had several magic items. He always had Stormbringer and the Ring of Kings. The Actorios stone on the ring is key to his summoning the elemental lords. He also made use of demon forged armor, Mournblade -- Stormbringers twin, and summoned hundreds of incarnations of the black blade to slay a god. He used magical herbs and various items in different stories / books.
Take every single item you just listed.
Every. Single. One.
Items from not one character but many on top of many.
You have just made the gear loadup of a single fighter.
This is not a good thing.
What you're really pointing out is that D&D / PF are much richer in magic and that it's heroes are more dependent on it. That's definitely true. They exist in an environment that seems to require magic to overcome threats on a much more frequent basis than most legendary or literary characters are confronted with (with the possible exception of Elric of Melnibone). Making it difficult to do without magic goodies without some compensating power. Something that several people speculated on above this post.
And what I'm saying is that this idea of "you require specifically magic to do the supernatural" is a) what people have a problem with and b) the reason wizards are so bloody powerful. When magic is the only thing that effects the world, yeah, the guys who control the magic are gonna be top dogs!
But what I'm also saying is that this isn't how storytelling works. The tale of Sir Roland wasn't filled with him and his bevy of magical items. Conan did not walk around gleaming like a second sun from all the magic he had on. Even when you look at the pulp roots of D&D, neither Fafnir nor the Grey Mouser had tons of magical items at their beck and call, and the archtypical Vancian wizard knew a grand total of four spells.
I recall once reading how Gygax actually statted up Conan, and I noticed two things that disturbed me. First, his stats were literally impossible - in the game built around pretending to be Conan, you couldn't be Conan. More horrifying is that Conan had psychic powers. Why? Because it was the only way he had written into the system a character like Conan could exist, with his resistance to magic and his amazing resilience. To make the archtypical barbarian he needed sci-fi brain magic.
This is entirely backwards. It is also what happens when you decide that magic is the root of all supernatural power, rather then magic being one of the limbs of the supernatural.
Professor, you omit that those characters tend to fight against people with no (or little) magic gear as a rule (a couple of special boss-fights excluded). In fact, what makes many of those characters special is that they have very special magic gear that practically nobody else has.
I'm not omitting this in the slightest! I'd far rather have a system where fighters have one or two unique magical items and not a whole bevy of boring Christmas ornaments!
Nobody's telling you you're playing the game wrong. I'm saying the game isn't built to do that.One of us is the developer of the game, though. You entirely have the power to change this.
And to be fair so does your group. He's not a programmer writing hard code. If there's something you don't like then change it. It's actually easier for you and quicker.
I'm not omitting this in the slightest! I'd far rather have a system where fighters have one or two unique magical items and not a whole bevy of boring Christmas ornaments!
+1
I could get 100% behind this. A GM ofcoz can simply play a low magic setting. Would be epic.
I'm not omitting this in the slightest! I'd far rather have a system where fighters have one or two unique magical items and not a whole bevy of boring Christmas ornaments!+1
I could get 100% behind this. A GM ofcoz can simply play a low magic setting. Would be epic.
\
I'm certainly not against it. It does tempt me to strip my players in the viking game of their magical lewtz and instead give them a handful of potent magical artifacts more in line with the mythology.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nobody is saying that a low magic item variation of Pathfinder is a bad idea. Just that the base game does assume a fair amount of magic items. The one paragraph option from UM was never intended to change that. Don't expect UC to do so either.
I certainly would love to see a chapter about running a low magic item game. I expect whenever Paizo makes a book of alternative rules (an unearthed arcana variant) they will explore the topic. I would definitely by a 3pp book about it.
But for now, you'll have to explore your own options. If you come up with a really tight system, pitch it to Kobold Quarterly or Rite Publishing or Super Genius games or any of the other fine sellers of 3PP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nobody's telling you you're playing the game wrong. I'm saying the game isn't built to do that.One of us is the developer of the game, though. You entirely have the power to change this.
And again you're ignoring that
Again, I wrote a 3PP book about low-magic campaigns. They can be done. I've done them. But Ultimate Magic isn't the place to tell you how to run a low-magic campaign, whether for one character, one class, or every PC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is titled Ultimate Magic.
I would think Ultimate Combat would be a better place for low-magic rules, if that.
The GMG would have been best. Maybe it will have a sequel.
Anyway, the best way to run a low magic game is to try it and see what breaks. Baby steps.
Reaper Miniatures
|
Yet another concept study. A monk 12 duelist 8 with absolutely no magic equipment or allied buffs at level 20.
- AC 29; can combat expertise +5, fight defensively +5, ki dodge +4 for 43 AC
- piercing flurry +26/+26/(+26)/+21/+21/+16/+11 (2d6+8 20/x2)
- greater trip flurry +30/+30/(+30)/+25/+25/+20/+15
- several maneuvers (greater trip, improved grapple, steal and dirty trick)
** spoiler omitted **...
May I ask, sir, how the AC43 +26(with 3 more +26 and 4 iterative attacks) stacks up against a monk with the, as it is so collectively dubbed "Christmas tree monk" geared with appropriate WBL "ornaments?
I ask because I'm curious to see the math breakdown, with all the Ornaments, what would I get if I was strict to WBL?
|
Reaper Miniatures
|
And again you're ignoring that
Again, I wrote a 3PP book about low-magic campaigns. They can be done. I've done them. But Ultimate Magic isn't the place to tell you how to run a low-magic campaign, whether for one character, one class, or every PC.
It is titled Ultimate Magic.
I would think Ultimate Combat would be a better place for low-magic rules, if that.
The GMG would have been best. Maybe it will have a sequel.
Anyway, the best way to run a low magic game is to try it and see what breaks. Baby steps.
+1
I felt a vibration in the web related to discussions about low-magic campaigns and no combat games.
I am going to say that the focus on open door/kill stuff/loot/repeat and magic item grind will end up driving many people away from the game.
I seriously doubt that a few sentences in an optional sourcebook are a really big drive in that direction.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I seriously doubt that a few sentences in an optional sourcebook are a really big drive in that direction.
I am going to say that the focus on open door/kill stuff/loot/repeat and magic item grind will end up driving many people away from the game.
Also, I'm going to disagree on the grounds that that HAS been the game for AT LEAST 11 years. And considering that in early D&D, the amount of experience gained was directionally proportional to amount of loot gained, I'm going to say it has been like that for decades and we are still playing it. The short version is: LilithsThrall couldn't possibly be more wrong even if an attempt was made.
I realize that you've convinced yourself that your posts are worth my time to read when you haven't even scrolled back to see what the discussion is even about, but if you had scrolled back you would have found that I wasn't basing it just on VoPI seriously doubt that a few sentences in an optional sourcebook are a really big drive in that direction.
I am going to say that the focus on open door/kill stuff/loot/repeat and magic item grind will end up driving many people away from the game.
You seem to have convinced yourself that D&D/Pathfinder has been doing everything wrong for what? 40 years? And will soon die because it isn't catering to the people who are the hardest of the hardcore role-players.
|
People really hate wizards. Wish I knew why. Deep-seeded emotional issues with wizards.
It's true that most of the iconic fantasy characters don't rely on magic items. It's because they're not wizards, and in most cases there aren't just wizards walking around. There also aren't set rules in these settings for creating magical items.
D&D is (and in the person of PF, remains) a paradigm that was created by Gygax and Arneson and Monte and (fill in D&D patriarch here, and here, and here). It is it's own thing. It isn't designed to directly mimic Bruce Lee movies or The Wheel of Time books or Middle-Earth or Arthurian legend. It is never going to simulate those things.
Look, I love playing fighters and I like King Arthur. He's cool. he has one magic sword, as Cirno points out. Where are the legions of people complaining that they can't play King Arthur in Pathfinder? Any fighter with nothing but one magic sword will be outpaced/worthless/non-viable/(other superlative for "bad" here) within 10 levels!! This is an outrage!
Only it isn't, because we knew what we were getting into. It's a game (not a book) with wizards and item slots and items, and expectations that those things will be used. People who want to play gearless characters have been very, very vocal since the release of UM, with very little from the other camp - but there is another camp. Loads of people love PF/D&D as it is - wizards (*SHUDDER*) and all - and don't want developers spending time on creating a whole sub-system for creating gearless characters when they could be spending it on other things that actually interest the majority of players.
"I want no gear on my monk" is a viewpoint that's held by only a subset of Monk players, which are themselves only a subset of D&D players. In my understanding of the economies of scale in the RPG industry, a rules subsystem for gearless characters sounds like exactly the sort of thing that a 3PP would handle. Maybe they're the ones to ask. Maybe continually prodding SKR isn't the way to go, here. Maybe blaming Sean for D&D being D&D isn't really appropriate, even though he didn't fix the entire "magic is too cool" problem in a few paragraphs in a book about how cool magic is.
Just, you know, maybe.
The GMs I've played with, as well as the players, have definitely gravitated towards more complex, more sophisticated plots than the people at your table have. You're falling into the trap of believing that everybody plays the way you do.Also, I'm going to disagree on the grounds that that HAS been the game for AT LEAST 11 years. And considering that in early D&D, the amount of experience gained was directionally proportional to amount of loot gained, I'm going to say it has been like that for decades and we are still playing it. The short version is: LilithsThrall couldn't possibly be more wrong even if an attempt was made.I seriously doubt that a few sentences in an optional sourcebook are a really big drive in that direction.
I am going to say that the focus on open door/kill stuff/loot/repeat and magic item grind will end up driving many people away from the game.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
If you'd bother to scroll back, you'd see that I specifically acknowledged that some people like the MMORPG style of gaming.Pot. Kettle. Black.The GMs I've played with, as well as the players, have definitely gravitated towards more complex, more sophisticated plots than the people at your table have. You're falling into the trap of believing that everybody plays the way you do.Also, I'm going to disagree on the grounds that that HAS been the game for AT LEAST 11 years. And considering that in early D&D, the amount of experience gained was directionally proportional to amount of loot gained, I'm going to say it has been like that for decades and we are still playing it. The short version is: LilithsThrall couldn't possibly be more wrong even if an attempt was made.I seriously doubt that a few sentences in an optional sourcebook are a really big drive in that direction.
I am going to say that the focus on open door/kill stuff/loot/repeat and magic item grind will end up driving many people away from the game.
Which didn't stop you from declaring that the the kick open door/kill monster/loot/repeat grind was going to kill Pathfinder (like it killed D&D). Nor did it stop you from asserting you were better than me and other people who didn't play like you. You're falling into the trap of believing that everybody plays the way you do. Or should.
DnD has been following a trend of putting out a version which is streamlined and with more options for character creation, then adding a whole bunch of bloat and bad rules which interact with each other in very destructive manners. Then, wiping the board clean and starting over. Adding bloat - especially bloat known to be unbalanced has historically been a problem. It doesn't suddenly become "okay" just because "Paizo" is on the cover of the book.You seem to have convinced yourself that D&D/Pathfinder has been doing everything wrong for what? 40 years? And will soon die because it isn't catering to the people who are the hardest of the hardcore role-players.I realize that you've convinced yourself that your posts are worth my time to read when you haven't even scrolled back to see what the discussion is even about, but if you had scrolled back you would have found that I wasn't basing it just on VoPI seriously doubt that a few sentences in an optional sourcebook are a really big drive in that direction.
I am going to say that the focus on open door/kill stuff/loot/repeat and magic item grind will end up driving many people away from the game.
Completely irrelevant. None of the "bloat" added the "kick in the door/kill monster/loot/repeat" system you are degrading. That is in the base system and was previously its backbone. You are still claiming that THAT cycle is what is going to kill a game that has been running on it for at least three decades.
What I actually said is "I'm not going to say that one [the way you play or the way I play] is badwrongfun" and that if the game designers focus on the way you play and ignore the way I play, it'll drive many people away from the game.
No, it's not.
I am going to say that the focus on open door/kill stuff/loot/repeat and magic item grind will end up driving many people away from the game.
Verbatim.
Never mind the later assertion that you are better than me and anyone who doesn't play like you.
The hardcore roleplayers have any number of game systems specifically for that style of play and given how much they sit around complaining about how d20 doesn't cater to them, I am going to go out on a limb and say focusing on what D&D has done for 30 years isn't going to drive those people away. They will still be there complaining that d20 isn't catering to hardcore roleplayers.
I realize that you've convinced yourself that your posts are worth my time to read when you haven't even scrolled back to see what the discussion is even about, but if you had scrolled back you would have found that I wasn't basing it just on VoPI seriously doubt that a few sentences in an optional sourcebook are a really big drive in that direction.
I am going to say that the focus on open door/kill stuff/loot/repeat and magic item grind will end up driving many people away from the game.
Than what are you basing it on? The very core of the game itself? Which is, let's face it, getting rewards for beating on things. The only thing that's changed is we've given different flavors of beating on things.
In that case. Why are you even here? There are games that cater to a different philosophy of gaming. Obviously this one is not for you.
Cartigan vs. LilithsThrall, finally.
My monies are on Cartigan, even though I intensely dislike him most of the time. (Though lately I've agreed with him on a number of things. Feels icky.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like I said, all he wants to do is argue and he's too boring for that to be enjoyable. I've dropped out of the discussion with him. There are better things to do, like sit on an army ant nest.Cartigan vs. LilithsThrall, finally.** spoiler omitted **
Or beat a dead horse about the focus of D&D/d20/Pathfinder while maintaining an air of conceited superiority.
Frankly the best way IMO to play a gearless character is to play one in a party of gearless characters at the moment. Just the encounters must be adjusted ;)
Nobody's telling you you're playing the game wrong. I'm saying the game isn't built to do that.One of us is the developer of the game, though. You entirely have the power to change this.And again you're ignoring that
Again, I wrote a 3PP book about low-magic campaigns. They can be done. I've done them. But Ultimate Magic isn't the place to tell you how to run a low-magic campaign, whether for one character, one class, or every PC.
Well, maybe Ultimate Combat is. Or another book you guys could bring out. It's really an alternative system which I'd like to see being made by Paizo as an optional for players.
Obviously, I find the continuation of this thread topic (after the last thread was locked) absurd.
But here´s my real quandary: Why are the people so upset that PRPG/D&D is hostile to their non-geared out fantasy trope stil wasting their time on it? There has to be HOW MANY RPG systems created in the last 15 years, right?, WHY NOT USE ONE OF THEM? It´s like a bunch of pit-bulls who won´t let go of something, even though they say it´s so horrible, or whatever. If Paizo converts PRPG 2.0 into My Little Pony meets Akira, I don´t expect everybody will just go with that, everybody has different options. If you like 3.5 VoP, use that. If you´re hung up on playing PFS, well, start your own ´pseudo-PFS´ society that uses PFS modules but different rules. Or is it about the validation of (in one´s ideal world) converting Paizo with their associated adventure writing cred, to implement ´your perfect game system´...? I mean, I hardly mince words when I deign to share a critique of Paizo´s rules (as part of playtest, or errata issues), but once I communicate that, that´s it, they can take it or leave it, change their game rules or not. Honestly, my perfect game system would be if I had time to do an update of the D6 rules set.
Obviously, I find the continuation of this thread topic (after the last thread was locked) absurd.
But here´s my real quandary: Why are the people so upset that PRPG/D&D is hostile to their non-geared out fantasy trope stil wasting their time on it? There has to be HOW MANY RPG systems created in the last 15 years, right?, WHY NOT USE ONE OF THEM? It´s like a bunch of pit-bulls who won´t let go of something, even though they say it´s so horrible, or whatever. If Paizo converts PRPG 2.0 into My Little Pony meets Akira, I don´t expect everybody will just go with that, everybody has different options. If you like 3.5 VoP, use that. If you´re hung up on playing PFS, well, start your own ´pseudo-PFS´ society that uses PFS modules but different rules. Or is it about the validation of (in one´s ideal world) converting Paizo with their associated adventure writing cred, to implement ´your perfect game system´...?
Yay, another "GTFO my game!" post. Lovely.
Well, maybe Ultimate Combat is. Or another book you guys could bring out. It's really an alternative system which I'd like to see being made by Paizo as an optional for players.Nobody's telling you you're playing the game wrong. I'm saying the game isn't built to do that.One of us is the developer of the game, though. You entirely have the power to change this.And again you're ignoring that
Again, I wrote a 3PP book about low-magic campaigns. They can be done. I've done them. But Ultimate Magic isn't the place to tell you how to run a low-magic campaign, whether for one character, one class, or every PC.
Ultimate Combat isn't really the place to have that discussion either. A low-magic system isn't something you can implement just by limiting characters. It's a whole system change because the system is balanced around the assumption that PCs have magic items that significantly improve them. Ultimate Combat should be dedicated to improving the capability for mundane characters to compete with magical characters. A book, or significant section of one, would have to be dedicated to the conversion of Pathfinder to a low-magic system.