Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
The Green Faith

Andrew Christian's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 2013 Dedicated Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul. 2,665 posts (6,718 including aliases). 3 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 20 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,665 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Drandle Dreng

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Akari Sayuri "Tiger Lily" wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Because its cheating. And it doesn't matter how fun it is, or whether you can directly tie hurt to someone through the...
Abusive yes, but I got the impression that it was very distinctly not cheating, just a really poorly designed implementation, hence how they got away with it.

They got away with it, because it really would have been too much effort to go and invalidate all those reported sessions.

But if you think that taking what should be a 4-6 hour session and turning it into a series of ten 23 to 40 minute sessions isn't cheating... Dunno what to tell you.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

trik wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

I think the "why" was adequately addressed in the locked thread.

A small subset of players ruined grace periods for the rest of us.

Don't blame Mike or John. Blame those who abused their leniency in the past.

I think the biggest disconnect I have is that I just don't see how creating a bunch of Aasimar/Tieflings was really abusive. It was behavior that Mike explicitly expected to happen, he was just surprised at the scope. But I just don't see it as an issue that I have 5 (unplayed since they were no longer legal) banked Aasimars instead of one.

Granting for the sake of argument that was abuse, that just means that advance notice is a bad idea. It doesn't mean that either more liberal grandfathering (as suggested in a different thread) or more liberal rebuilds is automatically bad.

Its no huge deal. I have 3 characters affected. All are still viable if somewhat less powerful now. But I am mildly irked at the decision, especially since I really don't understand it.

Note: I am not blaming anybody. I know they put a lot if thought into it. I fully understand why they don't want to go into more detail as to their reasons. But I think they made the wrong decision and so I remain curious and mildly irked.

It wasn't that a bunch were made. It was the fact that some folks thought it was ok to get together and play Master of the Fallen Fortress 10 times in 8 hours and brag about how they were able to get the run down to 23 minutes.

I can't think of a single person with a valid opinion that would feel that isn't abusive.

Sounds a little abusive to me. My question is, did they have fun? Did it hurt anyone? Did it break the PFS campaign?

If they had fun, didn't hurt anyone and didn't break the PFS campaign, why are you calling badwrongfun on them?

Because its cheating. And it doesn't matter how fun it is, or whether you can directly tie hurt to someone through the action, or whether you can directly determine breakage of the campaign, cheating is wrong. Period.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Lorrraine wrote:
As an offbeat suggestion, what if campaign leadership issued a holiday boon that allowed each player who took the boon in the time it was offered the option to rebuild one character. Anyone with a proto Mystic Theurge could rebuild that. People who didn't want to do that could rebuild one other favorite character that didn't turn out the way they wanted

We don't know what this Gen Con boon will offer:

But the last few years, Tier 1 GM's at Gen Con got a Boon that allowed them to build a particular race or get a complete and free rebuild of one character.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

pauljathome wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

I think the "why" was adequately addressed in the locked thread.

A small subset of players ruined grace periods for the rest of us.

Don't blame Mike or John. Blame those who abused their leniency in the past.

I think the biggest disconnect I have is that I just don't see how creating a bunch of Aasimar/Tieflings was really abusive. It was behavior that Mike explicitly expected to happen, he was just surprised at the scope. But I just don't see it as an issue that I have 5 (unplayed since they were no longer legal) banked Aasimars instead of one.

Granting for the sake of argument that was abuse, that just means that advance notice is a bad idea. It doesn't mean that either more liberal grandfathering (as suggested in a different thread) or more liberal rebuilds is automatically bad.

Its no huge deal. I have 3 characters affected. All are still viable if somewhat less powerful now. But I am mildly irked at the decision, especially since I really don't understand it.

Note: I am not blaming anybody. I know they put a lot if thought into it. I fully understand why they don't want to go into more detail as to their reasons. But I think they made the wrong decision and so I remain curious and mildly irked.

It wasn't that a bunch were made. It was the fact that some folks thought it was ok to get together and play Master of the Fallen Fortress 10 times in 8 hours and brag about how they were able to get the run down to 23 minutes.

I can't think of a single person with a valid opinion that would feel that isn't abusive.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

"Inari" wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
"Inari" wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
John and I discussed grandfathering at length. As John and I both advised in the first thread, this is the decision that the PFS team has made and is what we are going with.
Okay, this is a good answer.
Actually, it does not answer the OP at all. The question was "Why was this decision made?". Saying that it was made after discussion and that it won't change does NOT answer "Why".
It was already advised why the decision was made Here.

Michael,

Thanks for your responses. Let's put it this way..this sucks and you did hurt a lot of players by deciding on dropping the hammer without warning and adopt the FAQ as soon as it was released. However it is you and John who call the shots, so..okay.. moving on...

How about devising a policy on how the campaign will adopt the new FAQ as they come from now on to avoid such conversation in the future ??

* Will FAQ become in effect the day they are released if the PFS organizers decided to follow it ?
* Will it be in effect 2 weeks after the announcement is made ? to make sure all people are aware of it ?
* Maybe FAQ become in effect on set dates ? 4 times a year or something... so people check for new rules on Aug, Nov, Feb and May ??

I would like you guys to decide on something, announce it and stick to it, that way it is law and we won't get this thing happening every time.... even if you decide on something that is not fair..if it is not fair but consistent then the majority will accept it because it is law.

Cheers
Inari (who is really pissed he will pay 15 PP)

There already is a general set rule for how this works. Its in the Guide to Organized Play.

FAQs and Errata come into play immediately. They always have.

In this case, they made a special decision on how this particular change would be handled as it relates to grandfathering and rebuilds. The grandfathering at all was also a decision the Guide to Organized Play does not support.

Per the Guide, everyone with an early entry SLA would have to make some wholesale changes to their characters, up to the point of what was illegal, nothing more. In other words, they would have had to change approximtely 3 levels of the PrC to 3 levels of one of the entry classes (the one that the early entry SLA mitigated). This would have caused a ton of confusion and chaos.

So they made a determination on how this particular change would be implemented differently than the Guide suggests.

I expect that all complicated changes like this, will deviate from the guidelines in the guide, as appropriate for each individual circumstance. This game is way too complicated to make a hard and fast rule for how everything will be handled, as there will always be something that doesn't fit nicely into the rule (see the multiple threads on the differences between what the guide says and what additional resources say for the advanced class guide playtest, and how drastically the warpriest changed).

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Jiggy wrote:
Brigg wrote:

Okay, please forgive me for missing the boat on this, but I have three questions:

What was the old ruling? (Something about Spell like abilities and mystic theurge?)

There had been a FAQ which stated that having a spell-like ability counted as being able to cast that spell for the purposes of prerequisites, including for things like feats and even Prestige Classes. As a result, there were ways to get into Eldritch Knight at 3rd level and Mystic Theurge at 4th level, and so forth, using certain builds. Initially a certain population of GMs/players tried to say it didn't actually work that way or that it was ambiguous, but the Design Team systematically debunked all their counter-arguments and asserted with no ambiguity that yes, it really DOES allow those early-entry builds in exactly the manner people were talking about. The gnashing of teeth was (slightly) alleviated by an assurance within the FAQ that if there was ever any real, in-game evidence of overpowered builds, the FAQ would be reconsidered.

This was all put in place somewhere between one and two years ago.

Quote:
What is the new ruling? (That something has a new interpretation?)

After a year or two of the above FAQ barely affecting anything, it was reversed. Basically, the Design Team changed their mind and what was thoroughly established a couple years back suddenly ceased to be the case.

Quote:
Why are people actually upset? (Character build is now borked? )
The most heavily-affected Prestige Classes were the Eldritch Knight and the Mystic Theurge. Via traditional entry, a PC becomes really weak up until you finally actually enter the PrC, and it takes several levels for its benefits to finally start to balance out what you sacrificed. For instance, the EK is no better at attacking than the wizard for your first few levels, and doesn't catch up to other "cast/fight hybrid" classes' attacking potential until the end of their PFS career. (I can go into more detail on that if you like.)...

Of course, this is an explanation coming from someone who played his traditional EK through Eyes of the Ten. No SLA shenanigans.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Me and my Minion (wife--dont tell her I called her a minion please!) aren't skerd of you!

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Nope.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Only way to do this is to simply not play 1/3rd or 2/3rds of the module.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

Have I reached that point where I've become jaded about buying tons of books that I can't use? I guess I have... there's no amount of homebrew, PFS (Core or Encore), or one shot that will result in a potential 20% use of all the Pathfinder stuff I now own.

Look, yes: I believe there should be a free for all Pathfinder campaign that allows all official Pathfinder Roleplaying Game and Pathfinder Campaign Setting content. I'd be ok if you limit the campaign to non-evil only for the sake of weeding out the undesirables, but at some point I'd also be ok if you create a side campaign that's for all evil PCs as well. If it's Pathfinder, it should be allowed. The world of Golarion has been set to "emerging guns" as a default, and so I'd be fine with such a campaign following that guideline. High tech stuff should be limited to Iron Gods campaign, so I'd be fine with a ban on that (unless a specific module starts with a few ray guns on the floor, each with enough charges in them to fire a dozen time... i.e. they fizzle to useless junk on module completion, etc.)

I completely understand that with the years, Pathfinder stuff has expanded to a level where it has put a load on campaign staff to keep tabs on. The solution is deregulation and simplicity: gold value caps should make sure nobody walks around with a golem or siege engines. I mean come on. Siege engines? miniaturized? you're aware some of them have a puny Ref save of 15 right? sigh...

I still haven't figured out if you realize that the Standard campaign still exists, and you can still use all your books in the standard campaign per the AR document.

The Core campaign is an ADDITIONAL option for play. Nothing you currently have is invalidated if you don't play in the Core campaign.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

medtec28 wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
medtec28 wrote:
Billy Darios wrote:
medtec28 wrote:
Was hoping there would be more than just season 6 up there this year. Guess I'll be doing other things at gencon this year.
There is season 7 as well
And I'll try to play those, but i was at gencon 2 years ago and they had a smattering of older play. I haven't played season 6 since my bad experience at gencon last year, and neither have any of the group I'll be going with.

That smattering of older seasons was to celebrate the five year anniversary of PFS. But, having to muster 65 different scenarios every slot almost killed my HQ staff and I don't want to put them through that again.

You should try some of the rest of the Season 6. Judging an entire season on the first three scenarios isn't likely the best practice. Read the reviews. A good many have nothing to do with technology and you might be pleasantly surprised.

In addition to the three new season 7 scenarios and the four new specials, we will also have six new quests based around the new Occult Adventures.

I've been pretty vocal about this all along, and have pointed out that it isn't the tech that was the problem. It's the assumed power level expected of a character in each tier. We nicknamed it the year of the two handed greatsword not because of the tech, but because it felt like you needed to read off of a cheat sheet to be effective. Granted it was a tech scenario that was the breaking point, the tech flavor was fun, the 2 hour long initial combat, not quite so much

Judging a season by its first 3 scenarios is not a great way to really know.

Judging a seasons's power evel by its first 3 scenarios... same thing.

I actually think Season 6, overall, is easier than Season 5, and some of the lower level stuff is quite on par with Season 2 or 3.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Mattastrophic wrote:

Nefreet brings up a legitimate point. Many of the Core Rulebook's ioun stones are reprinted in Seekers of Secrets. If one of these stones appears on a Chronicle, does that appearance "unlock" the resonant power for that specific stone?

-Matt

No. Even if a stone is only in Seekers of Secrets, you don't get access to the resonance power, because Seekers of Secrets is not a legal source in Core.

You don't get to go to Seekers of Secrets because a stone also is printed there. The only time Seekers of Secrets gets to be accessed, is when a stone that shows up on a Chronicle Sheet, is not in the Core Rulebook.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Yes, what melferburque is experiencing, I also experienced while reporting Con of the North last weekend.

Event #51056
Sessions #s: 28, 36, 59, 77.

It appears that evergreen scenarios are not allowing unlimited replay, and the ability to replay (or get GM credit again) for scenarios played in regular PFS, is not reporting correctly when you replay in Core.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
Dave Baker wrote:
(except those found on chronicle sheets)
My opening post wrote:
(from a Chronicle Sheet, obviously)
Another post of mine wrote:
(via Chronicle Sheets, as I stated)

How many ioun stones from Seekers of Secrets actually show up on Chronicle sheets?

I don't think very many if any at all, that don't then list their resonant power on the chronicle as well.

The line drawn is very simple.

Core Rulebook, Guide to Organized Play, Traits Web Enhancement, and Languages Blog Post.

That can't be confusing. The only reason you are confused, is because you don't want it to work that way.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:

Although I'll abide by Mike Brock's ruling, I'm still confused by it.

I have to crack open Seekers of Secrets in order to read the text of certain Ioun Stones.

I just don't understand why I have to stop reading after a certain point (or how to determine where that point is).

I understand, truly I do, that Core is meant to be kept simple. I'm a fan of that.

But how the line was drawn in this circumstance just stumps me. Especially since, off the top of my head, it only applies to a handful of resonance powers.

The ioun stones that do not appear in the Core Rulebook are not available in the Core Campaign.

So the only reason you'd be looking in Seekers of Secrets is if an ioun stone from Seekers of Secrets showed up on a Chronicle sheet. And if I'm not mistaken, the only ones that do that, are the ones that have the resonant power written on the chronicle sheet.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

The resonant powers are only legal if they specifically show up on a chronicle.

This means that 99.9% of the resonant powers are not legal, because the only resonant power that I know is specifically written on a chronicle sheet, is a unique one.

That is quite pathetic.

Resonant powers and wayfinder slotting was invented in Seekers of Secret, a book detailing the Pathfinder Society.

How is it that a book entitled "Pathfinder Chronicles: Seekers of Secrets - A Guide to the Pathfinder Society" contains rules on ioun stones that are not accepted in the Pathfinder Society campaign?

This is a game folks: I'm constantly baffled at all the efforts out there to morph Golarion into the Flaeness...

You'll note Purple Dragon Knight, that you are in the Core Campaign section of the message boards. Resonance powers remain completely legal in the normal Pathfinder Society Campaign.

The point of the Core Campaign is to go back to the basics, and you can't allow everything everyone would like in the campaign, and still call it Core.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I have the privilege and honor to announce that Jon Dehning, the Venture-Captain, Minnesota-Minneapolis has earned his 5th star as of Con of the North this weekend!

He is full of dry wit, sarcastic humor, ironic demeanor, but overall, he's a fun guy and a great friend. He does his best to make sure the tables he's GM'ing for are fun and entertaining. Often, he is one of the most popular GMs in the are for people to ask to play at his table.

A couple comments:

Quote:

Jon is always a great representative for PFS. He makes people feel welcome, is cordial in his communications, and has a great way of politely reminding players when they're breaking the rules of Society or the venue. His fair application of the rules is beyond question, and he's always got time to answer a question.

I am honored to be among the (undoubtedly many) people whose characters have met unfortunate ends at his tables.

Quote:

I've never known a person to start on his Wookie costume for Halloween as early as Jon.

Does that count?

The last quote is a good example of the wit and humor he brings to our region, and why many folks like to give the humor back to him as much as he dishes it out.

Congrats my friend!

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

The resonant powers are only legal if they specifically show up on a chronicle.

This means that 99.9% of the resonant powers are not legal, because the only resonant power that I know is specifically written on a chronicle sheet, is a unique one.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

awesome!

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

The Fox wrote:

I am going to chime in here on the speed runs of MotFF.

I participated in two different speed runs of that module. For me, both resulted in chronicles that became planetouched characters (and both were later rebuilt into core race characters anyway, but that's beside the point).

But that is not the whole story. I had been wanting to play in a speed run of MotFF for a while, probably at least six months or so before the announcement regarding aasimars and tieflings. I like that adventure, but there really is a pretty low upper limit on how much role-playing there is in there. It seemed like the perfect choice for trying something like this. And it had nothing to do with getting chronicles.

After the announcement, my friends and I got together to play MotFF with the intention of gaining chronicles to be made into planetouched characters. John and Mike had indicated that this was acceptable and asked us to not go overboard with it. My friends and I all decided that one each of aasimar and tiefling qualified as a reasonable number of such characters.

At the first meeting, we had set aside an afternoon to play. We had four players who had all played the module before, and we were all playing pre-gens. Since I had been wanting to try a speed run of this module (and I had originally deemed that pregens would be the only way to do this, from an aesthetics point of view), I suggested it to the group. We set ground rules for ourselves: pregens only, all of the box text needed to be read, and we could not skip any encounters.

We had a blast. It was a lot of laughing among friends. Our time was nowhere near that 28 minute mark quoted up thread. (I think it was more like 61 minutes.) But we thought it was really fast.

Afterwards, we spent the next hour or so sitting around chatting, we ate some food, and just hung out together.

The second time we got together, a few days later, was about the same. Four pregens, all of the box text, no skipped encounters. Our time was a bit longer, but we still had...

I may be mistaken, but I thought you had to actually play the tiefling or aasimar, not just simply assign a pregen credit to one.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Akari Sayuri "Tiger Lily" wrote:

In a way, the change really does make sense - SLAs aren't really spells, and I actually never would have thought of trying to qualify for those classes with an SLA if the FAQ entry didn't exist. Using SLAs to qualify for caster level prestige classes is one of the more unintuitive things I've seen in the game.

The main problem is how thoroughly this screws over prestige classes. What's the point of publishing all these books full of PrCs if they're all just going to be inferior options to what already exists? Half of many of the (quite expensive) books are practically worthless due to Paizo's apparent distaste for anything that remotely resembles wandering outside straight classing. If the problem with PrC balance was addressed, this would not be nearly the issue it is - THAT is the core problem, and people were just using the SLA thing as a method to fix it without needing Paizo's nonexistent help on the topic.

First, thanks for not taking my chiding over hyperbole as an excuse for flaming. Im glad you posted a reasonable response that I can use to continue a good discussion.

1) I unequivocally disagree that multiclassing is a weaker option. 90% of the characters that have derailed scenarios I've played or GMd, have been multiclass monstrosities.

1) my first character that has been extremely viable for 15 levels is a kick butt Rage Prophet.

2) there are not lots of prestige classes. It seems Paizo is actually trying to do away with the glut 3.5 became. Seems archetypes, alternate and advanced classes have been the replacement.

3) you can still realize your build. Just a few levels later. I've seen a mystic the urge usung the old rules be very effective in my Kingmaker campaign.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Gregory Connolly wrote:
For what it is worth I just want a consistent ruleset. I understand that this is a complex game, but I really hate being told that I can't do something while other people can. I would really prefer to go all or nothing. Either don't mess with the rules in this fashion, or make everyone retrain out/retire. I don't get why so many people are cool with the "not anymore" approach. It drives away new players, and it makes those of us who have been playing long enough to know about the exploits but new enough not to have explored them yet insane.

I also like consistency. But what do you think is more fair? Telling 100 Mystic Theurges to retire, or letting a hundred hours of investment continue?

Would your hope for consistency also nix race boons?

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Akari Sayuri "Tiger Lily" wrote:
Mike Bramnik wrote:

Just as a reminder (I can't find the post Mike Brock made saying this at the moment, but I 100% know he said this) -

"If you think it's a loophole, use it at your own risk, for it may close without warning"

(I think that was in reference to using weapon cords for fast two-gun-mojo fast-reloading cheese for gunslingers, but it does apply universally)

There's a biiiiiig difference between exploiting a complete unknown vs. doing something that has an explicit FAQ entry that permits it, and then yanking and rewriting that FAQ entry in the most contentious and drama causing way possible, as though they are enjoying the suffering of those whose plans they screwed up.

I had some decidedly more choice things to say about this given that I was just about to start running an early entry MT... but given that my VC is here (/wave at Mike), I will restrain myself :)

Hyperbole doesn't really help anything.

And to be fair to the design/development rules team, the original FAQ did say they would potentially revisit the ruling in the future.

Now is the future.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Understood. But we are talking about such a small amount of characters, that the confusion it would cause to create some grandfathering system is not worth it.

Spock said it best.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Adding any sort of "This amount of xp or that amount of xp" option, just adds a layer of complexity that causes nothing but issues.

Just the "must have 1 played XP to make a new Aasimar/Tiefling" created probably 15 different questions of...

"What about..."
"What if..."
"how about..."

And so on.

So a clean break is best. It avoids any complexity whatsoever.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Jolene Danner wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Jolene Danner wrote:
It was a most excellent affair! Kudos to all the people who worked so hard to make it a success! Can't wait for next year!!

Hey, you were one of those people! You made HQ run pretty darn smoothly, and between you and a couple other folks, Jon and I only had to handle the big things.

So thanks Jolene, AJ, and Steve!

:D It was so well set up for me I only had to use what I learned last year to help keep things going smoothly!

Don't forget Dianna!! She was rocking, too!

Well Dianna gets her thanks in a different way.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Exguardi wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
What is it that you are trying to accomplish?

I think I've made it very clear what I'm trying to accomplish, Andrew, I'm not sure where your confusion is. I would like there to be a mechanism for people who have almost but not-quite gotten to play their Mystic Theurge, or Eldritch Knight, or what have you be able to continue with their concept without being left with a bunch of build-up class levels that no longer function as intended.

I have no personal stake in this as I do not have a character on that path, but I know there are people who do and I'd like for them to not be hit harder by this fairly large change than they need to be.

I've made a suggestion for how to do this in a way that I feel has little potential for abuse, and The Fox has made a suggestion that I feel has even LESS potential for abuse.

Make sense?

Yes. Thanks for the explanation.

While I feel for folks who were building towards a completely legal option, I think the best thing to do is make a clean break.

Not necessarily for abuse reasons, but because anything else will be rife with complexities that will create more questions than answers. Just look at the confusion around the "retrain if there is a change" rules differences in the ACG playtest and the Guide to Organized play. Something that on the surface looked pretty simple got blown up into a big ball of confusion. So much so, that John had to write a blog post about it.

So while I'm sure people can come up with some very reasonable options to avoid the rampant abuse seen in the Tiefling/Aasimar grandfathering, any system like that would have too many moving parts to make it viable for the average player to understand easily.

This is also such a corner case, that we probably are talking in the 10's of characters affected.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

I do not support this proposal.

I think a clean break is the best way to handle this.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

andreww wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
sarah_supreme wrote:
Still not fair that my PFS charcter has to compete with shenanigans that she can't possibly pull.

The crux of the issue I see in your comment, is that players or characters should not be competing with one another at all.

We gather together at the table to have fun and have a shared roleplay experience. Not to compete with one another for best character.

Sure it isn't a competition but if two players sit down at the same table and one PC can quite literally do everything the other can and then more that second PC may well be left wondering why they bothered turning up if all of their potential contributions are easily overshadowed. People should co-operate but they should also have the chance to meaningfully participate.

That sounds more like an issue with certain players who create characters that dominate the table. Not the options of the game itself.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Mike Bramnik wrote:

Just as a reminder (I can't find the post Mike Brock made saying this at the moment, but I 100% know he said this) -

"If you think it's a loophole, use it at your own risk, for it may close without warning"

(I think that was in reference to using weapon cords for fast two-gun-mojo fast-reloading cheese for gunslingers, but it does apply universally)

Close. It was in regards to double dipping Dexterity for damage with a Pistolero because Ultimate Combat had a misprint and forgot to say that Pistol Trainining replaced Gun Training. So people were maliciously assuming they had both.

Edit: Ninja'd

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Exguardi wrote:
John Compton wrote:
Grandfathering with a future grace period date was an invitation for abuse under a strict time limit.

John, thanks for engaging with me about this idea. I'd like to posit that this potential grace period would not invite nearly so much abuse, as the Aasimar/Tiefling grandfathering required playing only a single game before the end date. That's very easy to do, even for people that don't play very often.

On the other hand, trying to grandfather in a Mystic Theurge would take a lot of scenarios or at least several modules since you would need to get to level 4.1 in order to qualify for the grandfathering, in the most efficient Mystic Theurge path.

As far as other classes that could be grandfathered, these classes are much, much weaker than the early-entry Mystic Theurge. Early-entry Eldritch Knights are cool, but are already mechanically overshadowed by Paizo's own Magus class; and it still takes until level 3.1 to pull that off.

The only thing i can think of off of the top of my head that you can get into at level 2 and has any kind of "power" element to it is the Bloatmage. While cool, I've never seen anyone complain about a Blcatmage, or even notice if they were early-entried or not to be frank.

Does that make sense, John? I'm hoping to create a compelling argument here that could counteract the potential intense sadness of a decent amount of players. I don't even have any stake in this as I have no such characters in the works.

EDIT: I'd really hope to not get this discussion drowned out, incidentally, so if anyone posting non-constructively could... um... wait a bit on that until we've hashed this out, I'd appreciate it. It's for everyone's benefit I think!

What is it that you are trying to accomplish?

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Gregory Connolly wrote:
I also love how some people who play PFS, namely those who are venture officers, got warning that this was coming down. The argument that this is fair because nobody had notice coming from someone who admits to having notice is rich.

As far as I'm aware, the Venture Officers had no notice of this.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

sarah_supreme wrote:
Still not fair that my PFS charcter has to compete with shenanigans that she can't possibly pull.

The crux of the issue I see in your comment, is that players or characters should not be competing with one another at all.

We gather together at the table to have fun and have a shared roleplay experience. Not to compete with one another for best character.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Exguardi wrote:

Excuse me while I burn half of my personal “Cool Character Compendium” and do a bit of retraining on 2-3 of my PFS characters...

On a serious note, it would be nice if a grace period was introduced in order to let anyone who was already planning an entire character around a concept this ruling obviates get their one or so games in they needed to be grandfathered. Is that a possibility, John? Because I'm sure a lot of people are on the cusp of entering one of those prestige classes and are very sad right now.

EDIT: Especially anyone who had just taken their first Mystic Theurge level but had not gotten to play a game yet. Now they're stuck at Wizard 2 / Cleric 1 or an even worse level distribution with no way of retraining that as far as I can tell.

The last time they graciously allowed a grace period, and asked that it not be abused. It was abused.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Since this is the PFS section of the boards, can we all agree that the word GM refers to the person running each table, and stop making home game arguments that don't further the real dialogue here?

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

andreww wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
I'm pretty sure that you know you are going to a mining camp.

You do but you have no idea that particular camp has been attacked or that there is any great sense of urgency. Sharrowsmith disappeared months ago, the trail is very cold. Even after you finish up in the camp the module does nothing to tell you that these particular miners might be in any way important to the scenario or the society and yet the secondary mission and quite possibly the first are strongly dependant on them.

On the travel time issue the trip to the camp is a 20 mile journey using existing trails through hills. Anyone with a base speed of 20 can travel 12 miles per day, 30 base is 18 miles so you are automatically looking at 1 delay, probably 2. The trip from the camp to the valley is 15 miles through untracked hills reducing your daily travel rate to 8 or 12 miles meaning another 1-2 delay. If you end up with 4 delay that means only 1 miner is alive at the end and you have automatically failed the secondary.

That means pretty much any group with someone wearing medium armour is going to have to forced march assuming they even realise it is necessary.

So the RP you do with the Praetor at the beginning, where he specifically asks you what you are going to do to resolve his situation with the Kobolds, and that he wants it done quickly and all that really doesn't give the PCs the sense that Fort Bandu wants this taken care of quickly?

EDIT: The scenario deals with time very abstractly. It tells you what time of day it is when you arrive at the camp depending on when you left. It also tells you what constitutes a delay. The GM should not be adding on more qualifiers like movement speed in a jungle. The trail to the mining camp is an actual road, and as such no slow down in time should be used anyways. The only delay points should be assigned based on what the scenario says assigns them, or if the PCs manufacture their own delay by deciding to randomly roam about the jungle for a couple days. Lets not make this more complicated than it has to be.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

Im a little confused, too.

Lets say a Druid finds a scroll in a game, but it is NOT on the Chronicle sheet. Can they buy it, at value, and then add it to their effective list?

If instead they find a scroll that IS on the Chronicle sheet. Can they later, (games later), purchase it and add it to their list?

Andrew Christian wrote:
If it isn't on the chronicle, they can't buy it later.

Assuming that your response was aimed at me, that doesn't help at all, or even pertain to what was asked.

:P

I'm pretty sure it pertains exactly to what you asked. I bolded the part I was responding to above.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Darrell Impey UK wrote:
To be honest, I just get the feeling that whoever wrote this item had no concept of the actual size if an arrow.

Or what form of action economy would actually require an arrow in a wrist-sheath to begin with. I can't think of many reasons outside of needing to hide your weapon on your person, why you might need or want 1 arrow, let alone 5, hidden up your sleeve.

And so now you have 5 hidden arrows. What are you going to do with them? It isn't like you can hide your bow up your sleeve too... Use them in melee? I suppose its an option. There are rules for that. But they are worse than daggers for that purpose.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jolene Danner wrote:
It was a most excellent affair! Kudos to all the people who worked so hard to make it a success! Can't wait for next year!!

Hey, you were one of those people! You made HQ run pretty darn smoothly, and between you and a couple other folks, Jon and I only had to handle the big things.

So thanks Jolene, AJ, and Steve!

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

I'm pretty sure that you know you are going to a mining camp.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

If it isn't on the chronicle, they can't buy it later.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Matthew Pittard wrote:
You cant just swap out the Cheetah for the Wyvern. Its the complete wrong tier. Even if you dont agree with it.

That's pretty much what I just said.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Sanctus Spinatus wrote:

So I did it and the players had a good chuckle. We are not....okay maybe we are...

Three issue I had running low tier:
1). No stats for apsis consortium or guide on what he does when flummoxed my pcs went looking for him. I made him pull up camp and disappear.
2). No overview map. How do all these encounters relate? My pcs ended up with 3 delays since they kept camping overnight. Seems like an overview might have helped me dissuade the rests.
3). The cheetah made no sense ( playing down). I had the party stalked by a wyvern and to escape they had to run and quick cross clearings. 3 sprints later they all saved vs fort or had further non lethal environmental dmg. A cheetah chasing down 6 armed pathfinders?

In all great senario. I want to run it again with core because the arcanist color sprays and bard crystal notes blasted the final encounter.

This may have already been said, but I couldn't pass up commenting on this.

GMs are not allowed to make changes like this. We must run as written as far as changing encounters or the challenge levels.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

My intention, is that until this is fixed, unregistered characters will not get reported. But I'm not going to hold back an unspecified* number of reports in the hopes this will get fixed in the near future.

For those who care, they will get their characters registered so they can see what's been reported.

For those who don't care, it really won't matter to them whether their characters are reported or not.

So if they register their characters, they can email me to update the event, or when its fixed, I'll update what I have stored away for just this purpose.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

If the characters are not registered on the Paizo website, you cannot report them currently.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

well there ya go.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Joe M. wrote:
Matthew Caulder wrote:

John,

Does this mean Wizards can trade non-Core spells among themselves at tables? So if Wizard 1 has a spell in his spellbook, Wizard 2 can scribe it in his spellbook for the appropriate cost?

Looks like it, since

Quote:
Wizard PCs can scribe non-Core spells from spellbooks and scrolls during the scenario
:-)

I would say no. You can only learn non-core spells if your character personally has it on a chronicle sheet.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Bob Jonquet wrote:
Yes, yes, "X is not evil" does not imply "X is not a code violation," and the list of dishonorable acts is not all inclusive, but that does not answer the question. Taking the evil out of the spell, leaves just a spell whose use is to simply heal wounds. How is that in any way not acting honorably and therefore a violation?

[Evil] has not been taken out of the spell.

Simply for the purposes of PFS, casting an [Evil] spell does not constitute an alignment infraction. For the purposes of PFS paperwork (noting evil acts on chronicle sheets), casting an [Evil] spell is not considered an evil act.

But the spell itself is still [Evil], and casting it is still an [Evil] act whether its considered so administratively by PFS or not.

There would be no purpose to putting the part about Codes of Conduct in the FAQ, if the intent of the FAQ was to allow Paladin's to cast [Evil] spells.

Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

I think you may have just been unlucky. I've checked our Meetup Site and the couple venues you've been at recently, and what's been reported has been what was advertised on our meetup site as far as Core or Normal.

More information will be necessary for me to understand if things were switched on you last second and if I need to remind the coordinators to do their best to stick with what was advertised as best as they can.

1 to 50 of 2,665 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.