Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Guide 4.2 and Changes to Pathfinder Society Organized Play

Monday, August 6, 2012

With Gen Con just 10 days away, I wanted to release the new and improved Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play, Version 4.2 today so everyone has an opportunity to review it and discuss it before Gen Con. With the help of the Venture-Captains and Venture-Lieutenants, and specifically the tireless efforts of Boston Venture-Captain Don Walker to help me with wordsmithing, we have added several much-needed changes that we think will improve your experiences in Pathfinder Society play.

Most notably, the following changes will go into effect on August 16 when Season 4 kicks off at Gen Con:

  • We added three new races to character creation for all players to choose from: aasimar, tengu, and tiefling.
  • Scenarios and sanctioned module now have one unified set of rules for applying Chronicle sheets to pregenerated characters.
  • Added all hardcover rulebooks to the Core Assumption for GMs and advised that GMs can refer to the Pathfinder Reference Document for rules from any books they don’t own.
  • Updated text so GMs are now allowed to take boons when they are offered on a Chronicle sheet.

There are quite a few more changes not mentioned above, so keep an eye on the Pathfinder Society General Discussion messageboard, where we’ll be posting a complete list of changes from version 4.1 to 4.2.

As for other changes to Pathfinder Society play, over the past 6 months, I have taken a keen interest in various things that don’t fit Golarion thematically or that cause confusion with power imbalance in the context of the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign. I have talked with players that frequent the messageboards, as well players at the various conventions I have attended. I have discussed the topics below with Venture-Captains and Venture-Lieutenants, as well as with members of Paizo’s design and development teams. While some of these might work well in a home game (and I have some players that use them in my home game), they simply are not a good fit for organized play.

With that said, the following archetypes and equipment are being removed from Pathfinder Society Organized Play as legal options effective August 16, 2012:

Archetypes

Gravewalker Witch (Ultimate Magic 84)
Master Summoner (Ultimate Magic 80)
Synthesist Summoner (Ultimate Magic 80)
Undead Lord Cleric (Ultimate Magic 32)
Vivisectionist Alchemist (Ultimate Magic 20)

Equipment

Arcane bonded items must be listed as Always Available (thus, no firearms)

Added to the Additional Resources on June 20:

No Large or larger firearms available for purchase at any point.
Double hackbut (Ultimate Combat 138)
Culverin (Ultimate Combat 138)

Obviously, these changes do not reflect every problem, or cover every potential problem, in the Pathfinder Society, and we will continue to monitor, discuss, and evaluate material as it affects the format and as new material is released. We do not intend actions like this to be a regular occurrence. We did not make these changes lightly and recognize that many of you will feel like this is either too much or too little or somewhere in between. But I feel that these changes are necessary for the health and well-being of the campaign.

With that said, I understand the time investment and care put into a character’s background and the planning that goes along with making sure the character fits exactly how you envision him. If you have a character affected by the changes above, I am offering a rebuild along the following guidelines:

  • You may rebuild any class levels affected, to levels of other classes as necessary. (For example, if you have a 10th-level character with one level of rogue and nine levels of the synthesist summoner archetype, you may rebuild the nine summoner levels into any other class or another summoner archetype).
  • You may retrain any feats that directly apply to the changes above as necessary.
  • You may sell affected equipment for the full price paid when you purchased them (as listed on past Chronicle sheets).

However you feel about these changes, I ask that you remain respectful of the feelings of others when commenting below. We are a community and we all know players who probably have a beloved character affected by the changes above. Please keep discourse civil and appropriate.

I look forward to seeing folks at the show and am looking toward a bright future for the campaign. I sincerely appreciate everyone who provided feedback, whether it was for the changes to the Guide or the options being removed above, in working together to make our organized play the best it can be for the player base and GMs. Feel free to pull me aside at Gen Con to chat about any or all of the above changes.

Mike Brock
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Society
101 to 150 of 708 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
*** RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Clint Blome wrote:

I would recommend that, instead of poking or laughing at the people some felt were gaming the system, everyone recognize that some of their fun has been squashed. The boards have had a habit, in the past, of claiming that people 'should have known better' when all they were doing was playing by the rules.

Not everyone chose the synthesist for cheese. Not everyone chose the Undead Lord to skirt evil.

I would never have chosen to play those classes, but I respect the feelings of those who may think they have had the rug pulled out from under them. I salute those characters.

Keep in mind that none of these decisions were easy.

There you go being all rational and stuff.

Seriously, I feel the pain of losing a character you like, like the vivisectionist or the undead lord.

OTOH, one of the 'perks' of a home game is you can run an adventure or two where you pull the synthesist out of the 'power suit'.

Fans of comics know that Steve is still Captain America w/o the shield, Tony is still Iron Man, and Rhodey's ability to kick butt is not directly connected to the War Machine. So I'm not sad to see those builds go (in theory)

****

This is where I feel that even the best intentions fail. I understand what has been banned being banned. I'm not going to argue against it. I just feel that things like the Synthesist that did Min/Max is going to feel alienated from the game because they now have a character that they can't have fun with, especially if they put lots of time into the character and build.

But the unfortunate part is that Mike and the Venture-Captains had to make some changes, some that are going to be popular, some that aren't going to be popular. Personally, I don't like the fact that only three of the boon races are being allowed into Society. That's my opinion. But I'm sure that those that are involved behind the scenes had lots of discussions about it.

I know of at least one player from my local PFS group that ended up leaving Society because he couldn't take a race from the Advanced Races Guide unless he has a boon, and he doesn't have the time or the funds to go to the different conventions to try and get the boons to be able to play as one.

That was his choice. Just like it's my choice to continue to play even with changes to the rules that I don't agree with, some of which I haven't agreed with in the year that has been placed since they were implemented. I now have one character, even though it's a rather low level character, that has been directly affected by these new rules, just like I had a character that was affected by the last rule changes that saw the Double Hackbut and Culverin rightfully removed from the game.

But that doesn't change the fact that there are going to be people that are going to be upset. But that's a position that unfortunately Mike and the Venture-Captains are going to be put in, because you can't make everyone happy all the time.

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Daniel Luckett wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
On the other hand, it's very disheartening to see people gleefully creating builds meant, whether consciously or not, to marginalize other people participating in a team-based game.
I'd like you contact your local police dept about the man holding the gun to your head demanding you sit down next to a summoner. If it was so horrible that someone now has the "right" to be a jerk because the class was banned, then why pray tell didn't you speak with your feet, or better yet actually speak to the person about how you felt about playing with them prior to the banning?

You're right, except people demonize the guy who doesn't want to play with the synthesist or the magus and is willing to walk away from said table.

***** Venture-Captain, Indiana—Indianapolis aka Red-Assassin

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I cant see how a character can become unplayable, due to stats. You still have the option to rebuild.

The abliity score issue, just think of your character is now independant of your synthesis. Or before there was a synthesis there was really a person behind it.

Think Spiderman loosing Venom.

I would hope players take some time with their rebuilds and think of positive changes that could be used to build on.

*****

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I am disappointed about the Synthesist though. I put a couple of cool tricks in Race for the Runecarved Key that would have had a... devestating affect on that class (7/7/7 builds especially). Oh well, I'll have to settle for "severely debilitating" all the other PC builds. :-)


8 people marked this as a favorite.

For a newer player, this negativity is disheartening.

Silver Crusade ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Daxter wrote:
You're right, except people demonize the guy who doesn't want to play with the synthesist or the magus and is willing to walk away from said table.

You play with a vastly different group of players than I then. I have multiple standing requests that X player not be placed into Y situation. I just tell the requestor that the burden of effort is in their court, and the issues resolve themselves without demonification. People make sure to wait till Y player signs up, and avoids them. I have multiple 1 on 1 conversations with "problem" players, and every conversation has resulted in better play for all involved.

Osirion **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Frankthedm wrote:
Good Call on the no changing ability scores! Folks rigged their scores to take advantage of the system with a obviously OP class. They got caught and now they get to keep their scores :D

Got caught? Doing what - playing within the rules? You're not the only person who has said something like this in the posts above, and I have to say that all of it sounds rather vindictive to me.

I personally want the broken archetypes, features, etc done away with in PFS, and I think that this is a good first step. At the same time, Paizo and the campaign organizers need to realize that when Paizo publishes something and then PFS gives it the thumbs up, players expect that they are doing nothing wrong when they decide to play these twice-vetted characters. Yes, the Synthesist Summoner is OP - but it was OP the second it was available, and it didn't take a genius to figure that out. And I think if you look on these very boards, you will see that this was pointed out and complained about time and again. (As a side note: I do not have a Synthesist Summoner.)

The described remedy, while gracious, does not speak to the specifics of this build's problems. One of the bigger problems with this build is that it begs for stat dumping - you get to overlay a suit of living armor that entirely makes up for all of your deficiencies. This is further heightened by the fact that the character is built with spell-caster stats, but aimed at melee combat, often multi-classed with levels in other melee combat classes. So now, with this remedy they are stuck with levels in a melee class that cannot be changed (because they are unaffected by the ruling) and stats that do not in any way support that class.

Again - I don't have a Synthesist, and further I want broken stuff out of the campaign, but this feels wrong. By so narrowly defining these rebuild rules, it feels almost punitive.

Andoran

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I hate to be the %&^%%# who's quoting cheesy lines from the past, but seriously people, can't we all get along?

Paizo opens up three races - that is three more than anyone honestly thought were going to be opened.

They took away some classes that should have been taken away. Sucks for some people, but kudos to Paizo for that - that was a tough call I'm sure.

Those people get an ENTIRE REBUILD of all those levels; sure, a stat allocation would be nice, and maybe should be allowed...but at this moment, it's not...yes, that might suck, but those who have to deal with it, will do so...the rest of us who don't, let's all just stop belittling others about it, yes?

For those that say munchkins are evil, selfish, soul-sucking imps who are hurting others...please, just stop. Those arguments make no sense. This is a game...a team game and an individual game...we are all going to play what we want, whether its min-maxed well to overpower yourself, min-maxed poorly to gimp yourself, or straight up balanced. There...is...no...right...way. Should you RP your stats, sure...but don't question how I 'might' play the game because I show up with two sixes in my stat block. That only makes you look the fool, not me.

So seriously, there is some good stuff here, and very little for anyone to be in too much pain over. Those that have to rebuild will mourn for a time, surely, and we should let them....and you know what? Maybe even assist them by throwing out actually helpful ideas for their soon-to-be-dust synthesists or master summoners or gravewalkers, etc! Wow, helpful? Huh, how novel.

In any case, it's nice to see some changes, and game on.

OK, stepping down from my pedestal to go sit in the crowd again.

Grand Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Matthew Morris wrote:
There you go being all rational and stuff.

And I once got into a rather disrespectful argument with Erik Mona. I'm actually rather ashamed of how I acted in that thread. I don't think I was wrong, and I'm sure many people here don't, but that doesn't mean we have to be jerks about it.

I just don't want this discussion to turn into the animal companion discussion where lots of horrible things were said about people who were doing something that was completely inside the rules at the time.

Osirion *

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chris Bonnet wrote:


I would hope players take some time with their rebuilds and think of positive changes that could be used to build on.

In my original incarnation I had a lot of hp and a decent AC. I very rarely dealth any significant damage.

When I show up at my next game, following current rules, I will be completely trivializing combat. I don't need to change stats to accomplish this.

Normally I do not build for such a purpose, but since you have taken away the concept I have worked the last six months to achieve and cannot reallocate stats to move on to my next concept ....... I guess trivializing combat will have to do.

****

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Artanthos wrote:
Hakken wrote:


and that same fighter with 7/7 should not be allowed to come up with strategic plans and ambushes. Just because his player would think of something, doesn't mean his character should get to think it. The fighter player comes up with a solution to a puzzle or an ambush tactic---should have to roll with their character to see if their character could think of it (since that character doesn't have average wis or int)
Should not, but frequently do. There is nothing in RAW to stop them.

it they can sub their players int/wis in for their characters---why cant I sub in my players str/dex for my characters? My 5 str wizard can lift that 150 lb door because I can? makes as much sense as their fighter with 7 int/wis being able to think as well as the player. there does need to be a RAW rule on that---below average int/wis--you have to roll to actually use player int/wis

Grand Lodge ***

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
TriMarkC wrote:
For a newer player, this negativity is disheartening.

THIS

Taldor

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:

The one I don't is Vivisectionist. It isn't an inheritly evil class, no more so than rogue. It's basicly a rogue who substituted traps and skills for alchemical talent.

Sure, they might have had to cut people up. My sister is a P.T. major and disected cadavers in college. She's not evil. It's learning for the purpose of helping others. I think that the vivisectionist can easily trend right along these lines.

Dissecting cadavers is one thing, but vivisection is performed on living subjects.

****

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ricky Bobby wrote:

I hate to be the %&^%%# who's quoting cheesy lines from the past, but seriously people, can't we all get along?

Paizo opens up three races - that is three more than anyone honestly thought were going to be opened.

They took away some classes that should have been taken away. Sucks for some people, but kudos to Paizo for that - that was a tough call I'm sure.

Those people get an ENTIRE REBUILD of all those levels; sure, a stat allocation would be nice, and maybe should be allowed...but at this moment, it's not...yes, that might suck, but those who have to deal with it, will do so...the rest of us who don't, let's all just stop belittling others about it, yes?

For those that say munchkins are evil, selfish, soul-sucking imps who are hurting others...please, just stop. Those arguments make no sense. This is a game...a team game and an individual game...we are all going to play what we want, whether its min-maxed well to overpower yourself, min-maxed poorly to gimp yourself, or straight up balanced. There...is...no...right...way. Should you RP your stats, sure...but don't question how I 'might' play the game because I show up with two sixes in my stat block. That only makes you look the fool, not me.

So seriously, there is some good stuff here, and very little for anyone to be in too much pain over. Those that have to rebuild will mourn for a time, surely, and we should let them....and you know what? Maybe even assist them by throwing out actually helpful ideas for their soon-to-be-dust synthesists or master summoners or gravewalkers, etc! Wow, helpful? Huh, how novel.

In any case, it's nice to see some changes, and game on.

OK, stepping down from my pedestal to go sit in the crowd again.

look at the cheesy builds people make with gunslingers, archers, zen archers, druids and some fighters. Some of them are MORE powerful than the four they banned. Shouldn't they be banned also?

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Daniel Luckett wrote:
Daxter wrote:
You're right, except people demonize the guy who doesn't want to play with the synthesist or the magus and is willing to walk away from said table.
You play with a vastly different group of players than I then. I have multiple standing requests that X player not be placed into Y situation. I just tell the requestor that the burden of effort is in their court, and the issues resolve themselves without demonification. People make sure to wait till Y player signs up, and avoids them. I have multiple 1 on 1 conversations with "problem" players, and every conversation has resulted in better play for all involved.

Well we are a smaller group so it has come conflicts. We had a player vow to never show up because he didnt like that his magus was not welcome. The player and any other of his PCs were, just not the magus. But there was also a thread about a year ago when someone said they'd walk away from a magus table and a lot of flak was given. Both reasons basically being that since it was legal you had to deal with it.

*** RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Clint Blome wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
There you go being all rational and stuff.

And I once got into a rather disrespectful argument with Erik Mona. I'm actually rather ashamed of how I acted in that thread. I don't think I was wrong, and I'm sure many people here don't, but that doesn't mean we have to be jerks about it.

I just don't want this discussion to turn into the animal companion discussion where lots of horrible things were said about people who were doing something that was completely inside the rules at the time.

I understand where you're coming from, and I agree with you. Anyone who thought everyone would be happy with all the changes is a fool. I think it's more good than bad.

(Aside, at least one AC thread I was involved in was very educational. It helped to be able to argue "I'm pretty sure you don't have the 'Wolf climbs down 20' ladder' trick. You'll have to push." Which also lead to the amusing image of the wolf being lowered down in a rope harness looking very sad.)

And as for the stat rebuild issue, I suggest people (pro and con) make positive arguments. "My character is unplayable with 7/7/7 physicals." "I'm just going to use legal combo X to ruin everyone else's fun." "Ha ha, sucks to be you." None of these are productive, or convincing.

Qadira ***** RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Folks,

Every time the organized play environment eliminates some options -- animal companion apes with weapons, summoners able to cast enlarge person on their eidolons, masterwork heirloom weapons, the version of faction traits from Seasons 1 and 2 -- there have been (a) people saddened, and sort of whiney, and (b) people saying "well, that was overpowered; what were they expecting?"

So, let's be clear, okay?

Some people, playing within the rules, are going to have to change their characters. For some people, that might not work. For some people, this won't be fun.

Having other people add insult to the issue ("Well, you should have known that animal companions with high Intelligence scores still needed to receive instructions through Handle Animal," "Well, you should have known Antagonize was too good...") is just not helpful. Even if you try to sugar-coat it.

Even those people pouting understand that Mike and Mark have the best interests of PFS at heart, and everyone understands that we don't get to play with all the toys.

Incidentally, in terms of skirting with evil, tiefling clerics of evil deities casting [evil] aligned spells like infernal healingdidn't get banned. Neither did Hellknights. In terms of complicated powermongering, Summoners across the board didn't get banned. Neither did Gunslingers, or wacked-out archers. Insert your favorite powerful archetype, or spookiest prestige class. They didn't get removed from the environment. They could have.

Shadow Lodge *****

Hakken wrote:
look at the cheesy builds people make with gunslingers, archers, zen archers, druids and some fighters. Some of them are MORE powerful than the four they banned. Shouldn't they be banned also?

Reading the explanation for the ban, it seems a lot to do with flavor, though. I don't think it was all about power.

Qadira **** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Amsterdam aka Seraphimpunk

1 person marked this as a favorite.

my main questions for how this affects my characters:
my gunslinger:

i have a gunslinger 1/transmuter 6 that paid for a mwk pepperbox when he had the fame/gold. he then paid to have it be his bonded item ( i think about 3rd or 4th level, i forget, not digging through the chronicles at the moment ). Under the new rules, with firearms not being allowed as bonded items, can that character be refunded that purchase?

also, his concept was built on the point of being able to have a gun as his bonded item, and enchant it. is it possible to retrain the gunslinger or change his abilities so he's more melee centric, where he can still have a weapon as a bonded item, and still enchant it later?

my synthesist:
i have a synthesist 6/paladin 2
i'm only allowed to swap out the 6 synthesist levels to levels of something else. but i can't change his stats at all? he has power attack, and cleave, both requiring a strength he no longer has, i presume I can get rid of those. But he's still a melee-centric build, and kind of needs a complete rebuild from the ground up to stay playable, or needs his ability scores at least to change, so that he can stay a melee centric character.

I'm fine with the change/banning synthesist. I'd just like to be able to change my synthesist, to keep with the concept i have for the character, rather than have to tear up the character and throw it in the garbage.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

I don't have much of a stake in PFS, but perhaps allowing rebuying ability scores for Synthesists and Vivisectionists might be appropriate. There's no need to punish players, and it might mitigate some of the hurt of having to rebuild a character.

Now, that said: I'm glad to see the Vivisectionist and Synthesist go. They were a big part of some major gonzo characters that made PFS feel more like a carnival sideshow than a society of adventurers.

Shadow Lodge *** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Silicon Valley aka JohnF

Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:
The DMs getting the boons is a nice thing; it clears up that whole Quest for Perfection pt 3 problem.

One of the things I liked least about Quest for Perfection in particular, and boons in general, is that you're often going to end up with a boon that isn't a particularly good fit for the character who earned it. But as I couldn't play a more appropriate character through the scenario for credit, and I wouldn't get the boon as part of GM credit. Now, at least, the second part is no longer true. To my mind that's a very significant benefit GMs have now picked up - not only are they (we) eligible for the boons; they can arrange for the boon to go to a character who can make good use of it.

Fortunately for me I haven't yet judged Quest for Perfection, so this option will soon be open to me as well.

Shadow Lodge

i have to admit that i hate that you "top brass" are going the rout of the RPGA of 3.5. bann and prevent "broken material" even though it doesnt adversly effect the game.

people will argue that this class or that archetype is too powerful for the modules, but the truth of the matter is that you would have to gut the entire system to prevent over powering characters. g&+ d#!n if you want broken play a barbarian druid that one hits everything, or a sorcerer paladin DD that can single handedly take on every module you can think to toss at it.

basically what im saying, is that this seems to be getting more and more constricting without accomplishing anything worthwhile. honestly if
you guys get into a mentality of saying "thats too broken, ban it" pretty soon you're going to have a list of things you cant play, thats longer then the allowed list.

like the RPGA.

Lantern Lodge **

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't suppose the rules for refunded equipment also applies to copied spells, huh?

I have a Rogue/Alchemist (Vivisecionist) who is going to have to be reworked now, but I've already invested a bit in copying spells found during scenarios into his formulae book. The main draw to Vivisectionist for me, admittedly, was the Sneak Attack progression, and although I've grown to appreciate other aspects of the Alchemist Ive been ruminating on dropping it entirely due to this change. However, if changing classes means losing the gold spent on adding formulae to his book, I may have to give the decision more thought.

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Alorha wrote:
Reading the explanation for the ban, it seems a lot to do with flavor, though. I don't think it was all about power.

I would focus on this. There would appear to be two categories of removed classes - those with mechanical problems (not power mind you, but either game slowing or confusing) and those with thematic levels of evil associated with them.

Silver Crusade ** RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Did anyone else read through the new version of the rules yet? First-level retraining is now live. That's very nice for new players, so that they have a few sessions to make sure they're doing things that actually work.

Paizo Employee ***** Global Organized Play Coordinator

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jyacobo wrote:

I don't suppose the rules for refunded equipment also applies to copied spells, huh?

I have a Rogue/Alchemist (Vivisecionist) who is going to have to be reworked now, but I've already invested a bit in copying spells found during scenarios into his formulae book. The main draw to Vivisectionist for me, admittedly, was the Sneak Attack progression, and although I've grown to appreciate other aspects of the Alchemist Ive been ruminating on dropping it entirely due to this change. However, if changing classes means losing the gold spent on adding formulae to his book, I may have to give the decision more thought.

That is considered equipment and you can refund the spells copied as long as it is noted on your Chronicle sheets.

Grand Lodge ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
TheSideKick wrote:
i have to admit that i hate that you "top brass" are going the rout of the RPGA of 3.5. bann and prevent "broken material" even though it doesnt adversly effect the game.

This entire idea has nothing to do with the reality of the decisions that were made.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Hakken wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Hakken wrote:
so my master summoner got banned---but the gunslinger with two dual pistols doing 8 shots a round and about 200 dpr is still allowed. ANd archers who can do 30 damage with every arrow by level 5 are still allowed? Guess the squeaky wheel does get the grease.

I don't know where you're getting the archery from, but that damage figures for the Gunslinger were based on corner rule interpretations on what size gun a character could use.

If so, pay attention to the lines which say to the effect that Firearms of Large or greater size have joined the Synthesist Summoner to extinction.

Pistol, double-barreled 1,750 gp 1d6 1d8 ×4 20 ft. 1–2 (5 ft.) 2 5 lbs. B and P

by just one adventure into 3rd level--a gunslinger can have two of these--giving him 4 attacks a round vs touch ac. with other pluses add in-(grit, clustered shot) etc on top of that. Everytime the gunslinger gets an additional attack by BAB--he actually gets TWO additional shots. double barrel pistols are broken.

it has always been the gunslingers which break our games---basically walking up and one shotting the BBEG.

** spoiler omitted **

Remember we're limited to emerging guns on PFS, so that's just one shot per gun.

*****

Seraphimpunk wrote:

my main questions for how this affects my characters:

my gunslinger:

i have a gunslinger 1/transmuter 6 that paid for a mwk pepperbox when he had the fame/gold. he then paid to have it be his bonded item ( i think about 3rd or 4th level, i forget, not digging through the chronicles at the moment ). Under the new rules, with firearms not being allowed as bonded items, can that character be refunded that purchase?

Hey Seraphimpunk, the new rule applies to the free level 1 wizard bonded item. You are fine :)

**

Michael Brock wrote:
Take Boat wrote:
So do full-level rebuilds get to change their ability scores or are we going to have a bunch of ex-synthesists running around with hilariously dumped physical scores?
No, people do not get to change ability scores.

You're the GM but I don't see this as following the rules as written....

PFGOP 4.2 page 28 wrote:
If a class, prestige class, or a class feature-dependent ability score is altered: You may rebuild your character to its current XP, maintaining the same equipment.

Stats are part of a PC's build. When anyone builds a character, weather using a point-buy or rolled stats, they look at the stats as part of the PC build. It's hard to have a fun, playable Fighter with a low strength, constitution and dexterity. Stats are part of a PC's build.


Why do people give so much hate to synthesists?

People are mean and it is okay?

Yet PFS says that bullying is not?

People don't make sense; it is a game.

Let others have fun and don't tease them for doing so when it was perfectly within the rules at the time.

Qadira **** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Amsterdam aka Seraphimpunk

oh. and one other question>

if you're allowed one masterwork transformation for a character, can you then pay the 2000gp to make that a magic item? and if you do, are you considered to still have masterwork transformation filled for that character? or could he then cast continual flame and carry over the continual flame from game to game?

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Seraphim,

Yes you can upgrade it.

No, doing so does not open up Masterwork Transformation to be used again. It's still on the item.

Silver Crusade ** RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

I have a general question about a new rule: Since "all diseases must be resolved at the table" now, can you spend 1 PP at the end of the session to have remove disease cast on you by your faction, even if you end the session in a "far out there" place? I'm thinking of the multi-part campaigns more than anything.

Osirion

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hakken wrote:
if they can sub their players int/wis in for their characters---why cant I sub in my players str/dex for my characters?

Yeah, it always drove me crazy when someone would claim that using stat-based rolls to determine the effects of Int/Wis/Cha things was "roll playing" rather than "role playing". They never seemed to want to "role play" combat by throwing actual punches, though.

Silver Crusade ****

cartmanbeck wrote:
I have a general question about a new rule: Since "all diseases must be resolved at the table" now, can you spend 1 PP at the end of the session to have remove disease cast on you by your faction, even if you end the session in a "far out there" place? I'm thinking of the multi-part campaigns more than anything.

You need to be in a city large enough (3k from memory) to be able to use your PP.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

cartmanbeck,

You still have to be somewhere where someone can cast the spell. Unfortunately there aren't healers teleporting around to help PFSers :(

Qadira **** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Amsterdam aka Seraphimpunk

1 person marked this as a favorite.
RachelK wrote:

Why do people give so much hate to synthesists?

People are mean and it is okay?

Yet PFS says that bullying is not?

People don't make sense; it is a game.

Let others have fun and don't tease them for doing so when it was perfectly within the rules at the time.

i've no qualm with them getting rid of synthesits. i didn't dump stats as much as i could, and mine's still disgusting to look at. +11 natural armor? and you can add mage armor to it? his stats accross the board are 20(22), 14, 14, 14, 14, 20 at 8th level. if that weren't an alien suit, that'd be about a 54 point buy character. without the suit he's 8(10), 10, 14, 14, 14, 20 at 8th level as an aasimar.

its just when he goes, i'd like to be able to swish around his stats a bit, so i can still play him. I loved the concept of becoming an angel , wearing an angel suit, but i'll find some other way to build that with other classes. but an 8 str and 10 dex won't leave much room for him to actually hit things anymore.

Qadira **** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Amsterdam aka Seraphimpunk

Clint Blome wrote:

Seraphim,

Yes you can upgrade it.

No, doing so does not open up Masterwork Transformation to be used again. It's still on the item.

great, thanks clint!

Paizo Employee ***** Global Organized Play Coordinator

10 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. 20 people marked this as a favorite.
Swiftbrook wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Take Boat wrote:
So do full-level rebuilds get to change their ability scores or are we going to have a bunch of ex-synthesists running around with hilariously dumped physical scores?
No, people do not get to change ability scores.

You're the GM but I don't see this as following the rules as written....

PFGOP 4.2 page 28 wrote:
If a class, prestige class, or a class feature-dependent ability score is altered: You may rebuild your character to its current XP, maintaining the same equipment.

Stats are part of a PC's build. When anyone builds a character, weather using a point-buy or rolled stats, they look at the stats as part of the PC build. It's hard to have a fun, playable Fighter with a low strength, constitution and dexterity. Stats are part of a PC's build.

I stand corrected. Yes, any of the five affected archetypes are able to adjust their ability scores to make their character playable. Thanks for pointing that out Swift.

Silver Crusade ** RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Clint Blome wrote:

cartmanbeck,

You still have to be somewhere where someone can cast the spell. Unfortunately there aren't healers teleporting around to help PFSers :(

So this means that if you fail all of your checks, you die (or are paralyzed or in a coma, in the case of 0 Int or Dex, etc) and then you can either have your faction recover your body (using PP) and then have them cast spells on you (also using PP) or drop the character? That's fine, just checking.

*** Venture-Lieutenant, Georgia—Atlanta aka Yiroep

So you can change ability scores? Oh thank god.

I don't have one to rebuild, but this makes a lot more sense.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
cartmanbeck wrote:
So this means that if you fail all of your checks, you die (or are paralyzed or in a coma, in the case of 0 Int or Dex, etc) and then you can either have your faction recover your body (using PP) and then have them cast spells on you (also using PP) or drop the character? That's fine, just checking.

Most diseases aren't going to kill you, but yes it's a possibility. You would have to handle that death just like any other.


Quishadi wrote:
By so narrowly defining these rebuild rules, it feels almost punitive.
?almost? To me it it looked intentionally punitive.
Quishadi wrote:


Got caught? Doing what - playing within the rules?

...players expect that they are doing nothing wrong when they decide to play these twice-vetted characters.

Yet you make a compelling argument showing they should have realized they were doing something wrong.
Quishadi wrote:
Yes, the Synthesist Summoner is OP - but it was OP the second it was available, and it didn't take a genius to figure that out. And I think if you look on these very boards, you will see that this was pointed out and complained about time and again.

Andoran *****

Michael Brock wrote:
I stand corrected. Yes, any of the five affected archetypes are able to adjust their ability scores to make their character playable. Thanks for pointing that out Swift.

Thank you for the prompt response.

*

Argument mooted by THE POWER OF READING.

New question! Since continual flame now persists between scenarios, can I hire an NPC spellcaster with Heighten Spell to give me a level 4 continual flame to thwart deeper darkness or are spellcasting services limted to vanilla spells only?

Taldor **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Michael Brock wrote:
Swiftbrook wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Take Boat wrote:
So do full-level rebuilds get to change their ability scores or are we going to have a bunch of ex-synthesists running around with hilariously dumped physical scores?
No, people do not get to change ability scores.

You're the GM but I don't see this as following the rules as written....

PFGOP 4.2 page 28 wrote:
If a class, prestige class, or a class feature-dependent ability score is altered: You may rebuild your character to its current XP, maintaining the same equipment.

Stats are part of a PC's build. When anyone builds a character, weather using a point-buy or rolled stats, they look at the stats as part of the PC build. It's hard to have a fun, playable Fighter with a low strength, constitution and dexterity. Stats are part of a PC's build.

I stand corrected. Yes, any of the five affected archetypes are able to adjust their ability scores to make their character playable. Thanks for pointing that out Swift.

This is a big reason why I love playing the Society, Paizo actively listens and responds. Classy stuff Mike!

**

Cool thanks for the new races and a rebuild too!
Thanks for listening in the board Mike.

Qadira *

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Frankthedm wrote:
Quishadi wrote:
By so narrowly defining these rebuild rules, it feels almost punitive.
?almost? To me it it looked intentionally punitive.
Quishadi wrote:


Got caught? Doing what - playing within the rules?

...players expect that they are doing nothing wrong when they decide to play these twice-vetted characters.

Yet you make a compelling argument showing they should have realized they were doing something wrong.
Quishadi wrote:
Yes, the Synthesist Summoner is OP - but it was OP the second it was available, and it didn't take a genius to figure that out. And I think if you look on these very boards, you will see that this was pointed out and complained about time and again.

Guys I just want to point out that this is now a moot point. Mike has revised his statement above.

In my opinion if you want to continue the underlying theoretical discussion it should probably be taken to its own thread. Just sayin'.

101 to 150 of 708 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Society® / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Guide 4.2 and Changes to Pathfinder Society Organized Play All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.