>>Ask *Michael Sayre* ALL your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

101 to 116 of 116 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
the xiao wrote:

In my opinion, Saint Seiya is better. I really like Toriyama's humor (when Goku shows his "dragon balls" to Bulma is comedy gold), but from Freezer on the fights are really boring. The Freezer fight lasted for months in Japan! Anyway, normally your first animes are your favorite animes, until something comes and shakes your world (Perfect Blue, Samurai Champloo, Black Lagoon, Death Note, Berserk, Gurren Lagan).

Shonen anime fights tend to repeat too many animations. The best animated fights I have seen are from Kazemakase Tsukikage Ran, Chevalier D'Eon, and Seirei no Moribito. If I were to recommend one obscure anime, it would be that one, Moribito ROCKS!

I've really been enjoying the fights in Demon Slayer, and My Hero Academia has had a couple spectacular fight scenes. Shura No Toki is one of my favorite anime, and I enjoyed Tiger Mask W. I really dig it when companies take the time to put a lot of detail into their fights and focus on keeping things moving instead of recycling animations to pad out an hour.

Tangential, I have all these action figures on my desk and I keep saying that at some point I'm going to do a tournament where people can vote on who would win in various matchups. Obviously, I stat up the tournament winner for use in one of our systems. I kind of want to say PF2, but I've got a lineup that includes characters like Adam Jensen from Deus Ex, All Might from My Hero, and Deacon St. John from Days Gone, so maybe I should leave that open until there's a winner, or pick the system I'd use for each character. I really need to get that going.


Tiger and Bunny?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

I'm required by law to ask:

- thoughts on Dragon Ball
Michael Sayre wrote:
I enjoyed it. There are a few ways in which it hasn't aged well.

I tend to agree with this. In some ways, I think the over-all conceit(s) has/have aged better, with specific elements that have aged more poorly. But that could just be nostalgia talking.

Quote:
- thoughts on Dragon Ball Z
Michael Sayre wrote:
It has a lot of great stories and cool fights, and a lot of painful filler. It's net good, but the way it handles power escalation throws away a lot of potentially interesting characters by making them irrelevant. Vegeta is my favorite character.

The filler really, really is painful. I always thought that exploring the characters after they become (effectively) irrelevant would make for good or fascinating stories, but that's definitely outside of the DBZ genre.

I loved the arcs, but the recontextualization of everyone as "just aliens" and the slow loss of various weird and magical creatures never really made sense - Kami (the position), Korin, Mr. Popo, dragon balls, and other magical elements never stopped existing, and it was always a little weird that it tried to step toward sci-fi without going there. (Though DBZ was always fantasy sci-fi, what with capsule tech, the dragon radar, and a whole host of other sci-like elements.)

That said, I am not against the incorporation of alien themes or other things, it's just... some things were weird.

Also the fact that Raditz never mattered, was rarely ever addressed (I think, like, twice in the saga after his death), and never redeemed bothers me. To some extent that's true in general - it feels like a missed opportunity to revitalize the Saiyan peoples.

Quote:
- thoughts on Dragon Ball Z Abridged
Michael Sayre wrote:
Kai or Team 4-Star? Kai was a desperately needed update that brought the series to a new generation with a lot of the unnecessary filler trimmed out. The parody seems funny, but I haven't watched enough to have an opinion.

I meant 4-star, but good to know about Kai! I've not had the opportunity to actually watch Kai, so I'll be interested in doing so at some point!

I will say that TFS has quite a hefty amount of swearing, so if that sort of thing bothers you, please beware (it can bother me, but the over-all product was well-made enough that I enjoyed it anyway).

Michael Sayre wrote:
Bonus Round: I really dislike GT and enjoy Super. Probably because I like Vegeta. GT didn't really do him justice but Super has treated him pretty well.

I never saw anything past Z, myself: no time or opportunity. I've always intended to watch the rest of it - even with GT's broadly panned everything, I'd at least like to see it - but I don't know when that will ever happen.

You know, because you like Vegeta, I honestly don't know if you'll love how DBZ:A treats him or hate how it treats him.

One of the simultaneously best and worst lines in the DBZA series concerning Vegeta:

"You know, Prince, a little advice for next time: you should know your place, like everybody else, and wAiT fOr gOkU."

It's simultaneously extremely painful and extremely well-deployed to get exactly the reaction wanted. Also, Vegeta is awesome.

To some extent, everyone "suffers" in DBZ:A from "parody decay" - and in Vegeta's case, it's all about his arrogance/pride. People who know him proceed to use that against him. Warning: Yamcha gets the absolute short end of the stick. Absolute. Short end. And I mean it gets baaaaaaaaaaad. But it's also good, in some ways, too.

Tacticslion wrote:
Tiger and Bunny?

This was very vague. What I meant was, "Have you seen Tiger & Bunny, and if so what did you think of it?"

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Tiger and Bunny?

Has been perpetually stuck in my "I should probably check that out at some point" folder.

I'm not sure what the general consensus on Super is, but I actually really like it once it starts warming up. The filler (if there is filler, I'm not as up on the manga, but at least the midpoint "this doesn't actually change anything in the setting" arcs) is pretty good, and while Goku still has to be "The Guy", it treats the others a lot better. Master Roshi, Tien, and to a lesser extent Krillin actually matter in the Tournament of Power, and all of the whacky magic of Dragon Ball gets an at least partial return to relevance.

It also does some good development between Goku and Vegeta and (keeping spoilers to a minimum) ends is such way that it's actually not clear whether or not Goku is stronger than Vegeta. The balance and rivalry between Goku and Vegeta is much more engaging and interesting overall in Super, compared to the kind of one-note dynamic they had in Z.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey Michael, I didn't know there was a Wanderer lost constelation in Co7S. Speaking of which, why the change to Expanded Cosmology? To avoid too much stacking?

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
the xiao wrote:
Hey Michael, I didn't know there was a Wanderer lost constelation in Co7S. Speaking of which, why the change to Expanded Cosmology? To avoid too much stacking?

Yeah, Expanded Cosmology was both overwriting Noble Astrologist in a way it wasn't supposed to and then creating some elemental imbalances that affected other class features, so it was updated to do what it was supposed to be doing originally, which was let you create a mix and match custom cosmology. The AR v1 version was supposed to be updated to match, though I'm not sure if that's happened yet.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Haven't seen anything in my Drivethrough downloads.

Speaking of ExpCos, I was making a Mayan cosmology with 20 signs and more elements, but I suppose it wouldn't be compatible with others. I want death signs with negative energy! Which got me thinking that, in a way similar to the Wanderer, could be done. Maybe with a feat tax.

I feel like the culprit a bit since my Vishkanya snake lancer was going to get extra water signs via ExpCos LOL, but maybe I will change a fire constelation for the wanderer to get 4 water.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
the xiao wrote:

Haven't seen anything in my Drivethrough downloads.

Speaking of ExpCos, I was making a Mayan cosmology with 20 signs and more elements, but I suppose it wouldn't be compatible with others. I want death signs with negative energy! Which got me thinking that, in a way similar to the Wanderer, could be done. Maybe with a feat tax.

I feel like the culprit a bit since my Vishkanya snake lancer was going to get extra water signs via ExpCos LOL, but maybe I will change a fire constelation for the wanderer to get 4 water.

You could totally do expanded element types. Christen and I were just talking about a South American themed cosmology (and not just because I'm always looking for opportunities for more luchador mechanics, lol)!

Positive/negative element constellations could be really cool and a great way to bring in yet another type of constellation/cosmology. We've been trying to make every cosmology really distinct from the others as we've been going along; the asymmetrical, offense oriented Material cosmology, the perfectly symmetrical Concordia cosmology, and the powerful but kind of capricious Quiet Lands cosmology. A cosmology that uses nonstandard elements would be extremely cool, though it would require a rules expansion covering how to handle the new energy types; probably don't want unlimited healing by whacking allies with a positive energy enhanced sap. Or at least, it's not a great idea balance-wise :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Sayre wrote:


You could totally do expanded element types. Christen and I were just talking about a South American themed cosmology (and not just because I'm always looking for opportunities for more luchador mechanics, lol)!

Positive/negative element constellations could be really cool and a great way to bring in yet another type of constellation/cosmology. We've been trying to make every cosmology really distinct from the others as we've been going along; the asymmetrical, offense oriented Material cosmology, the perfectly symmetrical Concordia cosmology, and the powerful but kind of capricious Quiet Lands cosmology. A cosmology that uses nonstandard elements would be extremely cool, though it would require a rules expansion covering how to handle the new energy types; probably don't want unlimited healing by whacking allies with a positive energy enhanced sap. Or at least, it's not a great idea balance-wise :P

Is not that difficult. IIRC, the example is already in the rules. Clerics can use positive energy to heal allies or harm undead, but normally not both. So, a positive energy weapon would harm undead but not heal living characters. Same with negative energy. Or it could be like Chill Touch, where it works differently against undead.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
the xiao wrote:
Michael Sayre wrote:


You could totally do expanded element types. Christen and I were just talking about a South American themed cosmology (and not just because I'm always looking for opportunities for more luchador mechanics, lol)!

Positive/negative element constellations could be really cool and a great way to bring in yet another type of constellation/cosmology. We've been trying to make every cosmology really distinct from the others as we've been going along; the asymmetrical, offense oriented Material cosmology, the perfectly symmetrical Concordia cosmology, and the powerful but kind of capricious Quiet Lands cosmology. A cosmology that uses nonstandard elements would be extremely cool, though it would require a rules expansion covering how to handle the new energy types; probably don't want unlimited healing by whacking allies with a positive energy enhanced sap. Or at least, it's not a great idea balance-wise :P

Is not that difficult. IIRC, the example is already in the rules. Clerics can use positive energy to heal allies or harm undead, but normally not both. So, a positive energy weapon would harm undead but not heal living characters. Same with negative energy. Or it could be like Chill Touch, where it works differently against undead.

Oh yeah, for sure, just noting that the verbiage needs to be added since the rules so far only cover the 4 "primary" elements. Personally I'd rather it have one effect on living creatures and one effect on undead; you can usually use close to the same amount of word count to say "attacking a living creature with this weapon grants the target a new saving throw against a disease or poison effect currently affecting it" as it does to say "attacks enhanced with positive energy using the celestial lord class feature do not grant healing to living targets", or whatever.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sidebars are your friends. You could add a sidebar explaining that a touch doesn't suffice and you can attack allies for the positive effect, although you need to attack for non lethal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

* could instead of need. Damned be the time for editing LOL

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
the xiao wrote:
* could instead of need. Damned be the time for editing LOL

Lol, no worries. The editing windows have caught me a time or two as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Sayre wrote:

Yo! I'm Michael Sayre, Paizo developer and designer of various 3pp Pathfinder products like Akashic Mysteries by Dreamscarred Press, Classes of the Lost Spheres: The Zodiac by Lost Spheres Publishing, The Genius Guide to Bravery Feats by Rogue Genius Games, Ultimate Battle Lord by Amora Games, Spheres of Might by Drop Dead Studios, and a bunch of other stuff.

Do you have any questions about any of the projects I've worked on? Curious about what I do has a developer at Paizo or how I ended up here? Want recommendations on games I'm currently playing? Feel free to ask and I'm happy to answer!

Hello, I actually had a few questions, regarding Akashic Mysteries, a creation of yours that i absolutely adore. Here goes:

1. The Daevic class description state in the Passion feature that "Whenever a daevic invests essence into her passion the essence counts as being invested in all of the daevic’s passion veils (for example, a 9th level daevic could invest 2 points of essence into her passion and each of her 3 passion veils would count as having 2 essence invested)." As 9th level is when they would recieve their first dose of the Improved Passion Capacity class feature, this heavily implies that the Passion does not naturally benefit from the standard essence capacity increases for akashic receptacles, i.e. 1st–5th 1
6th–11th 2
12th–17th 3
18th–20th 4
If that chart were taken into account, and the Passion scaled its base with this, that would mean a 9th level Daevic could invest up to 3 points into their Passion, 2 for a veilweaving level between 6-11, and 1 from improved veil capacity. Which is the proper ruling, the charted progression, meaning up to 6 essence invested in the Passion at level 20, or the implied progression, meaning only 3 essence could be invested into the Passion at level 20? (Possibly 4 essence with Expanded Capacity, see below.)
Side Note: The above feature also states that at 9th level, a Daevic has 3 passion veils available to them, but according to the Progression Chart, they don't get their 3rd passion veil until level 10.

2. I have read on forums several suggestions that the wording "Because of the unusual nature of these veils, they cannot benefit from veil-specific feats or effects like Enhanced Capacity or akashic catalysts (though they can still be bound as normal).", which also derives from the Passion class feature, only implies that the veils themselves cannot be modified. Akashic Catalysts do not state that they can function with a Passion, so the obvious answer is no there, but are you able to take the Expanded Capacity feat targeting the Passion itself, thereby increasing the total available essence in a passion to 4 or 7, depending on the proper ruling from above?

3. Does Improved Essence Capacity, as the class feature for both Viziers and Radiants, apply to other veils and class features (such as Passion) from other classes in a multiclass/gestalt scenario, or does it only apply to the class that grants the Improved Essence Capacity class feature. The wording is different for each of those classes, so I am confused. the Vizier feature is worded:
"The vizier is particularly talented at investing essence. At 3rd, 11th, and 19th level the essence capacity of all the vizier’s essence receptacles increases by one. In addition, the DC for any of his veil abilities increases by +1 each time he gains this ability."
The wording "all of the VIZIER'S essence receptacles" seems to imply that this ability would only affect Essence receptacles belonging to the Vizier class, or an item, but wouldn't apply to veils from another class, or a Passion. However, the Radiant uses this wording instead:
"The radiant’s mastery of akasha and life energy has made her particularly talented at investing essence. At 3rd, 9th, and 15th level the maximum essence capacity of all her essence receptacles increases by 1."
This one states "her", which lends itself to the idea that it affects all essence receptacles of her character, including veils and features from other classes, such as Passions. Which is the correct interpretation? Are they class-dependent, global, or is it different for each class, hence the different wording? Is the "In addition, the DC for any of his veil abilities increases by +1 each time he gains this ability." effect also global, affecting veils from other classes?

4. If they are global, do the Improved Essence Capacity class features stack? for instance, a character that was a level 15 Radiant that took 3 levels in Vizier, would they receive all three max essence boosts from the Radiant class, in addition to the max essence boost from Vizier at level 3, for a total of +4 Maximum Essence Capacity for all of their essence receptacles? (Along with the +1 to veil save DCs?)
4b. Does Improved Essence Capacity effect items, such as a Suqur's Gift?

5. Multiclass/Gestalt Rules - I saw in a previous forum you said that, by gestalt rulings, Essence Pools don't stack, and instead accrue at the rate of the faster class. Is this the same with the Improved Essence Capacity class feature? Logically, I would expect that to accrue at the rate of the faster class as well, since they are the same class feature, but the Vizier and Radiant have different wordings AND effects (Viziers grant the bonus to save DCs of veils, the Radiant class feature of the same name does not grant this ability.)
5b. How do Veils shaped stack? Would a 20Daevic/20Vizier be able to shape 15+4 veils, or would it be 11+4. If the latter answer is correct, would a 20Vizier/20Radiant be stuck with just 11 Veils? I am assuming they do stack, as they are effectively different spell lists AND prepared spells, in the same way that a gestalted Wizard Cleric can still benefit from spell lists and Spell slots of both classes, but I would like to be certain.

That is all I can think of for now, and sorry for the ridiculous amount of text, but I have an upcoming campaign that is both gestalt and heavily influenced by Akashic Mysteries. Thank you so much for your time!

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Amandus-Morand wrote:

Hello, I actually had a few questions, regarding Akashic Mysteries, a creation of yours that i absolutely adore. Here goes:

1. The Daevic class description state in the Passion feature that "Whenever a daevic invests essence into her passion the essence counts as being invested in all of the daevic’s passion veils (for example, a 9th level daevic could invest 2 points of essence into her passion and each of her 3 passion veils would count as having 2 essence invested)." As 9th level is when they would recieve their first dose of the Improved Passion Capacity class feature, this heavily implies that the Passion does not naturally benefit from the standard essence capacity increases for akashic receptacles, i.e. 1st–5th 1
6th–11th 2
12th–17th 3
18th–20th 4
If that chart were taken into account, and the Passion scaled its base with this, that would mean a 9th level Daevic could invest up to 3 points into their Passion, 2 for a veilweaving level between 6-11, and 1 from improved veil capacity. Which is the proper ruling, the charted progression, meaning up to 6 essence invested in the Passion at level 20, or the implied progression, meaning only 3 essence could be invested into the Passion at level 20? (Possibly 4 essence with Expanded Capacity, see below.)

Daevics gain both the standard progression for capacity and apply their improved capacity to that. So by 20th level a single-classed daevic would be able to invest up to 6 points of essence in their passion. The progression in the table is correct; the text entry is an old fragment from the playtest PDFs that was incorrectly copied into the final release.

Quote:


2. I have read on forums several suggestions that the wording "Because of the unusual nature of these veils, they cannot benefit from veil-specific feats or effects like Enhanced Capacity or akashic catalysts (though they can still be bound as normal).", which also derives from the Passion class feature, only implies that the veils themselves cannot be modified. Akashic Catalysts do not state that they can function with a Passion, so the obvious answer is no there, but are you able to take the Expanded Capacity feat targeting the Passion itself, thereby increasing the total available essence in a passion to 4 or 7, depending on the proper ruling from above?

Passions can't be modified by Enhanced Capacity. That was actually a change between the playtest and final version.

Quote:


3. Does Improved Essence Capacity, as the class feature for both Viziers and Radiants, apply to other veils and class features (such as Passion) from other classes in a multiclass/gestalt scenario, or does it only apply to the class that grants the Improved Essence Capacity class feature. The wording is different for each of those classes, so I am confused. the Vizier feature is worded:
"The vizier is particularly talented at investing essence. At 3rd, 11th, and 19th level the essence capacity of all the vizier’s essence receptacles increases by one. In addition, the DC for any of his veil abilities increases by +1 each time he gains this ability."
The wording "all of the VIZIER'S essence receptacles" seems to imply that this ability would only affect Essence receptacles belonging to the Vizier class, or an item, but wouldn't apply to veils from another class, or a Passion. However, the Radiant uses this wording instead:
"The radiant’s mastery of akasha and life energy has made her particularly talented at investing essence. At 3rd, 9th, and 15th level the maximum essence capacity of all her essence receptacles increases by 1."
This one states "her", which lends itself to the idea that it affects all essence receptacles of her character, including veils and features from other classes, such as Passions. Which is the correct interpretation? Are they class-dependent, global, or is it different for each class, hence the different wording? Is the "In addition, the DC for any of his veil abilities increases by +1 each time he gains this ability." effect also global, affecting veils from other classes?

Improved essence capacity class features apply to all of the character's essence receptacles. The radian just has cleaner wording because it's about 6 years more up to date than the vizier.

Quote:
4. If they are global, do the Improved Essence Capacity class features stack? for instance, a character that was a level 15 Radiant that took 3 levels in Vizier, would they receive all three max essence boosts from the Radiant class, in addition to the max essence boost from Vizier at level 3, for a total of +4 Maximum Essence Capacity for all of their essence receptacles? (Along with the +1 to veil save DCs?)

Normally yes, but they shouldn't if you're doing a gestalt game. You'd want to treat them like other shared class features where only the best progression applies.

Quote:


4b. Does Improved Essence Capacity effect items, such as a Suqur's Gift?

Yes.

Quote:
5. Multiclass/Gestalt Rules - I saw in a previous forum you said that, by gestalt rulings, Essence Pools don't stack, and instead accrue at the rate of the faster class. Is this the same with the Improved Essence Capacity class feature? Logically, I would expect that to accrue at the rate of the faster class as well, since they are the same class feature, but the Vizier and Radiant have different wordings AND effects (Viziers grant the bonus to save DCs of veils, the Radiant class feature of the same name does not grant this ability.)

Use the best. In the case of e.g. a gestalt vizier//radiant, you'd use the vizier's progression, including the DC bumps.

Quote:


5b. How do Veils shaped stack? Would a 20Daevic/20Vizier be able to shape 15+4 veils, or would it be 11+4. If the latter answer is correct, would a 20Vizier/20Radiant be stuck with just 11 Veils? I am assuming they do stack, as they are effectively different spell lists AND prepared spells, in the same way that a gestalted Wizard Cleric can still benefit from spell lists and Spell slots of both classes, but I would like to be certain.

You'd have 11+4 as a daevic//vizier or 11 as a radiant//vizier. There's a few reasons for that, including the fact that there's a hard cap on the number of chakra a character can shape veils in and how it affects power curve across levels. For example, a cleric//wizard 2 would have the spells of a cleric 2 and wizard 2, but would still be limited to one (maybe one plus a swift action) spells per round. A radiant//vizier 2, if you added the veils shaped together, would be able to have 5 veils shaped simultaneously, benefiting from all of them and able to max any of them out with essence as necessary. That would mean that while the cleric//wizard got more options per day and better saves but pretty similar round to round power, the veilweaver would have about doubled their number of constant buffs in addition to standard gestalt improvements. So veils shaped needs to fall under the "take the best progression" category for usability and balance.

Note that this also applies to binds; you wouldn't get double binds since being able to bind to a chakra is a binary state outside of twin veil options (you either can bind to a slot or you can't, you don't gain binds for that slot). That still works out really well for most gestalt veilweavers though; a radiant//vizier would gain body binds 2 levels earlier than a standard vizier with the vizier's DC bumps applied and the ability to bind any Body veil from either list.

Quote:
That is all I can think of for now, and sorry for the ridiculous amount of text, but I have an upcoming campaign that is both gestalt and heavily influenced by Akashic Mysteries. Thank you so much for your time!

Hope that helps!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey, thank you so much Michael for the quick and excellent reply. I just have two more questions for you, after conferring with my GM.

1. To clarify, does Improved Essence Capacity affect Passions, or does the line "Because of the unusual nature of these veils, they cannot benefit from veil-specific feats or effects like Enhanced Capacity or akashic catalysts (though they can still be bound as normal)." include those veils benefiting indirectly via the passion, and therefore the Improved Essence Capacity feature would NOT affect Passions?

2. Does Veilshifting and Chakra Rebirth affect all veils the character possesses from all classes, or can it only affect veils granted by the class that grants those class features, such as the Vizier. I am asuming it is global, otherwise the Veilshifter class doesn't make as much sense, but I wanted to be sure.

Thank you again for your time, and for all the work that you do. Akashic magic is a great system that is actually easier for new players to learn than many traditional casters in the base class. It is a welcome breath of fresh air.

101 to 116 of 116 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *Michael Sayre* ALL your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.