Stay Classy Paizo.

[Saxony]

Firstly, I was talking to ubernoob, not Count.

Secondly, we're all headcases here. So yes, even crazy is hot.

Thirdly, it was a joke .

Don't you outsmart me with your well formed arguments and quips!

[Kaiyanwang]

That means no one ever gets a spell off. "He's casting! STAB HIM!"

Well, this should motivate more melees to protect them.

If alone, the spellcasters should spent more effort, and more spell, to get a combo that keeps them protected, unnoticed, and able to cast. This COULD lead to a greater use of resources, and thereafter to what, supposedly, should keep at bay spellcasters - daily resources.

Moreover, I was not thinking to raise the casting time of ALL spells, but of utilities supposed to be "out of combats" (in his post, K mada an example with the magnificent mansion) but can be used for "too easy win here" combos, or for things like gate that shifted to a 3 rounds casting time and to a deeper bargain with the outsider called could lead to better game and a better RPG, IMO.

I don't say I've DA ULTIMATE ANSWAR to the issues, of course. But act at several levels, this one included, could improved the game experience without distort it beyond recognition.



K: apparently, your post returned. Good for Paizo (it has more a sucky board than a bad policy, maybe ). We will see...

[Maxus]

That means no one ever gets a spell off. "He's casting! STAB HIM!"

Well, this should motivate more melees to protect them.

I believe you've heard the term 'meatshield' before.

Casters shouldn't need melee protection, and melees shouldn't need casters to be effective.

Further thought: Picking and choosing what spells get their time increased will be entertaining.

[Zinegata]

Maxus->

The belief that each character should be able to do everything on their own isn't universal.

Many people do believe that it is more optimal to have characters play a specific role, and that this role would complement an overall team effort.

Just because 4E made a total mess of things doesn't mean that the paradigm is a bad one. A system where meatshields defend casters is fine.

[Wyzzard]

@Zinegata:

Someone shouldn't have to play the fighter in order for the group to function on a basic level. If everyone wants to play casters, then that should totally be an option.

Role protection is okay, but role reqirements are ass. This isn't WoW where you have millions of people to play with; when you only know 3 people who play the game, it should be able to handle a fighter-only group, if that's what people want.

[Zinegata]

Again though, the idea that role-requirement is bad is not universal. Some systems revolve around role requirement. And they work well enough as long as the players are made aware from the get-go what they are getting themselves into.

It boils down to implementation. And just because 4E made a mess of things doesn't mean that people should dismiss attempts to create a workable system following this paradigm.

[Korwin]

Again though, the idea that role-requirement is bad is not universal. Some systems revolve around role requirement. And they work well enough as long as the players are made aware from the get-go what they are getting themselves into.

Examples?

[Zinegata]

Examples?

For starters, "Not 4th Edition" .

Seriously though, the system with fairly decent role requirement I often hear about is Ars Magica

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ars_Magica

In this game, there are definite power differences between Mages, Companions, and Mooks (Grogs) - which are the different sorts of characters players can play.

I'm going to be transparent and say I haven't played this game yet. But I've heard people say it's a unique and fun experience - as long as people know from the get-go what they are getting into.

Similarly, I could cite a couple of other boardgames that have role requirement - The most prominent of which is the classic Avalon Hill game Dune. To win in that game, you need to have military power, money, mobility, and access to information/espionage. With each faction generally having 2 of these keys to victory however, you really need to form alliances so you can have all the tools you need to win.

[Korwin]

In Ars Magica everybody plays an Mage.
If someone wants to play an NPC (every non-Mage) its allowed, but not recommended.
(I didnt play it myself, but I do have ~5 of the rulebooks at home, not shure which edition)

Doesnt sound like role requirement for me.
It would be the same, if you played Vampire (non Crossover) and said its required to play an Vampire (class).

[FatR]

Ahahahaha. No. Never. Not in a million years, no. Tome doesn't address the underlying broken aspects of 3e, it just powers up non-casters. Imagine if everyone were playing a class roughly as powerful as a wizard that required less system mastery to break the game.

This. None of my games got above level 11 yet (mostly due to RL problems that caused groups to fall apart) so I can't say how necessary Tome-like upgrades are for high-level play, but I can say with certainty that at levels 1-9 Tomes will actively make my GMing experience much worse. Primarily by making statblocks from published adventures - which I use because I don't have enough time and energy to make adventures for levels above 3rd myself - very much useless. My players tend to curbstomp them already, with relatively simple and mild martial-buffing houserules. And without playing full casters to anywhere near their full potential.

EDIT: Also, because the Tomes do, in fact, radically change every opponent statblock out there (by changing feats), they would have forced me to work on conversion anyway, even if the power level wasn't beyond what these adventures can handle.
So, despite claiming to be a patch on 3.5, Tomes are noncompatible with every element of 3.5 but spell lists.

[maddd0g]

LMAO!

THAT WAS MY THREAD, hahaha.

Fuck you Jason.

EDIT:

I'm reading through this thread, because I kind of just left it there as trollbait.. I don't understand the argument behind "he takes hits for the party"

HOW? He dies to EVERYTHING. And, the only reason they're attacking him is because they can't even find the wizard whos throwing hexes and what have you every turn from miles away while mage handing the king's daughter.

EDIT2: K, I love your Avatar on the paizo site. I rofled. *wipes the sh!t off his nose*

EDIT3: Read the entire thread.

It was incredibly amusing. Every arguement for the fighter being good actually highlighted how they were infact completely inferior to the wizard. Some people were even arguing that somehow an anti-magic field is going to outright kill a wizard, or that it wouldn't effect the fighter. Towards the end, some tard even argued.. "If magic were turned off, the fighter would be the best class." .. No fucking shit. Really? How about.. if you couldn't swing a sword, the Wizard is already the best class, so stfu.

It's hilarious how alot of the people were talking about wizards as being inferior "damage dealers".. what the hell? Who cares. The moment you're disabled you're done. I could gnaw on your toe for 3 hours and still win the encounter after you've failed a save.

Still totally clueless about the fighter "tanking" for the wizard. Since when does a wizard need a tank? All the wizard has to do is shake his dick and reality trembles. I'm sad now. I need a drink.

Time to watch some Mad Men.

[Koumei]

What is the avatar?

Also, how did Zine even get here in the first place and what provoked him into posting? All I remember is that ages ago, possibly on the first encounter, I put him on /ignore, and things worked out pretty well ever since. Was it a political thread though, or a D&D one, or the Shadowrun one? I can't remember.

[Kaiyanwang]

[
I believe you've heard the term 'meatshield' before.

Casters shouldn't need melee protection, and melees shouldn't need casters to be effective.

Further thought: Picking and choosing what spells get their time increased will be entertaining.

As I stated above, they should swear to plan spells studied and play accordingly. I don't say meleers hould be needed, but would make things more easy.

As for spells picked up, I'd start from those intended to be utilities (yes magnificent mansion, no fireball). Never said that can be done on the fly. But true improvements are never easy.

[Zinegata]

Also, how did Zine even get here in the first place and what provoked him into posting? All I remember is that ages ago, possibly on the first encounter, I put him on /ignore, and things worked out pretty well ever since. Was it a political thread though, or a D&D one, or the Shadowrun one? I can't remember.

Gee, is this "Hate on Zine day?" Wow, I'm so touched that I've bruised your inflated egos so much that you have to gather together in one thread to have your group therapy sessions and tell yourself that you're more than just a bunch of misfits in a niche site.

Anyway, I'm fine with you ignoring me. If you hadn't bailed on the game I was running I wouldn't have met up with a much saner 40K crew on SD.net anyway, where I have much more fun.

Still, if you wanna blame anyone for bringing me here, blame Titanium Dragon. Although if Zherog is the same one from WoTC I think he knows me too.

(And no, I wasn't part of Titanium Dragon's crew. I came here specifically just to help shout at him)

BTW, no, despite the implications, I'm not leaving no matter how much you, Crissa, or Kaelik whine. Sorry you wasted your time on a useless smear campaign.

[Zinegata]

In Ars Magica everybody plays an Mage.
If someone wants to play an NPC (every non-Mage) its allowed, but not recommended.
(I didnt play it myself, but I do have ~5 of the rulebooks at home, not shure which edition)

Doesnt sound like role requirement for me.
It would be the same, if you played Vampire (non Crossover) and said its required to play an Vampire (class).

Again, full transparency here - I haven't actually played it. However, I have some acquaintences who've played it and said it was fine even though some played Mages, other played Companions, and the latter played mainly as backup for the latter.

Also, wouldn't the "Role Requirement" in this game be that at least one person play a mage?

[Kaelik]

So you only know like nine seperate people who are running Tome. That's even LESS than my second estimate of ten.

I know you are retarded and don't understand ratios, but the ratio is nine to zero. That's really fucking good.

Here's the thing though: Most people don't actually try to design their games. They don't really delve too much into the mechanics. That's why even shit like 4E outsells Pathfinder.

Here's the thing though, I'm not talking about people who design their own games. I'm talking about people who post with some regularity on the Den, and aren't trolls.

So, yes, all the people who post here regularly are in fact people who play Tome games.

As for your hilarious "but nobody uses all the Tome rules!" The Book of Gears is Tome. But it's not finished. If your standard is "All Tome Rules" then my standard is "Pathfinder, including Pathfinder books that haven't been released, and also no 3.5 material, not even spells that they haven't changed and just reprinted." Oh look, no one at all plays Pathfinder, I guess Tome is more popular.

[virgil]

EDIT: Also, because the Tomes do, in fact, radically change every opponent statblock out there (by changing feats), they would have forced me to work on conversion anyway, even if the power level wasn't beyond what these adventures can handle.
So, despite claiming to be a patch on 3.5, Tomes are noncompatible with every element of 3.5 but spell lists.

Except for NPCs, I rarely changed/converted the feats for monsters in my Tome games.

As for the challenge rating of an adventure, I'd say that's hard to point full blame at Tome, because I've got several adventures on hand that're EZ-mode even for crappy parties, so it might be partially your adventure's fault for not challenging Tome classes.

One thing that might improve 'backwards compatibility' is not to use Tome feats, as the classes alone give most of the upgrades.

Probably the biggest effect one sees in using Tome is in the effects of system mastery. People who would've made level-appropriate characters without Tome make drastically bigger characters than players who would've made a PHB-only barbarian had they not been handed Tome.

[RobbyPants]

But seriously, I hope you like attention whoring, daddy issues, and being cheated on. Because you're almost certainly bellying up to an all-you-can-eat buffet filled with that shit.

Sure, it's anecdotal as hell, but this describes the only female gamer I personally know perfectly.

Lucky for me I never got involved with her. My best friend did and he became just as bad a head-case.

[Zinegata]

I know you are retarded and don't understand ratios, but the ratio is nine to zero. That's really fucking good.

Again Kaelik, now you're really just lying. I already told you: There are other people playing non-Tome games in the Den. You're just ignoring them in favor of your own bullshit interpretation.

(Besides which, it's actually 10 to 2, because ubernoob claimed to not play anymore, but 2 other people claimed to be playing currently - Korwin and Count).

I actually do keep count, as opposed to your pointless and juvenile name-calling.

As for your hilarious "but nobody uses all the Tome rules!" The Book of Gears is Tome. But it's not finished. If your standard is "All Tome Rules" then my standard is "Pathfinder, including Pathfinder books that haven't been released, and also no 3.5 material, not even spells that they haven't changed and just reprinted." Oh look, no one at all plays Pathfinder, I guess Tome is more popular.

Oh, gee, we have different points of reference. Which I pointed out several posts ago.

And yet you declare victory based on different points of reference.

Kaelik, you're being dishonest. Because I had the gall to say Tome (and by extension, YOUR stuff) isn't as popular as Pathfinder. Which you really have Crissa and DragonChild to blame for because they're the ones claiming that Pathfinder is taking away Tome players.

So, again, this is just you trying to stroke your ego. Get over yourself.

[Meikle641]

One thing that might improve 'backwards compatibility' is not to use Tome feats, as the classes alone give most of the upgrades.

Probably the biggest effect one sees in using Tome is in the effects of system mastery. People who would've made level-appropriate characters without Tome make drastically bigger characters than players who would've made a PHB-only barbarian had they not been handed Tome.

I sorta agree with this. I like Tome classes and Tome feats, but I find the latter can make it a bit too much. In my current campaign I've restricted PCs to a max of 5 Combat feats but Tome classes themselves are relatively unfettered.

I like the idea behind Tome feats, but once you get enough of them it gets a little hard to remember every little thing you have. Since they do so much you only really need a handful to get a concept down anyway.

[Kaelik]

Again Kaelik, now you're really just lying. I already told you: There are other people playing non-Tome games in the Den. You're just ignoring them in favor of your own bullshit interpretation.

No, I'm only counting the ones I know about, because I can't fucking count things that I don't know about. There are probably a hundred Tome games I don't know about, but I don't know about them, so I can't count them.

Oh, gee, we have different points of reference. Which I pointed out several posts ago.

And yet you declare victory based on different points of reference.

No, you declared victory based on your point of reference of "I only know of 4 games, and there are 1075 posters, 300 of which have never even posted, so therefore, 4 out of 1075!"

I pointed out that of all the people who post here often, nearly all of them play Tome games when they play.

Kaelik, you're being dishonest. Because I had the gall to say Tome (and by extension, YOUR stuff) isn't as popular as Pathfinder. Which you really have Crissa and DragonChild to blame for because they're the ones claiming that Pathfinder is taking away Tome players.

So, again, this is just you trying to stroke your ego. Get over yourself.

Zine, get over yourself. The Tomes aren't mine, and I never claimed they were more popular that Pathfinder except to mock you, because I don't make arguments ad populum, because I know that 90% of everyone is retarded.

What happened is you made a stupid statement "The Tomes aren't popular on the Den." And then I called you on your stupid statement, and you backpedaled so fucking hard that you think a 10 to 2 ratio of Tome games to all other games in the universe proves your point that the Tome isn't popular on the Den.

So no. You were wrong. I called you on being wrong. Stop defending your incorrect statement just because you are an irrational tard who can never admit to being wrong about anything.

[Zinegata]

No, I'm only counting the ones I know about, because I can't fucking count things that I don't know about. There are probably a hundred Tome games I don't know about, but I don't know about them, so I can't count them.

Oh, gee, you're talking about numbers but refuse to count even as new numbers and information is revealed.

Stop trolling Kaelik.

No, you declared victory based on your point of reference of "I only know of 4 games, and there are 1075 posters, 300 of which have never even posted, so therefore, 4 out of 1075!"

No, I made an argument. You made a counter-argument. I then pointed out we had different points of reference.

It ended there. Nobody declared victory until your BS here.

Zine, get over yourself. The Tomes aren't mine, and I never claimed they were more popular that Pathfinder except to mock you, because I don't make arguments ad populum, because I know that 90% of everyone is retarded.

Kaelik, get over yourself. The first "evidence" you presented was how you tried to start 12 Tome games. You have a lot invested in the system. Trying to deflect that this is another ego-trip on your part is BS.

What happened is you made a stupid statement "The Tomes aren't popular on the Den."

"As far as I know". Read what I actually fucking wrote.

Gee, maybe I'm wrong. But you're seriously presenting nine names as counter-evidence of the Tome's popularity in a board of 1,075 members. And you dismissed that counter-evidence by an unsubstantiated claim that "half of those are just Paizo trolls".

When you admit now you can't even be bothered to count (although you seem to have counted 300 people who never posted - heaven knows why you're only putting that up as evidence now).

Frankly, I just left that exchange hanging there because the truth is, neither of us have enough statistical data to prove one way or another just how popular the Tome is to the Den as a whole. You're just focusing on "active members", but that ain't my goal posts.

You wanna claim victory? Go right on fucking ahead. I don't care either way, because we're not even talking about the same goal posts..

[Korwin]

In Ars Magica everybody plays an Mage.
If someone wants to play an NPC (every non-Mage) its allowed, but not recommended.

Also, wouldn't the "Role Requirement" in this game be that at least one person play a mage?

Sounds like a bad idea for me.
You would have (in D&D terms) a party with One Wizard an the others would be Experts and Warriors.

[Kaelik]

Oh, gee, you're talking about numbers but refuse to count even as new numbers and information is revealed.

No, I'm talking about numbers and I don't count every person saying "I have a game" in this thread as the same thing as games I already knew about.

No, I made an argument. You made a counter-argument. I then pointed out we had different points of reference.

No, you made a false statement, then I called you on it, then you decided to claim that the number of registered posters on the Den is the number of people who count as the Den. Which is fucking retarded.

Kaelik, get over yourself. The first "evidence" you presented was how you tried to start 12 Tome games. You have a lot invested in the system. Trying to deflect that this is another ego-trip on your part is BS.

1) The evidence I presented was how I succeeded in starting 12 Tome games.

2) Did I say "I don't have a lot invested in the Tomes." No, because the part where you claim that I only corrected your false statement about Tomes being popular on the Den, because you claimed that Pathfinder is more popular than me is fucking retarded. The popularity of the Tomes on the Den has nothing to do with Pathfinder at all, and the part where you try to present ulterior motives for the people who are correct as a reason they stop being correct is fucking stupid.

I did not write the Tomes, so they are not mine like you claimed they were. That doesn't mean I'm not invested in them, because I am, because I only want to play Tome games. But the fact that I only want to play Tome games has nothing to do with you being wrong about the popularity of the Tomes on the Den.

Gee, maybe I'm wrong. But you're seriously presenting nine names as counter-evidence of the Tome's popularity in a board of 1,075 members. And you dismissed that counter-evidence by an unsubstantiated claim that "half of those are just Paizo trolls".

When you admit now you can't even be bothered to count (although you seem to have counted 300 people who never posted - heaven knows why you're only putting that up as evidence now).

No I didn't admit that I didn't count. Where did you get that besides your own ass. Though of course, I didn't count, because anyone who thinks that the number of registered users on a forum is more indicative of the forum than people who actually post on the forum is a fucking retard.

You can actually just look at the Memberlist, it shows post count. 3/4ths of posters have less than 100 posts and most of them joined in mar 2008, aka when the forum as ported over (Which by the way, means their posts from the old forum were ported over too), 1/8th are in the single digits. If you have made less than a hundred posts in two and a half years, or even longer... You aren't actually part of TGD, you just visited.

The part where you count that is fucking stupid.

Here's a better idea. Only count people who have posted at least once in the last 2 weeks.

Hey look, most of those people play Tome games. Go fuck yourself.

[mean_liar]

I love Ars Magica. Players are encouraged to make several characters: a personal Magus character, a personal Companion, and then there's a pool of Grogs (mooks).

Your magus does shit like research in a cloistered lab a lot, and getting you to NOT spend your time locked up in a lab is the GM's responsibility. When he succeeds by throwing a crisis at you and you actually leave (or you're a Wormtongue or something similar) and go on an adventure, the other players snigger and they all grab their Companion characters, since their Magus is back home getting more powerful and you're stuck trying to deal with the dragon, hahahaha.

If there's a reason why your Companion is busy, you grab a Grog from the pile. They're supposed to be stereotypes a little on the outrageous side just so you can have fun playing the uneducated meatshield.