| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just wanted to get that off my chest. The existance of a mutli-national organization of professional adventurers bugs the heck out of me. It makes the PCs' adventures seem common and reduces them to the role of errand-boys to the more experienced, famous and successfull Pathfinders.
I suppose it's pointless to rail against something so integral to the game system that they named it after them, but I've been wanting to say it for a while.
That's all, really. I'm hoping either enough people chime in here with enthusiastic support of the Pathfinder Society to change my mind -OR- other people who share my distaste join me in a public confession.
Or both.
|
I'm not a big fan of the concept. But it hardly reduces the PCs to erand-boys. Especially since your PC doesn't HAVE to be Pathfinder....in fact, I'd wager more people playing in Golarion play non-Pathfinders than play Pathfinders.
I don't think I said Pathfinder enough in that couple of sentences. :P
I have nothing against them, but I would say that typical Pathfinders don't get nearly the same sort of adventures as PCs. I guess it depends on whether you are playing APs or PFS.
On the other hand, home games you could cut them out with no big loss. Or play on Greyhawk, Eberon, Forgotten Realms, Ancient Greece, or any number of worlds without Pathfinders.
Integral to the brand does not mean integral to the world.
It's only as important as you make it in your game. Some campaigns will have a lot to do with, say, the Aspis Consortium. Others won't ever mention them. Just not relevant to where you are and what you're doing.
I'm going to bet there are Pathfinder Lodges in Tian Xia. That doesn't mean communication home is very frequent. Also, the route used in Jade Regent is half picked to avoid assassins. Following a Pathfinder route would lead straight to them.
I'm going to bet there are Pathfinder Lodges in Tian Xia..
Isn't that what the Lantern Lodge is all about? Representatives of the Pathfinders and their lodges in Tian Xia who've reached back out to the Inner Sea Region?
Pathfinders are not integral to the game system. They are integral to the Golarion setting. That's a big, big difference.
We do not play in the Golarion setting. We treat the rules the same way we did 3.5, and we play in homemade settings. No pathfinders.
In my first PF campaign (RotRL of course) I had two Pathfinder npcs to chat with players. One was halfling called Yaris who was interested about party and about their deeds. He even informed his companion (Eandon Kline) about this "brave and interesting people" and party got to meet Eandon at the end of campaing. Players and me grow to respect Pathfinders and I loved how that worked in campaign.
Then I played Pathfinder Society.. Missions they had to do and how they work for those factions. My image about Pathfinders was crushed from mystical travelers and scholars to ruffians how "just do their job and screw the consequences". (Okay this was in 0 season and I haven't played high level scenarios yet. Don't get me wrong, I like playing and gm'ing PF Society but first time was shock to me).
I made decisions about Pathfinders. In AP's and other campaigns Pathfinders are like they were in RotRL and in PFS they are what they are in that. two different type of Pathfinders for two different gaming styles. I like idea of Pathfinders and mainly because whenever I mention Pathfinders my players get interested about them. They know that these people are respected adventures and want to get information or advice from them. (I haven't got good chance to introduce Shadow Lodge, Aspis Consortium or any ex-Pathfinders to them. I like screwing with stereotypes.)
But like others have sayed, Pathfinders are easy to ignore and as always in roleplaying you should use things you like and nothing else.
Personally the way I use pathfinders are those crazy archeologists and the like that the pcs hire or get hired by pcs to do stuff. They have grand adventures, but nothing like pcs. Pathfinders aren't specifically out to save the world or stop a villian they are out to find lost treasure and make a name for themselves. As such they are just as likely to be villians as allies, based on the characters goals and the individual pathfinder. This approach makes them acceptable and makes them a faction of interest. Pcs want info on thasillion? Hire a pathfinder to track it down or learn about it. Pcs have info that leads to alost city of gold? Pathfinders of various natures want in or want the info. I like them to be the morally grey faction with the potential to be either side of the fence as needed by the story and individual. Makes each pathfinder encounter something different as the pcs decide if its a "good" pathfinder or a "bad" one. Also leaves those Indiana Jones, old buddy betrayals all the more possible as they may have mistakingly labeled one. :P
It's worth noting that PFS doesn't really cover 'typical' Pathfinder activities much. Rather, the characters portrayed in PFS are the Societ's 'Elite Troubleshooters' (When something goes wrong in day-to-day Society operations, they find the trouble and shoot it.)
Yeah that is true and I have noticed this. It is sad that PFS hasn't got scenarios that have this kind of 'typical activities' as that is what I would like to play in PFS. On the other hand some scenarios come really close to this for example Before the Dawn I and II that focus on doing things for Pathfinders as fellow Pathfinders need help. Not just for friends/allies/Absalom/"whoever needs them" as in many other scenarios.
|
I really don't like them with BBQ sauce. Maybe honey mustard.
I can see the OP's point and I think there are likely lots of gamers that could feel that way.
Me, I love the concept of The Society, even outside of Organized Play.
But it's nothing to eliminate Pathfinder Society from your games -- or even cut down the size of the organization dramatically, if one so chooses.
Heck, it was easy for every gamer who has ever played or thought of playing Pathfinder to cut Numeria and Alkenstar completely out of their games.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinders are a plot device for organized play, and exist for no other reason. Otherwise, they can be ignored.
Not true.
The Pathfinder Society existed from the very start, years before both the Pathfinder RPG and the Pathfinder Society Org Play program came along. They have an article in Pathifnder AP #1, after all.
Whether or not they work for anyone's game is up to each individual person. Golarion certainly functions fine without the Pathfinder Society. But that said... they don't have to be allies for your PCs. If you don't like them, it's actually quite easy to set them up as bad guys; the society itself is neither good nor evil, after all. If you don't like them, set them us as villains and let your PCs take them apart! :-)
|
|
But that said... they don't have to be allies for your PCs. If you don't like them, it's actually quite easy to set them up as bad guys; the society itself is neither good nor evil, after all. If you don't like them, set them us as villains and let your PCs take them apart! :-)
And there's the third option, where they're neither allies nor enemies, but just some people who happen to be on Golarion, and are exceeding neutral towards the PCs.
I actually like them as a concept. It makes it very easy to put a non antagonistic rival into the mix. Plus their mere existence causes a lot of trouble, allowing for a lot of events and reasons for things to happen.
Frankly if anything I think there needs to be more evil organizations.
** spoiler omitted **
Hmmm...I wonder if Shadow Lodge is a viable option for PCs in PFS games now.
I've kind of developed a personal filter for Pathfinder Society references in various Paizo products. In my clouded vision, the Pathfinder Society existed in the pre-Uh-oh days before the death of Aroden but had faded from activity and closed up shop. Current Pathfinders are a very small band of treasure/thrill-seekers trying to revive the organization whose few surviving published works have inspired them.
So I still get closed down lodges in Westcrown and brand new lodges opening in Magnimar, but even its senior members are little more than early-adopter wannabes.
That's how I choose to see them.
I just wanted to get that off my chest. The existance of a mutli-national organization of professional adventurers bugs the heck out of me. It makes the PCs' adventures seem common and reduces them to the role of errand-boys to the more experienced, famous and successfull Pathfinders.
Keep in mind that professional and multi-national doesn't always mean elite.
I recall a scenario in one of the APs in which an adventuring group (I can't remember if all or only some of them are Pathfinders) beats the PCs to where they're going for completely different reasons than the PC's reasons for going there -- and they get destroyed. The PCs might be able to play heroes and save some survivors.
Given that I'm running a Darklight Sisterhood game at the moment, there is a whoooooole lot of Pathfinder hate played out at my table.
At the very least I've never seen the Pathfinders do stuff that forced a good aligned noble I was playing to issue a kill on sight order for any known members of the group who weren't an archmage who could level the city. I hate the Harpers.
I just wanted to get that off my chest. The existance of a mutli-national organization of professional adventurers bugs the heck out of me. It makes the PCs' adventures seem common and reduces them to the role of errand-boys to the more experienced, famous and successfull Pathfinders.
I suppose it's pointless to rail against something so integral to the game system that they named it after them, but I've been wanting to say it for a while.
That's all, really. I'm hoping either enough people chime in here with enthusiastic support of the Pathfinder Society to change my mind -OR- other people who share my distaste join me in a public confession.
Or both.
I have a similar antipathy, though in my case it extends to any group with continent spanning influence - magic changes everything, of course, but nonetheless these far flung, cohesive groups just dont ring true to my particular view of 'realistic fantasy'.
It also always struck me as odd that the pathfinders would publish these chronicles. It doesnt seem like a huge leap to form the view that keeping the secrets uncovered by their agents would be better for the organisation than making them more widely available. I can understand a group forming to go tomb-robbing, lost city exploring and ancient lore unearthing - I dont see what their motivation is for making that information widely available (at least without assuming they're benevolent, serving to a 'god of knowledge' or somesuch).
Generally speaking ive looked at them as a 'okay they are ther but the only affecft anything if I or the players want it' They dont seem to be written in a way that really inspires any passion for me.
That said i dont play PFS and most of the whole struggle impression of the lodges seems to come from that.
Though back in the day i remember i /hated/ the harpers though i cannot remember at this moment why.
|
I've always run the Pathfinder Society in my campaigns as a equivalent to the National Geographic Society. They work with local groups such as universities and governments where possible, but the quest for knowledge goes beyond political borders.
I figure 90% of the PFS are your regular style archaeologists, they dig up ancient tombs many of which have just dust bones and knowledge. Hardly sexy but it adds to the the society's knowledge pool. The other 10%, the elite are like Indiana Jones or Belloq, they stir up trouble wherever they go and find secrets man was not meant to know.
Hmmm...I wonder if Shadow Lodge is a viable option for PCs in PFS games now.
You can indeed join the Shadow Lodge as a faction as from the current season of PFS
Have you tried them grilled with BBQ sauce?
Yes.
I just wanted to get that off my chest. The existance of a mutli-national organization of professional adventurers bugs the heck out of me.
What are you? Chelish? Aspis agent?
It makes the PCs' adventures seem common and reduces them to the role of errand-boys to the more experienced, famous and successfull Pathfinders.
Only if they join. Otherwise they're adventurers, all on their own.
Just because there's an organisation doesn't mean the individual will become meaningless. In fact, it can be a stepping stone for adventurers. Some of the most legendary heroes Golarion has ever seen were Pathfinders, and they weren't remembered for being Pathfinders. Sometimes the Pathfinders are being remembered for their members.
I suppose it's pointless to rail against something so integral to the game system that they named it after them, but I've been wanting to say it for a while.
You got that one backwards. The product name Pathfinder came first. It might not be a coincidence that they could use the name for the Pathfinder Society (the in-game organisation AND the name for their organised play), but they didn't invent the Pathfinders and then thought "Hey, those guys are super important, let's call everything we do from now on by their name!"
In all the PF campaigns (almost all of which were Adventure Paths), the Pathfinders played either no or only a very, very small role. I think I had one character in my Legacy of Fire campaign who was a Pathfinder, and in another campaign, and in Council of Thieves, we sort of hired by them to investigate something.
Serpent's Skull had a possible connection to the Pathfinders (they were just one of 5 or so organisations you could side with), and in a year or so Shattered Star seems to be an AP where they play a role (and, as I said, in Council of Thieves they play a minor role).
They're not exactly omnipresent and overpowering.
The Pathfinder Society organised play thing is different, but that's because we're talking about organised play involving a kind of global meta-campaign, and the PFS is a good hook to tie it all together (yes, one ties together stuff with hooks). And even there, you don't have to be really loyal to the Society, as many use the organisation to push their own goals and that of their faction.
In the end, if you play your own games and campaigns, the Pathfinders are only as important as you make them to be. And if you don't play in the Pathfinder Campaign Setting, they probably don't even exist.
Does tying things with hooks work better than rope?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmm...I wonder if Shadow Lodge is a viable option for PCs in PFS games now.
No, we're a mere myth, anyway.
Uh, I meant to say: The SHADOW LODGE is but a myth anyway. Doesn't really exist. You're chasing bogeymen. Except bogeymen really exist and the SH doesn't.
Uhm, would you mind giving me your full name and address for a completely unrelated reason?
>_>
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does tying things with hooks work better than rope?
Oh yes! It is simply champion!
Pathfinders is one of the coolest organizations I've read about in all the fantasy worlds. Name one similar social club that's better.
Not the stealing the spotlight of precious, special PC's myth again.
Pathfinders are a plot device for organized play, and exist for no other reason. Otherwise, they can be ignored.Not true.
The Pathfinder Society existed from the very start, years before both the Pathfinder RPG and the Pathfinder Society Org Play program came along. They have an article in Pathifnder AP #1, after all.
Whether or not they work for anyone's game is up to each individual person. Golarion certainly functions fine without the Pathfinder Society. But that said... they don't have to be allies for your PCs. If you don't like them, it's actually quite easy to set them up as bad guys; the society itself is neither good nor evil, after all. If you don't like them, set them us as villains and let your PCs take them apart! :-)
I know you're not trying to say that anybody who cracks open the core PF rulebook is forced to then play in the Golarion setting.
But just to let you know? It sounded like that was what you were saying.
Pathfinders are a plot device for organized play, and exist for no other reason. Otherwise, they can be ignored.Not true.
The Pathfinder Society existed from the very start, years before both the Pathfinder RPG and the Pathfinder Society Org Play program came along. They have an article in Pathifnder AP #1, after all.
Whether or not they work for anyone's game is up to each individual person. Golarion certainly functions fine without the Pathfinder Society. But that said... they don't have to be allies for your PCs. If you don't like them, it's actually quite easy to set them up as bad guys; the society itself is neither good nor evil, after all. If you don't like them, set them us as villains and let your PCs take them apart! :-)
I know you're not trying to say that anybody who cracks open the core PF rulebook is forced to then play in the Golarion setting.
But just to let you know? It sounded like that was what you were saying.
I don't get that impression at all. He says that Golarion doesn't need the PFS but that they can also be useful for more than PC employers. That doesn't mean he says you must use Golarion. I read it more as "If you're not using Golarion, then it's absolutely a non-issue, but that's so self-evident I'm not even writing these words." except with a lot less presumption than I managed to get in there ;-)
Yeah,they don't capture my imagination much either. All the Golarion games I've run or played in haven't had much to do with them, except for an occasional reference here or there, and no one's cared to really poke more into it. It seems too gimmicky and clearly constructed to be An RPG Adventure Hook Generator. I'd like them better if they were more localized, like the National Geographic Society, as opposed to being so "perfectly international."
|
|
Good idea for a thread!
I like them, but I can see the ‘ugly side’ to their activities. Essentially the world has given this one organisation the rights for a sort of artefact imperialism – being able to run around the world, find powerful magical resources and crate it up to some warehouse somewhere. There is little detail about what happens to all these ghastly items the organisation holds and protects. There are the chronicles, sure, but if anything, democratisation of the knowledge that the organisation holds would be likely to create even more enemies for the Society or have all nations turn to the organisation and get worried about their level of power, similar to how we worry about how many nuclear weapons a nation owns right now.
The biggest disconnect I get with the Pathfinder Society is the downside of the world’s agreement to let them raid. I feel any nation would be accepting of the Society, and will open their borders to them, just as long as the Society will be there for the Nation if something horrific happens. When the Tarrasque awakens, the Society would be the organisation given responsibility of ‘dealing with it’. Elves living in forests ruined permanently by TreeRazer would be publically demanding the Decemvirate use their incredible resources and deal with this terrible threat. If the Society refused to, it would lead to a collapse of the goodwill they’ve garnered and they’d have a reputation as self-interested tomb raiders.
And if the numbers of the Society are high enough, I’d imagine there’d also be some sort of ‘Society Intervention’ in nations like Galt. It’d be protracted and bloody, but an international good organisation would do nothing less.
Except, of course, that the Pathfinder Society is not good. Individual members may be, but the organization as a whole is as dedicatedly True Neutral as they come.
|
|
Also the PFS are not exactly welcome everywhere. Ustalav has banned them (grave digging is not recommended in a place with that much undead) and the PFS position in Cheliax, Andoran, Osirion and Taldor is precarious to say the least. This precarious position is actually the plot of several PFS scenarios.
The PFS is supposed to be politically neutral and is not supposed to interfere with the internal and external workings of a country. This is due to the fact that if the PFS were to help out (say) Taldor this could well upset Quadiran interests and by extension pathfinder digs there. The PFS tries it's hardest not to play favourites for this very reason. If you make a friend you make an enemy.
The point is that the PFS is only interested in locating and obtaining artifacts. Some in the society would prefer to achieve this through diplomacy and favours and look to the society as a force for the betterment of everyone. Equally however there are those pathfinders who would happily slaughter a Mwangi village to get at the idol they have in their temple. These are the extremes of the society though, by and large they see themselves as above concers of law, chaos, good and evil. The only thing that matters is the artifacts.
You got that one backwards. The product name Pathfinder came first. It might not be a coincidence that they could use the name for the Pathfinder Society (the in-game organisation AND the name for their organised play), but they didn't invent the Pathfinders and then thought "Hey, those guys are super important, let's call everything we do from now on by their name!"
Actually, I think that's exactly what happened. The Pathfinder Society was mentioned in a back-up article in 'Burnt Offerings,' well before the Pathfinder RPG was announced.
But I am guilty of not differentiating between the RPG and Golarion, so y'all are right to point out that the organization is key to the setting and not the game.
|
|
I will say this, though, despite loving the idea of the Pathfinder Society I am upset that Paizo made me buy Seeker of Secrets. They said that to play in Pathfinder Society one must have the Core Book and Seeker of Secrets and not only is there nothing in Seeker that is necessary for play but I don't much like the stuff in it for general Fluff.
And now it's obsolete and I have to consider getting the new Pathfinder Society book that replaced the old! (that, of course, they say we have to have for Organized Play.)
*Really, we should be able to send Paizo our copies of Seeker of Secrets to recycle and get a 1/2 off discount for the new book!
At least they're not all good-aligned.
They're better than the Harpers.
Personally, I don't think they would make very good villians, since the society would work to keep individual agents within certain parameters to avoid unnecessary trouble, and the society itself doesn't really come across as villianous to me, for the same reason I don't think the individual agents would be. I could see them more as an interested 3rd party that often makes it slightly harder, and occasionally slightly easier, to deal with the main issue.
The Turks from FF7 strike me as a good way to portray them if you want to highlight their darker side. They'll work to maintain their interests, but usually step out of the way if pushed against hard enough. If you come to close to core activities or properties, they'll push back, but otherwise, both the organization and an individual agent would likely decide that most historical artifacts and documents aren't worth a major fight that would jeopardize the overall well being of themselves.