View Profile: BoxCrayonTales - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
No Recent Activity
About BoxCrayonTales

Basic Information

Age
27
About BoxCrayonTales
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
251
Posts Per Day
0.10
Last Post
A more mature setting? Sunday, 15th March, 2015 06:01 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
72
General Information
Last Activity
Monday, 3rd December, 2018 07:39 PM
Join Date
Sunday, 4th December, 2011
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
No results to show...

Friday, 7th March, 2014

  • 08:40 PM - Mordikenn mentioned BoxCrayonTales in post [GM Tool] Monster Generator - Free Program to Create New Monsters
    Hello everyone~ Just wanted to let a new crowd of people see the program. It's still a great free way to save time making enemies! I clicked random a few times and then fiddled with what it gave me to make the monster below. @Raneth: I have no plans to overhaul this program to perform CR calculations backwards. Unfortunately I've moved on to other projects with the majority of time, including making a few games. However, you can add racial bonuses to skills to monsters under the 'special qualities' menu already ( just click on the bonus to skills options, any of those display as a racial bonus). The majority of those monster rules are already in the program under the powers menu, and you can specify your own custom powers to add to the program. There are details regarding how to do that in the readme, you just go and add things to 'custom_powers.txt' in the data files. If you were thinking about learning to program in order to make that program yourself, be my guest... Just bear in mind that...

Wednesday, 5th March, 2014

  • 01:39 AM - Tovec mentioned BoxCrayonTales in post What qualifies a creature as an extraplanar outsider, an extraplanar animal/humanoid/etc or an extraplanar native outsider?
    Raneth I think you have some misconceptions. I'll clear up what I can. But over all Keldin is right. Especially in that you would have to ask the original authors why an outsider is an outsider as opposed to a magical beast. In the case of the tenebrous worm, according to this: http://paizo.com/PRD/additionalMonsters/tenebrousWorm.html It is typed: N Medium outsider (extraplanar) It is therefore NOT a native outsider. So let me start with terms. Specifically the three you brought up. A. extraplanar outsiders, B. extraplanar creatures of any other type, C. native outsiders that are native to an outer plane or similar. I'm starting with C. (Native Outsiders). By this I assume you mean creatures with the type of Outsider (native), as it is the only time I can remember 'native' being tied in relation to the creature type. You'll note that regardless of its origin, outsiders do not universally gain the "native" subtype just for being on a different plane. Native outsiders, as defined by that same wi...

Thursday, 20th February, 2014

  • 02:57 AM - Quickleaf mentioned BoxCrayonTales in post Skill Groups and Level-Based Skills
    Raneth What you propose looks a lot like 4e's skill system. Which is little surprise since Mike Mearls was the mind behind Iron Heroes and 4e. For example, Pathfinder's physical skills Climb, Jump, Swim, and Ride can be readily grouped as Athletics. And that's precisely what 4e does (well, forgetting the Ride skill). I think you'd need to spend some time determining what constitutes a trained skill use, since all characters can make all skill checks now. For example, when my fighter gets a lucky roll on Knowledge: engineering check, are there limits on what he can do/knows compared to a character trained in Knowledge: engineering? Do you plan to adjudicate that ad hoc, or prepare in advance?

Monday, 26th August, 2013

  • 10:57 AM - Tovec mentioned BoxCrayonTales in post Consolidating monster types further
    In the system I've been working (for the past year and a half or so) has very similar consolidations. Part of the issue I'm still grappling with is the names of certain types (like your "aberrants") but I'll gladly share my thoughts on this subject. This kind of came and went a little while ago, discussing 5e's types/subtypes, with (I think it was) KM making very similar suggestions - though a more consolidated list. Anyway. Oozes not being a type. I completely agree here. But I think you are doing a disservice putting them in the Aberration category. Why isn't ooze simply a subtype that is applied to creatures without discernible anatomies. Water elementals are basically oozes. Air and fire elementals, debatable so. Earth probably not (I make them out to be either outsiders or constructs, depending on source). Undead, also agreed, not a type; but a subtype fits them well. Again, as a subtype there is no reason to simply lump them in with "animated" but I do agree in principle. I wou...

No results to display...
Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

Sunday, 15th March, 2015

  • 04:04 PM - Umbran quoted BoxCrayonTales in post A more mature setting?
    Perhaps you should find a less antagonistic way to sublimate your inner racist? I said very clearly just a bit up the thread that we expected folks to show respect for one another. But, we still get comments like this. We can discuss mature themes when we are willing to discuss it like mature adults, and not make it personal. Thread closed.

Sunday, 8th March, 2015

  • 06:53 PM - Umbran quoted BoxCrayonTales in post A more mature setting?
    I find a world where people can be literally born gay, evil or both to be offensive because it implicitly equates alignment with sexual orientation. I have no problem with diversity itself. When the writers start projecting their own moral relativism into a game with objective morality without thinking through the logical implications, then I have a problem. EN World has a rule against discussion of real-world religion and politics. We allow that to bend slightly to discuss things like sexism in the gaming community. But, we watch it carefully. For everyone, please note that these can be delicate topics - we suggest you try to assume the best of your fellow posters, and of the folks who create products. We expect you all to show respect for each other - and if they discussion gets to the point where you can't, we strongly advise you to leave the discussion.

Friday, 6th March, 2015

  • 06:24 PM - TreChriron quoted BoxCrayonTales in post A more mature setting?
    ... Thoughts? Instead of dragging PF/Paizo through the mud on your personal social mission (which seems more like a protest...) why not talk about what You WANT in a setting? The OGL is free as is the PF license IIRC. You could even create and publish your own setting that meets your criteria. Instead of griping (to no effect) you could lead by example. If people dig your passion and approach, you could find a nice following of customers who appreciate the same things you do.
  • 04:52 PM - Reynard quoted BoxCrayonTales in post A more mature setting?
    Noted. My point about the inherent ridiculousness of the Golarion setting still stands. I find it really difficult to empathize with the alignment system when its definitions of good and evil are so often arbitrary and contradictory. My solution to that problem is to decide the alignment system is a real thing in the context of the milieu, a set of actual forces as real as gravity, magic and the elements. It doesn't have to make sense because it isn't a description of personality traits. Rather, it represents a metaphysical tie between a mind and a fundamental force of creation. The "Free peoples" type races are unique in that they have the capacity to choose which force to Align with (and may even do so subconsciously). Which races constitute so-named Free Peoples varies based on the campaign. I have done it where it is anything intelligent, where it is only humans, and everything in between.
  • 03:28 PM - Reynard quoted BoxCrayonTales in post A more mature setting?
    A pastiche is a parody of an entire genre. Golarion is basically Discworld except that it takes itself seriously with no hint of self-awareness or satire. A pastiche is not a parody. Is there any compelling reason the PCs need to kill everything they come across? Couldn't they earn experience from non-lethal solutions where applicable? Of course not. It was your assertion that PCs were automatically killing and looting everything they encountered, not mine.
  • 02:55 PM - Reynard quoted BoxCrayonTales in post A more mature setting?
    Golarion is unique by virtue of being an unintentional pastiche of the fantasy genre. It is neither unique in that regard, nor is that unintentional. It seems odd for you suggest otherwise. Golarion is heavily influence by the World of Greyhawk, a pastiche of fantasy subgenres, which itself was influenced by Howard's Hyborean Age, also a pastiche of mythical and historical tropes. As to your general dislike of having "evil types" I suppose that is just a matter of taste. It doesn't matter if its is Orcs or Sothrons or bandits -- D&D is solidly in the action adventure genre and that generally requires cannon fodder. So pick fodder you don't mind murdering by the score. Whatever you deem as inoffensive and acceptable for indiscriminate destruction, someone somewhere is going to find offense with it.
  • 01:51 PM - pickin_grinnin quoted BoxCrayonTales in post A more mature setting?
    PF is great and all, but I don't find the official setting particularly original or thought-provoking. To be honest, high fantasy in general - in books, movies, or rpgs - is rarely very original or thought-provoking. You generally have to stray into other subgenres of fantasy to get that. Most high fantasy is derived from Tolkien, when you get down to it.
  • 01:01 AM - Reynard quoted BoxCrayonTales in post A more mature setting?
    Lord of the Rings didn't portray orcs as rapacious rapists. No, just vicious cannibals. In fact, they demonstrated positive qualities like honor, loyalty, and friendship. Half-orcs were produced in breeding programs with willing participants over the course of decades. Both of these assertions are going to need textual evidence to back them up. Sauron wasn't evil because he was a rapist, he was evil because he was fascist. No, he was evil because he was Capital E Evil, a supernatural entity composed of malice. He was fascist because he was the kind of Evil that wanted to control creation. [B]The fact that the game is founded on ethnic cleansing This is not a fact, it is a disingenuous interpretation. Absolute morality in PF is not code that the Paizo folks are down with genocide. In the genre that Golarion exists in, some creatures are made evil and the reason it is acceptable to destroy them is that if you don't, they will burn down your village and literally devour your ch...

Sunday, 1st March, 2015

  • 06:51 AM - Celebrim quoted BoxCrayonTales in post The lack of overarching aesthetics in certain major planar races
    What do you suggest for overarching motifs? I don't. The existing outer planar creatures generally have too strong of a motif as it is. Having a motif in physical appearance makes complete sense for animals linked together by shared heritage and physical form. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever for things that are incarnate ideas. If you'd note the link my signature, one of the things I was try to do was as much as possible pull away from the assumption that Slaad have a motif while still maintaining some ties to the canonical description of these creatures. But the fact is, that a motif of common form is the last thing I'd except to find in reified platonic idealism, and if I was designing the slaad from first principles they'd be even more diverse than I present. Really, the 1e Hordeling remains the best fiendish creature entry ever. The chaotic incarnates shouldn't even have races per se, much less motifs. There shouldn't be such a thing as say a Bralani. By definition, chaotic in...
  • 06:05 AM - Shemeska quoted BoxCrayonTales in post The lack of overarching aesthetics in certain major planar races
    Archons, Azatas, Daemons, Demons, and Devils do not have that sort of overarching aesthetic. If it wasn't for their statistics, you wouldn't be able to tell Archons and Azatas apart from other celestials: Houd archons look like Agathions, Trumpet archons look like Devas, Lillends look like a cross between an agathion and a deva, and the other Archons and Azatas are mostly wingless celestials that don't look like they fit in any category. Daemons, Demons and Devils are pretty much interchangeable in appearance. You'll notice to an extent that those outsider races that were created for Pathfinder because their prior versions from D&D were closed content (and thus had to be replaced with new races created from the ground up) exhibit more cohesion around a central concept versus those outsider races that incorporate legacy D&D material via the OGL. Paizo's creatives (and its freelancers like myself) went out of their way to make the new races cohesive. As for some that you don't think have an overa...

Saturday, 28th February, 2015

  • 02:21 AM - Shemeska quoted BoxCrayonTales in post Making the gods of evil and the fiend lords the same thing?
    The gods of evil have always bothered me. The gods of good and neutrality are served by their angels and so on, but the gods of evil must bargain with fiends and have no dedicated workforce. This leads to the strange situation of demon lords having bigger armies than actual evil gods. Why shouldn't Angels have evil counterparts that serve the gods of evil like in 4e? Better yet, why not cut out the middleman and make the fiend lords and the gods of evil one and the same? I liked the Scarred Lands pantheon: one gods to represent each of the nine alignments and numerous demigods for everything else. In the case of the three gods of evil, the fiendish races were their de facto servants. That's what I'm looking for. In fact, why not equate the gods of evil/fiend lords with the titans? The gods claim they created the titans and punished them for rebellion, but perhaps the opposite is true: In the beginning the titans of chaos and evil and their elemental, protean, and qlippoth children held sway....

Wednesday, 10th December, 2014

  • 08:37 AM - Saelorn quoted BoxCrayonTales in post Could Pathfinder benefit from emulating 5th edition's creature type scheme?
    There's no reason to remained enslaved to the sacred cows of 3e. Do creature types really need to determine HD/BAB/saves/skills? Do we really need a dragon type separate from magical beast? Do we really need a monstrous humanoid type separate from humanoid?I dunno, I find those things are pretty useful. Racial advancement makes more sense than giving everything class levels. And separating dragons from magical beasts makes a lot of sense in terms of what you're parceling out to the various polymorph spells. If you wanted to implement a 4E-style role system, you would practically have to start from scratch.

Tuesday, 2nd December, 2014

  • 07:40 PM - Celebrim quoted BoxCrayonTales in post May there be non-evil societies of always evil races? What would they be like?
    The basic premise of the game is that humanoids really are just funny-looking humans with token psychological issues to set them apart like in Star Trek The basic premise of your game perhaps, but not of mine. And if you mean "the game" as if there was a single real way to approach D&D or Pathfinder, then you yourself are out of luck since it is you that wish to modify the basic assumptions. Since you have modified the premise and changed it, there is no reason to assert there exists some premise you or others have to adhere to. The basic premise of my game is that if you aren't playing a human, your basic outlook in particular areas is distinctly inhuman. (otherwise their value system would be so alien you couldn't relate to them) If you can imagine it, you can relate to it. It may not be emotionally provocative to you. It may not be attractive to you. It may even be distasteful, but you can relate to it. Moral ambiguity only exists insofar as people have a choice to be good, ...
  • 06:39 PM - Dannyalcatraz quoted BoxCrayonTales in post May there be non-evil societies of always evil races? What would they be like?
    My problem is that the Pathfinder books state categorically that drow and orcs and whatever are always evil and good individuals are generally killed young. There are no non-evil societies of these races anywhere in the material plane. I don't like that because it dehumanizes them and turns them into nothing more than MMO mobs to be killed for loot, whereas humans and halflings and whatever are free to be whatever alignment without being genocided. Moreover, I'd like to be able to play non-evil characters of those races without angsting about how everyone hates him and he has no place in the world. (Emphasis mine.) IOW, they are like the Spartans: those who vary from what society deems acceptable are ruthlessly culled. That doesn't change them into "nothing more than MMO mobs to be killed for loot", that means that any individual who may vary from their societal norm has probably been killed off. Survivors have been inculcated into a culture of evil so thoroughly that their norm is to be ...
  • 06:38 AM - Celebrim quoted BoxCrayonTales in post May there be non-evil societies of always evil races? What would they be like?
    Should the Paladin kill the baby orcs because they'll grow up to be evil? No? Should he raise them so they'll grow into good orcs? Yes? Why are there not whole civilizations descended from good orcs born thousands of years ago? Do you realize this is probably the most tired conversation in all of D&D? I notice you are not really that interested in using "this thread to brainstorm non-evil societies of evil races." Your first fails utterly. There is nothing about the society that is drawn from the races unique nature and it is generally well within the range of human social orders. If you are going to do that sort of thing, you'd be better off simply having a lot of different human societies. Otherwise your supposedly alien and inhuman races really are likely to just end up being a bunch of pastiches of individual human ethnic cultures. If the Serq really are immigrants from the plane of shadow, this would imply to me that their biology is almost incomprehensible to humans. Are they...
  • 05:06 AM - Dannyalcatraz quoted BoxCrayonTales in post May there be non-evil societies of always evil races? What would they be like?
    Should the Paladin kill the baby orcs because they'll grow up to be evil? No? Should he raise them so they'll grow into good orcs? Yes? First, that is a campaign world-specific question, which depends on: 1) whether or not orcs are innately and irrevocably evil (essentially, the starting point of this thead) And 2) whether the Paladin in question is an "Old-Testament"/talion law or "New Testament" style holy warrior. While both are the sword-arms of their divine patrons, the latter is expected to be merciful and values conversion of his foes. The former is asked to kill much more frequently and with fewer exceptions, and has his god's favor for actions in his/her/its service up to and including genocide. Why are there not whole civilizations descended from good orcs born thousands of years ago? Assuming orcs are not innately and irrevocably evil, etc., the simple answer is it depends on a wide variety of factors. How many good orcs survive to reproduce vs those who get killed b...

Monday, 1st December, 2014

  • 09:23 PM - Celebrim quoted BoxCrayonTales in post May there be non-evil societies of always evil races? What would they be like?
    Those aren't people. Killing them is morally no different than pest control. I dare suggest that Jonas Salk experienced far more complete joy in irradiating the mindless and perhaps not even alive polio virus, than he would have in defeating something that chose to be evil. Killing someone that chooses to be evil brings little satisfaction at all to a moral person. They always see it as at the very least tempered with tragedy, even if they had no choice and loved the thing that they were defending, to have to have destroyed a free willed being to do so, is not a thing to take pleasure in. Failing to understand this is critical to your failing to understand Tolkien.
  • 09:18 PM - Celebrim quoted BoxCrayonTales in post May there be non-evil societies of always evil races? What would they be like?
    I am dissatisfied with Pathfinder's reliance on the tired cliche of entire races being evil. It's an unfortunate artifact of the game's unintentionally racist roots and needs to be cut out like the cancer it is. Even frigging Tolkien believed evil races were a stupid idea (he was Catholic). I reject the notion that a fantasy race is intended to be a stand in for any human racial or ethnic group or even humanity at all. Further, I reject the notion that a concept like 'angel' or 'demon' even refers to a 'race' or 'species' as we commonly understand the term and to treat it as such is to suggest a lack of imagination. Further, I reject your statement regarding Tolkien as being overly simplified and lacking the nuance with which he approached the topic and based on a few isolated readings that don't take into account his whole body of work, or mischaracterize his particular (for Tolkien, largely theological) problems with his creations. I've really no interest in debating such things. How...
  • 04:26 AM - Umbran quoted BoxCrayonTales in post May there be non-evil societies of always evil races? What would they be like?
    Even frigging Tolkien believed evil races were a stupid idea (he was Catholic). Yet, he gave us orcs, our basic icon for an evil race. Did Tolkien depict a single good orc? I don't know of any. Real-world racism is a problem. Game racism, however, I can't see as particularly problematic, so long as it clearly isn't, "this obvious cognate of a real-world culture is the model of this evil race". It is a game, and it can have moral codes that are drastically simplified, for ease of play.

Friday, 24th October, 2014

  • 12:08 AM - Saelorn quoted BoxCrayonTales in post Designing new caster base classes for unfilled niches?
    Now, all I'm looking for is a divine counterpart to the Wizard and a Wisdom-based arcane caster.Just so you know, it may not actually exist. It's not as though any designers specifically wrote out the grid and then looked to fill in the gaps. Divine spells just don't lend themselves toward Intelligence, and arcane spells don't lend themselves to Wisdom. Charisma just happens to be the replacement stat for both of them. I mean, there's nothing wrong with looking for these things, but failure is also an option.


Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

BoxCrayonTales's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites