Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 121 to 150 of 308
  1. - Top - End - #121
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Larpus's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    Absolutely agreed, and Paizo has some *really* bad editting. That said, relying on GM fiat which would make the class better than RAW seems like unsteady ground, for looking at the power of a class/ACF... especially if you're proposing stacking half-giant and weapon-size increasing spells to get to high-OP levels of damage.
    I agree as well, it does seem to step a bit too strong on the ground. I'm not saying that "melee can't have nice things", but I can see a lot of Fighters and other Barbarians frowning whenever a Titan Mauler appears, this can be especially bad since the mauler doesn't exactly give up a lot of things to do what he does, and boy, does he do that well by RAI.

    Still, I'd rule that he can and actually be rather balanced about it based solely on how hard it'll be for him to find magical and optimized Large+ weapons (and "unrealistic" fluff-wise to be able to just buy one every other town), after all pretty much his main source of weapons is, as the text says, slain gigantic foes, so if the DM wants to tone him down, just refrain from making him battle humanoid Tarrasques wielding +30 Greatswords.

    Similarly, the DM could also charge him more for magical enhancements for such weapons, so it doesn't get too ridiculous too fast.

  2. - Top - End - #122
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    CTrees's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    RE: Availability

    *shrug* if it was me, and the Titan Mauler was allowed to function as it seems to be intended, I'd just plan on putting some points into craft (or bribing the rogue or wizard to do it). Unless I'm missing something obvious, by RAW a given weapon costs the same regardless of size*, so the time to craft isn't that rough. This gets really sticky with multiple phases of houseruling, though.

    Personally, I think I'd houserule the ACF to allow a TM to use any weapons recovered from enemies he, personally, had a hand in killing, with size penalties extrapolated out. Fits the fluff exactly. Then I'd either ban him from using oversized weapons he just purchased, or make them unavailable unless he went into a cloud giant town or whatever - how many human blacksmiths are going to be physically capable of making a gargantuan greatsword? All of this is RAI/houserules, though, so... yeah.

    *EDIT: Actually... that's interesting. There are listed and obvious rules for weight increases, but there I, at least, can't find rules indicating cost increases for oddly sized weapons (and, certainly, it stays the same in practice for small/medium/large creatrures, so...). Thus... if one were to take Leadership, taking followers who were crafters (NPC classes will be fine) and had them craft gargantuan adamantine sling bullets... Sling bullets are explicitly batches of 10ea for a cost of 1sp and weight of 5lbs, at medium size. Cost of masterwork ammunition is explicitly 6gp/missile, and cost of adamantine is 60gp/missile. Thus, a batch of 10ea gargantuan, adamantine sling bullets weighs eighty pounds and has a market value of 660.1gp, costing ~220.03gp to craft (cost to craft explicitly includes all the raw materials). Naturally, your followers take ten, aid another, etc. Result, you've spent ~2.75gp per pound of adamantine. Then, you go ahead and sell it not as bullets (cannon balls, really, but they're just big spheres), but as a bulk commodity, by weight. Profit from the sweatshop should be... continuous, and rather immense. Interesting.
    Last edited by CTrees; 2011-08-03 at 10:28 AM.

  3. - Top - End - #123
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    FMArthur's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    The Magus archetypes made me sad. None of them add anything particularly exciting and still replace other features, yet every single one has Diminished Spellcasting as a feature, because obviously the guy who uses magic to whack people with weapons can't fit in with the melee theme of the book without having that reduced.

    Still reading. I really like the Gunslinger. And the Spellslinger Wizard archetype sounds really cool, but its text on that site is fragmented and incomplete in what seems to be critical information. I don't see information on how guns work or how good they actually are, though; I can surmise based on the Gunslinger's features that you can't full-attack with them without special abilities, which is a bit of a downer.
    Last edited by FMArthur; 2011-08-03 at 10:25 AM.
    • Chameleon Base Class [3.5]/[PF]: A versatile, morphic class that mimics one basic party role (warrior, caster, sneak, etc) at a time. If you find yourself getting bored of any class you play too long, the Chameleon is for you!
    • Warlock Power Sources [3.5]: Making Hellfire Warlock part of the base class and providing other similar options for Warlocks whose powers don't come from devils.

  4. - Top - End - #124
    Orc in the Playground
     
    NamelessNPC's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Casteland, Argentina
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    The link doesn't work anymore, it now leads to a rant about how linking the work in progress has delayed the complete update. This is why we can't have nice things, I guess

    In any case, I really liked the kensai (I think that was the name) magus archetype, the one that can't use armor. Yes, it has diminished spellcasting and it's possibly underpowered, but has just about every cool feature that I enjoy my characters having.

  5. - Top - End - #125
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Fax Celestis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fairfield, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by FMArthur View Post
    I don't see information on how guns work or how good they actually are, though; I can surmise based on the Gunslinger's features that you can't full-attack with them without special abilities, which is a bit of a downer.
    ...so, like a crossbow.

  6. - Top - End - #126
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    CTrees's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by NamelessNPC View Post
    The link doesn't work anymore, it now leads to a rant about how linking the work in progress has delayed the complete update. This is why we can't have nice things, I guess
    Haha, wow. Epic bold text and everything. It's not productive, but that response from Paizo just provokes a gut "QQ more" reaction...

    I mean, oh no! People are interested in your work, and want to see what your company is putting out! Worst thing ever, right?
    Last edited by CTrees; 2011-08-03 at 10:47 AM.

  7. - Top - End - #127
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    FMArthur's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by Fax Celestis View Post
    ...so, like a crossbow.
    That was my thought, but given that they have a class feature to make a poor-man's full-attack, I think the action requirements are even more severe, and not negated by a mere feat. I also sort of got the impression that firearms are touch attacks within their first range increment, which could be something they have over ordinary ranged weaponry if their damage doesn't turn out to be all that compelling.


    CTrees, Paizo doesn't run d20pfsrd, and don't have anything against them putting up their open content on the site. These guys are just trying to organize and categorize a big pile of information, and I guess visitors were somehow interfering with the process and making it harder. What's wrong with the site forbidding access for the moment while they fix things up?
    Last edited by FMArthur; 2011-08-03 at 11:01 AM.
    • Chameleon Base Class [3.5]/[PF]: A versatile, morphic class that mimics one basic party role (warrior, caster, sneak, etc) at a time. If you find yourself getting bored of any class you play too long, the Chameleon is for you!
    • Warlock Power Sources [3.5]: Making Hellfire Warlock part of the base class and providing other similar options for Warlocks whose powers don't come from devils.

  8. - Top - End - #128
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Larpus's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    RE: Availability

    *shrug* if it was me, and the Titan Mauler was allowed to function as it seems to be intended, I'd just plan on putting some points into craft (or bribing the rogue or wizard to do it). Unless I'm missing something obvious, by RAW a given weapon costs the same regardless of size*, so the time to craft isn't that rough. This gets really sticky with multiple phases of houseruling, though.

    Personally, I think I'd houserule the ACF to allow a TM to use any weapons recovered from enemies he, personally, had a hand in killing, with size penalties extrapolated out. Fits the fluff exactly. Then I'd either ban him from using oversized weapons he just purchased, or make them unavailable unless he went into a cloud giant town or whatever - how many human blacksmiths are going to be physically capable of making a gargantuan greatsword? All of this is RAI/houserules, though, so... yeah.

    *EDIT: Actually... that's interesting. There are listed and obvious rules for weight increases, but there I, at least, can't find rules indicating cost increases for oddly sized weapons (and, certainly, it stays the same in practice for small/medium/large creatrures, so...). Thus... if one were to take Leadership, taking followers who were crafters (NPC classes will be fine) and had them craft gargantuan adamantine sling bullets... Sling bullets are explicitly batches of 10ea for a cost of 1sp and weight of 5lbs, at medium size. Cost of masterwork ammunition is explicitly 6gp/missile, and cost of adamantine is 60gp/missile. Thus, a batch of 10ea gargantuan, adamantine sling bullets weighs eighty pounds and has a market value of 660.1gp, costing ~220.03gp to craft (cost to craft explicitly includes all the raw materials). Naturally, your followers take ten, aid another, etc. Result, you've spent ~2.75gp per pound of adamantine. Then, you go ahead and sell it not as bullets (cannon balls, really, but they're just big spheres), but as a bulk commodity, by weight. Profit from the sweatshop should be... continuous, and rather immense. Interesting.
    Whoa, for real?

    That is one major oversight, that simply can't be right, hope the actual book has something on that, but I don't think I've ever seen any DM that'd let it slip like that.

    Still, yeah, the ability to wield larger weapons can be rather easily balanced out on "common sense", as you noted, I find it hard to have a medium crafter make anything bigger than a large whatever.

    And I agree as well, I'd rule against the Barbarian just using larger weapons unless he's at least fought with a foe who wielded such a weapon at some point (so he has the whole "I'll beat him senseless at his own game, literally" fluff going on).

    Quote Originally Posted by FMArthur View Post
    The Magus archetypes made me sad. None of them add anything particularly exciting and still replace other features, yet every single one has Diminished Spellcasting as a feature, because obviously the guy who uses magic to whack people with weapons can't fit in with the melee theme of the book without having that reduced.

    Still reading. I really like the Gunslinger. And the Spellslinger Wizard archetype sounds really cool, but its text on that site is fragmented and incomplete in what seems to be critical information. I don't see information on how guns work or how good they actually are, though; I can surmise based on the Gunslinger's features that you can't full-attack with them without special abilities, which is a bit of a downer.
    I agree, the Magus' archetypes also made me very sad...not only Diminished Spellcasting (on a half caster on top of that) is bad, but also most/all of them take away your Recall Spell and Improved, making these archetypes really underperform the base class. I'm not against making a less magical Magus (as strange as that sounds), but at least give the man some worthwhile bonuses or less harsh penalties, I can understand Diminished or no Spell Recall, but not both.

    Spellslinger sounds interesting indeed, though the cost of ammunition for non-gunslingers makes me worried.


    Quote Originally Posted by NamelessNPC View Post
    The link doesn't work anymore, it now leads to a rant about how linking the work in progress has delayed the complete update. This is why we can't have nice things, I guess
    Can't quite understand it tho, if they didn't want anyone to look they should've at least put a warning there or something, don't think that anyone (here at least) that has linked the content or anything did it with ill intentions. Anyway, it's a secret to everybody. Don't worry, this is just a .doc with the content that was present at the SRD, I'm assuming they wanted access off that section of their site for whatever reason, but if it was indeed because people shouldn't be accessing that content yet, then I'll gladly put it offline once requested to do so.
    Last edited by Larpus; 2011-08-03 at 11:36 AM.

  9. - Top - End - #129
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    CTrees's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by FMArthur View Post
    CTrees, Paizo doesn't run d20pfsrd, and don't have anything against them putting up their open content on the site. These guys are just trying to organize and categorize a big pile of information, and I guess visitors were somehow interfering with the process and making it harder. What's wrong with the site forbidding access for the moment while they fix things up?
    First, didn't know that, so "the devs" or whatever you want to say.

    Second, nothing's wrong with them forbidding access. It's the way they put it, the giant bold font, everything. NamelessPC's description of it as a rant is accurate. If they had just said "please don't link work in progress - it interferes with the process," that would've been polite and gotten the same point across. The manner in which they stated things is what makes me want to poke fun at them.

    EDIT: Larpus, if that link is what I suspect, I'd strongly suggest removing it.
    Last edited by CTrees; 2011-08-03 at 11:11 AM.

  10. - Top - End - #130
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Larpus's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    EDIT: Larpus, if that link is what I suspect, I'd strongly suggest removing it.
    Megaupload with a .doc of the content, I didn't close my browser so I still could copy-paste it, if linking is their problem I don't think this will cause a ruckus, but I'll remove it without hassle if that would get anyone in trouble.

    EDIT: I'm following the train of thought that they wanted traffic off that section but not necessarily bar the access to the content (since it was there open on the internet to begin with, without any warning of any sort), but I don't want to give them, me or us any trouble for doing so.
    Last edited by Larpus; 2011-08-03 at 11:28 AM.

  11. - Top - End - #131
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    CTrees's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Ah... okay, I was suspecting the actual pdf of the book. In that case... I honestly don't know whether that's okay here or not. Never mind, assumed the worst!

  12. - Top - End - #132
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Scania
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by NamelessNPC View Post
    The link doesn't work anymore, it now leads to a rant about how linking the work in progress has delayed the complete update.
    Hahaha, oh wow. Wait, what? Haha, how?

    Edit: Checking the link (edit 2: link removed) again, I find it hard not to chuckle.

    Quote Originally Posted by Massive QQ
    DO NOT LINK TO WORK IN PROGRESS. NOW OUR JOB IS SIGNIFICANTLY HARDER AND FINAL POSTING OF THE CONTENT WILL BE NOTICEABLY DELAYED DUE TO PUBLICLY LINKING THIS CONTENT.
    How? Why? How does that even make any sort of sense whatsoever? How about not hosting content publicly if the intent is not to show it publicly? In what way does people looking at it make their job harder? It's not like it can be publicly edited (afaik).

    Amateurs, QQ, cry moar, whine less baby, cool story bro, etc, etc.
    Last edited by Luckmann; 2011-08-03 at 02:37 PM.

  13. - Top - End - #133
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Can't wait for my hard copy arrive. Has anyone checked out Inner Sea Magic sourcebook that was just released? It suppose to be a crunch heavy book with new archetypes for casters, magic items, and a boatload of spells. If so, anything good in it?
    Lastgrasp
    Running: Pathfinder RPG: Carrion Crown Adventure Path. http://exoknight.livejournal.com/

    Planning: Hunter: The Vigil: Ordo Venator
    http://lastgrasp.livejournal.com/

  14. - Top - End - #134
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    CTrees's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    What makes the rant especially funny is the Work Queues section of the SRD. Everything else in the work queue is publicly, and intentionally, linked, and one of their people had to have done it... the only reason the broader 'net knew about it is... the devs in control making the link public in the first place. Not sure how it isn't affecting everything else on there (which is roughly a giant boatload), or why they even have that section of the site, if it's a problem.

    It's all very lulzy, basically.

  15. - Top - End - #135
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Well,


    That is sort of par for the course with Public access I reckon.

  16. - Top - End - #136
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Aug 2009

    Exclamation Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Hey Guys,

    This is John Reyst, the main dude behind d20pfsrd.com and the one responsible for the big bold text on the Ultimate Combat pages.

    I want to make something clear. We have an unofficial agreement with Paizo and various 3rd Party Publishers to NOT make their content publicly available for a minimum of 2 weeks AFTER the book has been available "on the street" meaning, in stores. We had this same issue with Bestiary 2 also. We post the extracted content from PDF's into a temporary working area while the team cleans it up and links it etc. We don't intend content in the work areas to be for "public" consumption since a) its ugly and b) its usually there before the "street +2 week" delay period. We had been told by Google (who hosts the site) that a new feature was imminent, one that would allow us to add different security settings to different sections of the site, thereby allowing us to keep to our agreements. Ultimately we want to minimize any possible loss of sales a publisher may see as a result of their being so open to the Open Gaming ideas.

    So its not us, or most certainly not Paizo, trying to be mean, or cruel, or whatever, its just us, as in d20pfsrd.com, trying to adhere to our agreements to respect the publishers wishes. We'll try to get the content up as fast as possible but having public messageboards posting links to the content defeats our agreement so we have to move the content, which makes our job harder and will take us longer to do since we now have to jump through additional hurdles etc.

    Sorry, but that's the way it is for now until Google gets this feature released.

    --john

  17. - Top - End - #137
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Archpaladin Zousha's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Hastings, MN
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Perfectly understandable. I don't plan on looking for stuff on the SRD until I've actually purchased the physical book. I want Paizo to have my money so they can continue creating awesome Pathfinder stuff.
    "Reach down into your heart and you'll find many reasons to fight. Survival. Honor. Glory. But what about those who feel it's their duty to protect the innocent? There you'll find a warrior savage enough to match any dragon, and in the end, they'll retain what the others won't. Their humanity."

  18. - Top - End - #138
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Aug 2009

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by Archpaladin Zousha View Post
    I want Paizo to have my money so they can continue creating awesome Pathfinder stuff.
    That's our position as well but we sometimes fear that others may not share that attitude.

  19. - Top - End - #139
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    CTrees's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    First, let me say that I really appreciate the site and all of your effort.

    Now, then... Do you see how the giant text and ranting tone might come off a bit... off, compared to saying either what you did here, or even just a simple, one-line "this was not meant to be publically accessible, please do not link," in a normal, non-bold font size? You guys, in general, have a very professional seeming site (though I have some issues with how it shows on my phone now...), and this seemed incongruous.

    Second, the big rant, shouldn't that have been more of an internal rant? After all, someone made the page publically visible, like the rest of the work queue stuff. I check that page fairly often, so I'm sure someone would have found it. That's not our fault, is it? We didn't hack in, or abuse our permissions in order to gain access to the Ultimate Combat page and then illicitly post it across the message boards - you guys made it visible, someone found it, and, as it seemed no different from anything else (which is fine to link), it got distributed because it was interesting. Why are you acting like we did something wrong?

    Again, I love the work you're doing, I really do. This is just... odd, to me.

    EDIT: Just for the record, I'm the guy in my group that has to buy all the books, so I'm definitely buying Ultimate Combat. Unfortunately, my local games store doesn't have it yet, and I want to support them just as much as I want to support Paizo (thus, not simply ordering it online). So... yeah.
    Last edited by CTrees; 2011-08-03 at 12:54 PM.

  20. - Top - End - #140
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    KitsuneKionchi's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    I'm getting kinda worried...I pre-ordered my book from my local shop and I don't think he's gotten his shipment in (i.e. I don't see any extra boxes behind the counter where they normally are and he usually proudly announces when he gets something). I'm sure that these modules were shipped out prior to launch--right? Like...that's one of the primary reasons to have a release date--to make sure all the shops have it out at the same time so smaller shops with frequent distributor problems don't lose business to larger shops that get their stuff on time.

    EDIT: Just for the record, I'm the guy in my group that has to buy all the books, so I'm definitely buying Ultimate Combat. Unfortunately, my local games store doesn't have it yet, and I want to support them just as much as I want to support Paizo (thus, not simply ordering it online). So... yeah.
    I kinda wish I just ordered from Paizo now...at least I'd be sure I'd get the PDF. My shop owner said at some time Paizo gave PDF access to the stores to give to the customers who pre-order the books but the system hasn't been working for him since they changed distributors or something...but I still feel like I'd rather support my LFGS.

    EDIT: Also, my group has stopped playing until I finish the next dungeon for the other DM. And the other DM wants Ultimate Combat material in it...
    Last edited by KitsuneKionchi; 2011-08-03 at 01:08 PM.

  21. - Top - End - #141
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Aug 2009

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    First, let me say that I really appreciate the site and all of your effort.
    Thanks! I'll treat the rest of your post in the positive, non-aggressive way I'm sure you intended then...

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    Now, then... Do you see how the giant text and ranting tone might come off a bit... off, compared to saying either what you did here, or even just a simple, one-line "this was not meant to be publically accessible, please do not link," in a normal, non-bold font size? You guys, in general, have a very professional seeming site (though I have some issues with how it shows on my phone now...), and this seemed incongruous.
    Sure, but to be honest we went through all of this with Bestiary 2 and asked/made very clear on every board we could, that posting links to content in the work areas was not desired. We currently have no other technically viable means of doing what we do without adding significant time delays to the process. The big bold text was me being frustrated. And, as a sidenote, I'm the one guy on the site who tends to screw things up when it comes to any sort of diplomacy effort which means I'm usually the last person people want communicating with people "off site." However, I'm also ultimately the final person responsible for the site and overnight we became aware of a LOT of links being posted all over the web to the work area content. I had to do something quick and the big bold text was me showing my irritation at having to do this.

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    Second, the big rant, shouldn't that have been more of an internal rant?
    Which "the big rant" are you referring to? The big bold text on the UC pages, or my previous post here?

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    After all, someone made the page publically visible, like the rest of the work queue stuff. I check that page fairly often, so I'm sure someone would have found it. That's not our fault, is it? We didn't hack in, or abuse our permissions in order to gain access to the Ultimate Combat page and then illicitly post it across the message boards - you guys made it visible, someone found it, and, as it seemed no different from anything else (which is fine to link), it got distributed because it was interesting. Why are you acting like we did something wrong?
    We didn't/don't have a way NOT to have it be public. We post content in the work area because that's NOT the final place for it on the site. We don't go out of our way to make something public or not public. If its on the site it HAS to be public since there's no mechanical way of doing otherwise. The only part that got me bugged was that we tried to be very clear the last time that posting links kills our process and our agreement thus causing us to have to do other things. Of course not everyone could have known that, but most people read the Paizo boards, and other boards, and we hoped the word would have spread. It didn't and yes, that's on us. The long and short of it becomes though that if we are to adhere to our agreement with the publishers we can't rely on asking people not to post links clearly. We're still very hopeful the new security features will be in place in the next few weeks from Google but until they are we have two massive books we have to work on.

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    Again, I love the work you're doing, I really do. This is just... odd, to me.
    It's odd because its me. I'm prone to snap decisions. In general though don't hold my actions against the site or the others who volunteer massive amounts of their time to the site. They had nothing to do with it other than making me aware of links they discovered on various boards.

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    EDIT: Just for the record, I'm the guy in my group that has to buy all the books, so I'm definitely buying Ultimate Combat. Unfortunately, my local games store doesn't have it yet, and I want to support them just as much as I want to support Paizo (thus, not simply ordering it online). So... yeah.
    Well obviously we agree. I hope you (and others) understand why we (I) did what we (I) did and will spread the word not to post links to anything in the work areas.

    --john

  22. - Top - End - #142
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by jreyst View Post
    We didn't/don't have a way NOT to have it be public. We post content in the work area because that's NOT the final place for it on the site. We don't go out of our way to make something public or not public. If its on the site it HAS to be public since there's no mechanical way of doing otherwise.
    Would it be possible to set up a second google site with the full protections and shift content over when it's ready?

    It would solve your access problems, but I don't know how much of a cost there is in moving pages between google sites.
    Quote Originally Posted by Popertop View Post
    Congratulations sir, only a proud, great and terrible few have managed to produce an epic frown from me.

  23. - Top - End - #143
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    CTrees's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    I was unaware you went through something like this with Bestiary 2. When that book came out, I wasn't aware of it ahead of time, so one day it was just on the shelves of my game shop, so I scooped it up. However, with Ultimate Magic, I was first able to check it out via your work queue, and, yeah. You know.

    Ultimately, well... I don't know, but I've said my piece. I'll just chalk it up to a couple bad rolls - everyone fumbles sometimes.

  24. - Top - End - #144
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by CTrees View Post
    Ultimately, well... I don't know, but I've said my piece. I'll just chalk it up to a couple bad rolls - everyone fumbles sometimes.
    Silence brain eater!

    -chuckles- Well slip ups happen.

    Back onto greener pastures. Someone talked about the TM Class and the cost of making bigger weapons....(Page 144 on Pathfinder core) says that Large weapons costs x2 the cost of a normal weapon. I'd assume Huge would cost x2 that....etc etc.

    Something that gives me a hint of confusion with regards to the whole Titan Mauler using a Large Greatsword (so a Huge Greatsword for him).

    They got a Ability that reduces the oversized weapon pen by -1 at 3rd and -1 every 3 levels till they hit 0. That seems a little dicey to me given that on page 144 of the core, they talk about inappropriately sized weapons giving a cumulative -2 for each size cata, which seems unneccessary since you couldn't use something more then 1 size catagorey too big for you anyways.

    So a Large Dagger would be a 2 hander? Or a 1 hander?

    Just trying to get a better grip on how this works...

    Myself I'm of the mindset that characters with humorously large swords just seems characterful given how long it would take even a TM to ramp up to the point where it would make people go "Whoa" and since its damage dice typically, unlike the static bonus from power attack, made much juicer with Furious Blow, I don't really see that sort of damage being a issue in the mid Teens where they'd get it.

  25. - Top - End - #145
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    CTrees's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by NateClark View Post
    Back onto greener pastures. Someone talked about the TM Class and the cost of making bigger weapons....(Page 144 on Pathfinder core) says that Large weapons costs x2 the cost of a normal weapon. I'd assume Huge would cost x2 that....etc etc.
    Ah... you are correct. I missed that - it's not noted next to the table, where weight increases are, and I must have skimmed over it. So, yeah, that whole bit of crafting shenanigans is largely out. However, it's really not all that much added cost. Assuming double at every size category, that means a +1 Flaming colossal greatsword would cost 9100gp, as opposed to 8350gp for a medium one. A good amount more, but not crushing. Switch to a a greataxe and it's only 8620, v. 8320 for medium. Lower sizes, like huge, is essentially negligible after low levels - a huge, masterwork longsword would only be 45gp more expensive than a medium on - 360gp v. 315gp.

    EDIT: In fact, it's entirely negligible - a batch of ten colossal adamantine sling bullets only increases to 661.6gp market value, increasing my price per pound for finished adamantine by less than a copper. Less than a copper!
    Last edited by CTrees; 2011-08-03 at 01:52 PM.

  26. - Top - End - #146
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Fax Celestis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fairfield, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by jreyst View Post
    We didn't/don't have a way NOT to have it be public. We post content in the work area because that's NOT the final place for it on the site. We don't go out of our way to make something public or not public. If its on the site it HAS to be public since there's no mechanical way of doing otherwise. The only part that got me bugged was that we tried to be very clear the last time that posting links kills our process and our agreement thus causing us to have to do other things. Of course not everyone could have known that, but most people read the Paizo boards, and other boards, and we hoped the word would have spread. It didn't and yes, that's on us. The long and short of it becomes though that if we are to adhere to our agreement with the publishers we can't rely on asking people not to post links clearly. We're still very hopeful the new security features will be in place in the next few weeks from Google but until they are we have two massive books we have to work on.
    You need a big warning box header, then, on workspace pages, that reads "DO NOT POST LINKS FROM WORKSPACE PAGES UNTIL AFTER IT IS FINALIZED AND MOVED, ESTIMATED ON [blah] DATE." Something like the big green thing here, or the NSFW Warning template.

  27. - Top - End - #147
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Scania
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by jreyst View Post
    Hey Guys,

    This is John Reyst, the main dude beare of a LOT of links being posted all over the web to the work ahind d20pfsrd.com and the one responsible for the big bold text on the Ultimate Combat pages.

    I want to make something clear. We have an unofficial agreement with Paizo and various 3rd Party Publishers to NOT make their content publicly available for a minimum of 2 weeks AFTER the book has been available "on the street" meaning, in stores. We had this same issue with Bestiary 2 also. We post the extracted content from PDF's into a temporary working area while the team cleans it up and links it etc. We don't intend content in the work areas to be for "public" consumption since a) its ugly and b) its usually there before the "street +2 week" delay period. We had been told by Google (who hosts the site) that a new feature was imminent, one that would allow us to add different security settings to different sections of the site, thereby allowing us to keep to our agreements. Ultimately we want to minimize any possible loss of sales a publisher may see as a result of their being so open to the Open Gaming ideas.

    So its not us, or most certainly not Paizo, trying to be mean, or cruel, or whatever, its just us, as in d20pfsrd.com, trying to adhere to our agreements to respect the publishers wishes. We'll try to get the content up as fast as possible but having public messageboards posting links to the content defeats our agreement so we have to move the content, which makes our job harder and will take us longer to do since we now have to jump through additional hurdles etc.

    Sorry, but that's the way it is for now until Google gets this feature released.

    --john
    Perfectly alright and perfectly understandable.

    It is just that publicly posting something and then complaining about it being public is.. somewhat hilarious. I also do not see how this has somehow delayed anything, or how that would even happen. Or why. Which somewhat adds to the hilarity of the rant.

    But make no mistake; based on the work and the quality of PFSRD, were you not equipped by a penis, I would no doubt want to make sweet love to you.

    I'm going to go back and remove the link in my previous post now.

    PS: I love the way you recently organized Archetypes. <3

    Edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by jreyst View Post
    We didn't/don't have a way NOT to have it be public. We post content in the work area because that's NOT the final place for it on the site. We don't go out of our way to make something public or not public. If its on the site it HAS to be public since there's no mechanical way of doing otherwise. The only part that got me bugged was that we tried to be very clear the last time that posting links kills our process and our agreement thus causing us to have to do other things. Of course not everyone could have known that, but most people read the Paizo boards, and other boards, and we hoped the word would have spread. It didn't and yes, that's on us. The long and short of it becomes though that if we are to adhere to our agreement with the publishers we can't rely on asking people not to post links clearly. We're still very hopeful the new security features will be in place in the next few weeks from Google but until they are we have two massive books we have to work on.
    Wouldn't the easiest way be to simply set up a separate "work site", only available to editors, only filing finished content onto the PFSRD when done?
    Last edited by Luckmann; 2011-08-03 at 02:42 PM.

  28. - Top - End - #148
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Aug 2009

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by Luckmann View Post
    Edit: Wouldn't the easiest way be to simply set up a separate "work site", only available to editors, only filing finished content onto the PFSRD when done?
    This is what we're going to have to do. The problem is there are additional copy and paste steps and script changes that will need to be made based on the links not being on the right site etc. hence, additional time for the process. We're dealing with hundreds and hundreds of pages of content, and automate as much of it as we can. The problem is the final "pretty it up" steps still include a lot of manual checking for bad/incorrect/missing links etc.
    Last edited by jreyst; 2011-08-03 at 02:49 PM.

  29. - Top - End - #149
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Prime32's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ireland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    Quote Originally Posted by Luckmann View Post
    PS: I love the way you recently organized Archetypes. <3
    I'd already made lists in that format, which became completely redundant when the SRD did it.
    Last edited by Prime32; 2011-08-03 at 03:50 PM.
    Art - Homebrew - Avatar adoptions
    Spirit Artist in the Playground

  30. - Top - End - #150
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: [PF] Ultimate Combat released to subscribers

    For those who were interested, the firearm rules were up on the site, in a different section, and I got a peek at them before it all went down. Unfortunately, the main weapons are all single-shot, and the damage dice are none too impressive (d8's, d10's, etc.). However, they also included rules for more powerful guns, such as revolvers, which have larger ammo capacities. So, if I were to play a gunslinger, I would definitely beg my DM to let me use advanced firearms.

    Oh yeah, and the Pistolero archetype looked better than the actual class; it let you fire pistols without the possibility of jamming, and it gives you a source of bonus damage.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •