Search results

I find it so odd that its economically better to sell a system then adventures and modules. I had a Dungeon, and a Dragon subscription. I thought the magazines were perfect, especially Dungeon. I would have paid more. Why they chose to throw that away in exchange for me buying 3 books every...

I just thought it was funny, but its rude to hijack someone else's topic. So Ill add some more genuine ideas to continue on with his topic :) 12 - Whenever combat takes place, players have to actually compete in combat, LARP style 13 - Drop fantasy races for something younger fans will...

Crazy idea. Why dont we just strengthen the fighter? Why dont we just make more powerful martial items. Why not be very pro multiple attacks, and powers? Why not have "semi" magical abilties (like spell resistance, and damage resistance). Seems to me a lot of people would rather tone down...

removed by admin

Very very good point. The adventure paths, and incredible modules are what make Pathfinder incredible. The system exists to sell adventures. WOTC could take a lesson from this

I consider issues like this central to being a good DM. Even if all the characters are balanced, its the DMs job to try and keep everyone interested, engaged and excited about their characters For matrtial characters, magic items are usually stronger. Things like , ring of the rams where you...

I could care less about the definition of hitpoints. Its been like it is long enough and I see no reason to change it. I voted who cares, with one caveat, if it is expanded to put even more emphasis on combat, tactics and minis, I probably wont play because thats not the type of game I run.

One of the greatest things about 3e was the adventures The 3pp adventures were incredible, my favorites were AEGs lil pamphlet adventures, 5 pages with some ideas, a map, and a couple NPCs. Just enough meat for me to craft an adventure around. Paizo also did exceptionally well with the...

Completely agree with this post.

I dislike it too. Seperate leveling was a bother. And your DM should have given you XP under that system, not level.... Still I much prefer common experience totals. Lately when I DM, I level the group as a whole instead of giving out XP, at the end of the adventure, they all gain a level...

I have watched the tables swing about what we are arguing about in this discussion over and over. One minute I can swap out wizard combat powers for non combat powers, next I can ask my DM, and finally it doesnt matter just because you can't dump EVERYTHING into non-combat, (as if control over...

My gnome loved mirror image. Lets be clear, I have no problem with combat powers being available in illusion. I have a problem with a system that forces me to choose the combat ones and siloes off the non combat ones, i have a problem with a system that doesnt allow me to make the choice of...

And I am a fan of the rotating spotlight. In the end all I am arguing for is a couple classes to maintain that non combat focus to remind DMs and the company of an aspect of the game that it seems only Paizo cares to remember. Plus the trickery needed to redefine an illusionist into an...

And here we get to the heart of the disagreement. You think 80-90% of the game is and should be about combat, and I disagree on both counts. I maintain that the reason the designers had those classes in the game, was because they knew what the game was about, possibly more then you do. Anyways...

I think his use of the word primary objective is fair. After all its a reaction to the last edition which can had balance as a primary objective at the expense of other large swaths of the enterprise. Not sure if you see this as arguable, but Im sure I could make a pretty big list of things...

Where does allowing players to make classes that have been in D&D since pretty much its inception fit into this spectrum you speak of? D&D has been a pretty successful game as far as I can tell, and even the great unbalanced 3e had and has a huge following, I wont even mention the last edtion...

That all sounds great. In my play its usual casual conversation with the DM. And players are always free to switch anyways once they get the feel of a game. Often what I do is the player says "I may wanna play a barbarian" and I say cool, well if you want, tell me and well make sure your bard...

Huh? I have to ask my DM? If I have to do that why not just put it in the rules? Isn't that what we always hear, just because a DM can fix it doesnt mean its not broke. And by the way Im not usually a player I usually DM. And I DM in a system where players can choose a variety of types of...

I agree. With that. Give them something to make up for Wish (not that I remember anyone ever casting it in the last 10 years, but shrug sounds good to me). And as to my previous arguer, you won. You made me dig out this horrible book. Theres like 3 heroic feats that are non combat, I guess...

1- I don't want it to be the only choice. Just a choice of some classes. Just like the fighter can't cast spells, I dont believe the illusionist should be able to be better at damage then an invoker, and a bard shouldnt be a better swordsman then the fighter. Classes shouldnt all have to be...