Things You Love, That Others Might Not?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

101 to 150 of 208 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm gonna make a Dhampir Summoner, whose Eidolon is a big black, bouncing coffin. It 'attack's by having the top half open up to reveal shadowy blackness and two glowing red eyes, and two evil looking hands quickly grab the target and pull it into the coffin that slams shut.

Cue horrible, horrible screams.

Shadow Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Things You Love, That Others Might Not?

Porn.

Wait, what?


TOZ wrote:
Quote:
Things You Love, That Others Might Not?

Porn.

Wait, what?

Hey, there's porn in Golarion. I'll allow it.


Vamptastic wrote:

I'm gonna make a Dhampir Summoner, whose Eidolon is a big black, bouncing coffin. It 'attack's by having the top half open up to reveal shadowy blackness and two glowing red eyes, and two evil looking hands quickly grab the target and pull it into the coffin that slams shut.

Cue horrible, horrible screams.

So bonuses to grapples and swallow whole with nightmare spell-like abilities?


Seth Parsons wrote:
Vamptastic wrote:

I'm gonna make a Dhampir Summoner, whose Eidolon is a big black, bouncing coffin. It 'attack's by having the top half open up to reveal shadowy blackness and two glowing red eyes, and two evil looking hands quickly grab the target and pull it into the coffin that slams shut.

Cue horrible, horrible screams.

So bonuses to grapples and swallow whole with nightmare spell-like abilities?

Yes. And I've never looked at the Summoner class, so it's cool that I can easily do that.


Oh yeah, it's cool. One of my players in a homebrew of mine actually had similar, but it was a flying snake. Rush forward, grapple, swallow whole.

Nearly took down someone a full 5 levels above their level with that. Why? Because so few GMs (myself included) don't account for grapple, let alone swallow whole. It can be horrifying if done right.


gamer-printer wrote:
I love Haunts, I think its absolutely the best mechanic for things somewhere between traps and monsters, especially since I love horror gaming and adventure design. And I know if you look at the Carrion Crown fora and look at any haunts threads - the vitriol is so heavy with hate of haunts. It seems not to be a thing loved by many players. I don't care, Haunts are the best thing since apple pie, seriously.

I think if done well, they can be great. In Up From Darkness and a few others in that series, they can give you a clue about mechanical traps to expect (and dread). Or they can give you a clue into the storyline.

But in most of the modules I've read, they have a section on how the butter churn haunt 'came to be' but it is nothing the players read or have any way to discover. So it is a little story perk for the GM, but provides absolutely zero to the players except for a usually weak/temporary effect trap that can't be easily bypassed or disarmed.

I've seen several examples where the PC's are expected to permanently put the haunt to rest. But there was no reasonable way to expect the PC's (or their players) to figure it out from what is in the game. The GM acted like we were complete idiots for not figuring them out.

I later found out that most of those we had trouble with were copies from some old grade B horror movie, ghost story novel, or ancient Grimm fairly tale. None of us every really got into watching, reading, or listening to those. To me it seems silly to expect that the players not only had the same childhood hobby as the author/GM, but actually read, watched, or listened to the exact same stories.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I love role play. Speaking in character and interacting directly with other players and NPCs in character. I reward XP for this in my own games and I cant really enjoy a game that omits this kind of play. Maybe I'm old fashioned but that is why I come to the table. If I wanted Diablo I'd be online.


Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:
But in most of the modules I've read, they have a section on how the butter churn haunt 'came to be' but it is nothing the players read or have any way to discover. So it is a little story perk for the GM, but provides absolutely zero to the players except for a usually weak/temporary effect trap that can't be easily bypassed or disarmed.

No matter how good given mechanic might actually be, unless a writer/designer knows how to properly write/use a it in a given adventure, there is no guarantee that it will be used properly. Not every adventure writer has the chops to do it right.

While I do love the haunt mechanic, properly getting the back story to work and integrate in the existing adventure is not always the easiest thing, so can be problematic to include by less than fully experienced authors. I love haunts, especially because I do know how to do it right.


gamer-printer wrote:
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:
But in most of the modules I've read, they have a section on how the butter churn haunt 'came to be' but it is nothing the players read or have any way to discover. So it is a little story perk for the GM, but provides absolutely zero to the players except for a usually weak/temporary effect trap that can't be easily bypassed or disarmed.

No matter how good given mechanic might actually be, unless a writer/designer knows how to properly write/use a it in a given adventure, there is no guarantee that it will be used properly. Not every adventure writer has the chops to do it right.

While I do love the haunt mechanic, properly getting the back story to work and integrate in the existing adventure is not always the easiest thing, so can be problematic to include by less than fully experienced authors. I love haunts, especially because I do know how to do it right.

I agree when done right they can be excellent (in moderation). I have seen them done well and I would say they contributed mightily in those cases.

But most of the time either the write-up or the GM (not always sure which) handled it poorly and it was just a time waster. Many of the modules where I saw them as GM, I just dropped them since they seemed to detract rather than add to the feel of the campaign.


Haunts can be tricky, there's no doubt. I've seen them used well and poorly in different adventures.


The deal with the story hints and backgrounds to things in modules and APs is that is one of those areas that are incumbent on the GM to weave into play and present to the players in ways that make sense. Modules and APs are not meant to be played as is out of the box. They can be but they come across flat for reasons.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Vamptastic wrote:

I'm gonna make a Dhampir Summoner, whose Eidolon is a big black, bouncing coffin. It 'attack's by having the top half open up to reveal shadowy blackness and two glowing red eyes, and two evil looking hands quickly grab the target and pull it into the coffin that slams shut.

Cue horrible, horrible screams.

Twoflower wants his Luggage back.


Who?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Buri wrote:
The deal with the story hints and backgrounds to things in modules and APs is that is one of those areas that are incumbent on the GM to weave into play and present to the players in ways that make sense. Modules and APs are not meant to be played as is out of the box. They can be but they come across flat for reasons.

In published modules I've helped develop or actually written/designed myself that use haunts - the haunts were closely tied to the ghost or other BBEG of the adventure or larger encounter in which it takes place. Often laying the ghost to rest in the main encounter is the same means for destroying the associated haunts. Learning the background of the haunts give you actual clues on laying the ghost to rest as well.

One haunt was CR 1/2 powered with the cantrip Ghost Sound, and its only purpose is to get the PCs to search the correct chamber to encounter the ghost, and causing no harm unto itself. Most haunts I design are not lethal, rather debilitating so as to somewhat weaken a party prior to a monster attack and to use up some resources. I never have the background story for a haunt as some minor paragraph, usually its an entire column of text, sometimes an entire page of back story.

Though Knowledge DC checks tell you how to deal with a haunt, I often include a cast of NPCs, where not any one NPC knows all the details. It takes some detective work finding all the right NPCs with all the clues you need to lay it to rest.

In one especially haunted product I did write and design - Haiku of Horror: Autumn Moon Bath House, not only is there a unique ghost (in 5 CRs for all levels of play) and 4 associated haunts, but there's also an associated curse called the Ju-on or 'grudge' curse. When first encountering the ghost, the party gets exposed to the curse, those who fail to save against it are now haunted by the ghost itself. Meaning the ghost is no longer anchored to the bath house where she died, she is anchored to the cursed characters. If not laid to rest, no matter where the party goes, when she rejuvenates, she appears where ever the party is. This was designed especially for those players that fight a ghost or haunt and not lay it to rest, but just continue on in their adventure... (its also a nod to the movie, The Grudge)

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
gamer-printer wrote:
Buri wrote:
The deal with the story hints and backgrounds to things in modules and APs is that is one of those areas that are incumbent on the GM to weave into play and present to the players in ways that make sense. Modules and APs are not meant to be played as is out of the box. They can be but they come across flat for reasons.

In published modules I've helped develop or actually written/designed myself that use haunts - the haunts were closely tied to the ghost or other BBEG of the adventure or larger encounter in which it takes place. Often laying the ghost to rest in the main encounter is the same means for destroying the associated haunts. Learning the background of the haunts give you actual clues on laying the ghost to rest as well.

***

This is how I like to see Haunts used as well, where they're not just a weird and annoying hazard, they're also integrated directly into the story and serve as vital clues that help propel the story forward.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vamptastic wrote:
Who?

Twoflower (with the Luggage entry right below)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I need to read those. I read one book about a guy in a postal office, it was pretty good.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vamptastic wrote:
I need to read those. I read one book about a guy in a postal office, it was pretty good.

I think "Going Postal" and "Wee Free Men" are the 2 best books in the series. But all of them are pretty durn good.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The Kingdom Building rules and all the little knick knack rolls you do for it.

My best bud and I were having a good time just doing bloody logistics for a fantasy city.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
gamer-printer wrote:
... but there's also an associated curse called the Ju-on or 'grudge' curse. When first encountering the ghost, the party gets exposed to the curse, those who fail to save against it are now haunted by the ghost itself. Meaning the ghost is no longer anchored to the bath house where she died, she is anchored to the cursed characters. If not laid to rest, no matter where the party goes, when she rejuvenates, she appears where ever the party is. This was designed especially for those players that fight a ghost or haunt and not lay it to rest, but just continue on in their adventure...

I'm sorry, but that whole concept is being stolen right here and now! I just have to figure out a way to work it into my campaign in the near future.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

You know the worst part is if it becomes part of the morning routine. Wake up, brush teeth smite undead horror, eat breakfast.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
David Neilson wrote:
You know the worst part is if it becomes part of the morning routine. Wake up, brush teeth smite undead horror, eat breakfast.

If the ghost remains static in its powers, and if the party never lays her to rest, she might indeed become part of the daily routine, but the ghost in question (in that linked product) is a very unique ghost with her own list of powers she acquires based on her CR.

She is the Yurei no kami or the long black hair ghost. Her hair is semi-corporeal and can make attacks with it: grapple, strangle, trip, pull while the rest of her is incorporeal. Also because she drowned in her murder, she has a Drowning Touch ability (touch attack) fill your lungs with water, and other cool unique powers. She comes pre-stated at CR 6, 10, 14, 18 and 22. Yurei no kami is also an included template CR+3.

So if you let her power-up with her continued existence in your player's daily routines, she might eventually kill them and return to her bath house... waiting for someone to lay her to rest.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like play unoptimized characters in a party of equally unoptimized characters. Half the fun is actually being a little afraid of the roving band of orcs, and running away as your friends are being chopped to bits.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.

After reading another thread:

All those varied races.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Seth Parsons wrote:
And lastly, Cayden Cailean: Seriously, how are there not more worshipers of this guy?! He literally drank so much he ascended. Okay, maybe not, but maybe! And he may have done it to get with a goddess! Maybe! Point is, I love this deity and he is easily my favorite one out of any d20 ruleset/campaign setting.

Are you saying that Cayden Cailean is not everyone's favourite god?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Seth Parsons wrote:
And lastly, Cayden Cailean: Seriously, how are there not more worshipers of this guy?! He literally drank so much he ascended. Okay, maybe not, but maybe! And he may have done it to get with a goddess! Maybe! Point is, I love this deity and he is easily my favorite one out of any d20 ruleset/campaign setting.
Are you saying that Cayden Cailean is not everyone's favourite god?

He is comical, but he is not my favorite god. That is Sarenrae. Closely followed by th empyreal lord Zohls.

Liberty's Edge

Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Seth Parsons wrote:
And lastly, Cayden Cailean: Seriously, how are there not more worshipers of this guy?! He literally drank so much he ascended. Okay, maybe not, but maybe! And he may have done it to get with a goddess! Maybe! Point is, I love this deity and he is easily my favorite one out of any d20 ruleset/campaign setting.
Are you saying that Cayden Cailean is not everyone's favourite god?

He isn't. Sadly.

He's popular with my group (myself included), though. And I don't even drink.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
williamoak wrote:
Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Seth Parsons wrote:
And lastly, Cayden Cailean: Seriously, how are there not more worshipers of this guy?! He literally drank so much he ascended. Okay, maybe not, but maybe! And he may have done it to get with a goddess! Maybe! Point is, I love this deity and he is easily my favorite one out of any d20 ruleset/campaign setting.
Are you saying that Cayden Cailean is not everyone's favourite god?
He is comical, but he is not my favorite god. That is Sarenrae. Closely followed by th empyreal lord Zohls.

Sarenrae is my favorite Pathfinder god as well. I just really like the premise behind her. Although, trying to stick to her Redemption theme gets really difficult when everyone I play with seems to go rushing into every encounter with murder and killing as their go-to method. I try to do nonlethal damage, but trying to convince the other members to do the same is like smashing my head against a steel beam. Though I think the steel beam would give way first.


williamoak wrote:
Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Seth Parsons wrote:
And lastly, Cayden Cailean: Seriously, how are there not more worshipers of this guy?! He literally drank so much he ascended. Okay, maybe not, but maybe! And he may have done it to get with a goddess! Maybe! Point is, I love this deity and he is easily my favorite one out of any d20 ruleset/campaign setting.
Are you saying that Cayden Cailean is not everyone's favourite god?
He is comical, but he is not my favorite god. That is Sarenrae. Closely followed by th empyreal lord Zohls.

Sarenrae's up there for me, alongside Shelyn, and on the other side, I like some of Asmodeus, but he's a bit too over the top devil straight out of the book (I tend to play him up as a bit of a dark paragon, sort of like a stern paternalistic figure who personifies the concepts of order, hierarchy, having the stronger lord over the weak, and so on), and his Domains seem like they were designed on an earlier developed version of the god.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I play an optimized character, whether or not the group is optimized. It's not my goal to overshadow the party, but rather to ensure its safety and well being. I always try to have extra contingencies (general contingencies, not contingency) in place, cards up my sleeve to pull us out of danger, whether or not a GM is prone to considering the build 'balanced.'


Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Seth Parsons wrote:
And lastly, Cayden Cailean: Seriously, how are there not more worshipers of this guy?! He literally drank so much he ascended. Okay, maybe not, but maybe! And he may have done it to get with a goddess! Maybe! Point is, I love this deity and he is easily my favorite one out of any d20 ruleset/campaign setting.
Are you saying that Cayden Cailean is not everyone's favourite god?

Asmodeus4lyfe! We sold our souls for Bard music, yeaaah!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tholomyes wrote:
williamoak wrote:
Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Seth Parsons wrote:
And lastly, Cayden Cailean: Seriously, how are there not more worshipers of this guy?! He literally drank so much he ascended. Okay, maybe not, but maybe! And he may have done it to get with a goddess! Maybe! Point is, I love this deity and he is easily my favorite one out of any d20 ruleset/campaign setting.
Are you saying that Cayden Cailean is not everyone's favourite god?
He is comical, but he is not my favorite god. That is Sarenrae. Closely followed by th empyreal lord Zohls.
Sarenrae's up there for me, alongside Shelyn, and on the other side, I like some of Asmodeus, but he's a bit too over the top devil straight out of the book (I tend to play him up as a bit of a dark paragon, sort of like a stern paternalistic figure who personifies the concepts of order, hierarchy, having the stronger lord over the weak, and so on), and his Domains seem like they were designed on an earlier developed version of the god.

I like abadar.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I dig Erastil down to the "Traditional" values he espouses. Makes for a very real medieval god.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really like fighters, rogues, monks, simple weapons, elite array, kilted leather coat armor with spikes (they don't have to be useful, just there) and basic races. I like the underdog. I really like taking what others see as sub-optimal and seeing what I can do with it. Elite array just makes creating characters so much faster for me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another one: the Druid spell list. Sure, it's weaker than the Clerics' and Wizards' lists, but there are a lot of really cool spells that only a druid gets (at least easily), and it can do some solid battlefield control, while still being able to do some support and (lower level) utility stuff. It even can function as a halfway decent healer, once Wands of CLW are around.

It's a shame the druid doesn't get the sort of love the wizard and Cleric get, in terms of having the Oracle and Sorc parallels, as well as Bard/Inquisitor Parallels and Magus/Warpriest parallels.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I love the different non-standard player races. I love variety and hope that in the next 2 years we will have like a dozen more.

Mikaze, what thread are you talking about? Link?


Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Seth Parsons wrote:
And lastly, Cayden Cailean: Seriously, how are there not more worshipers of this guy?! He literally drank so much he ascended. Okay, maybe not, but maybe! And he may have done it to get with a goddess! Maybe! Point is, I love this deity and he is easily my favorite one out of any d20 ruleset/campaign setting.
Are you saying that Cayden Cailean is not everyone's favourite god?

He for sure isn't mine. But he's not the only PF god I don't care much about.


Dragon78 wrote:

I love the different non-standard player races. I love variety and hope that in the next 2 years we will have like a dozen more.

Mikaze, what thread are you talking about? Link?

I believe this is the one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:

I love the different non-standard player races. I love variety and hope that in the next 2 years we will have like a dozen more.

Mikaze, what thread are you talking about? Link?

I believe this is the one.

I believe you are correct, and I would recommend people to stay away from there. The OP admitted after 500 replies have been made that he created it as a troll thread. So best to steer clear.

Manager - The Kessel Run

I love details, rules and encumbrance.

I specifically design characters to carry everything they need, I use every official pathfinder rule, to milk every last ounce of usefulness out of my character.

My DM hates it, because the rest of the players barely look at the rules, so they often feel underpowered or useless when my character can easily deal with any situation that arises.


-Markus- wrote:

I love details, rules and encumbrance.

I specifically design characters to carry everything they need, I use every official pathfinder rule, to milk every last ounce of usefulness out of my character.

My DM hates it, because the rest of the players barely look at the rules, so they often feel underpowered or useless when my character can easily deal with any situation that arises.

No offense, as you're not doing anything wrong. You're using the rules as they exist to improve your options in game, you're doing basic optimization. However, if I were your GM with the other players like you describe, I'd hate it too - and it currently is my situation - too a lesser degree.

The problems that arise, is that your success forces me the GM to make encounters a little harder, so they can be a challenge to you, but now that same threat is too much for the rest of the party. It isn't fair, and the point of the game for everyone to have fun. If only you're having fun, and the rest of the party is not, that's a problem.

If tables could be ideal, it would be great to have all players being optimizers, or no players being optimizers. Mixed groups are problematic.

Again, I'm not saying you're doing anything wrong, but your style of play is not the only style, and you'll have to adapt somehow, perhaps make yourself less optimized (not suboptimal), or it could kill a table. I've seen it happen.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Haters going to hate.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I like fighters.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

The universe. So many cool worlds with really neat backstories--its like having a campaign setting within a campaign setting. I feel like the planes are tried and traditional, but the planets--more please!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The only thing I love as much as fighters and rogues is fighter/rogues. : )


3 people marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:
The only thing I love as much as fighters and rogues is fighter/rogues. : )

Hey if you gestalt them it can function almost like a real class :p


1 person marked this as a favorite.
chaoseffect wrote:
blahpers wrote:
The only thing I love as much as fighters and rogues is fighter/rogues. : )
Hey if you gestalt them it can function almost like a real class :p

Ouch! Well, I did set that one up for you, didn't I?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GreatKhanArtist wrote:
The universe. So many cool worlds with really neat backstories--its like having a campaign setting within a campaign setting.

VERCES!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Castrovel and Akiton!

101 to 150 of 208 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Things You Love, That Others Might Not? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.