Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Numataro-Sama

Andrew Christian's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 2013 Dedicated Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul. 2,002 posts (6,054 including aliases). 3 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 13 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,002 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

2 people marked this as a favorite.
GM Bold Strider wrote:

All the pro-modified PotP people seem to be saying is "This lets you Bluff in social circumstances instead of using Knowledge(________) or any other Int-based skill."

The problem with this interpretation is that PotP doesn't do anything then. You can already do this with the Bluff skill. You can already tell people that you are some rich and famous guy from somewhere no one has heard of. You can convince them that your Knowledge is the correct Knowledge. That is what Bluff is. If you follow this interpretation, the masterpiece just gives a +4 to Bluff and Disguise.

This makes PotP vastly weaker than many other options you can take in its place and goes against a plain reading of the text, in my opinion. If the writer intended for it to be a simple +4 to Bluff and Disguise, then they would have just written that.

Sure it does. Bluff isn't just a roll vs a sense motive. There are modifiers, some quite heavy, based on how dubious your lie is.

Pageant of the Peacock let's you mitigate the dubiousness of the lie, by effectively making up info that's believable. So that instead of potentially getting a -10 or -20 on your bluff check, you get a +4 with either no or less of a penalty.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Quest for perfection 1 and 3. Just make sure the final fights of both aren't too much.

Cyphermage Dilemma can also have some very fun encounters and some hilarious wackiness at subtier 1-2.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Disk Elemental wrote:
LazarX wrote:


it dies even sooner when it becomes "give the player what he wants, because he can twist rules language creatively."

There's no twisting of the rules being done.

Peacock Pageantry wrote:


For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check.

RAW, the masterpiece allows you to make knowledge checks. Saying otherwise is "twisting" the rules.

Does it make a whole lot of logical sense? Not really.

But it's magic, it doesn't have to make logical sense; according to the description of masterpieces, they are supernatural effects unless otherwise stated.

As always, quoting a singular phrase in the larger context, a rule does not make.

Reading that phrase in the larger context certainly lends ambiguity to it, and as such, allowing it only to fake an Intelligence check, but not actually know something, certainly is a legitimate interpretation.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Rudy2 wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Having read the ability carefully, I don't see it as invalidating people who make legitimate skill investment in knowledges. I see it as an art for effectively faking knowledges to bluff someone when you're passing off yourself to be someone you're not, as lack of knowledge is generally the Achilles Heel to many a would-be impersonator.

IF this is a valid interpretation of the ability, so that I can tell a player "No, you can't actually know true facts about monsters using this ability, you're just faking.", then that 100% resolves any issues I have with it. There's no more problem.

However, many people, including many in this thread, are very insistent that it does really truly provide real knowledge, and that if I say otherwise I'm going against the rules.

Obviously, because there are two very different interpretations of the rule, it is ambiguous enough to not be clear and cut on how it works.

Therefore, you would be completely in your rights to interpret it in one way or the other as you wish.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Holmes?

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

RobertN-MSP wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
I'd cut the Witch.
Likely my fault... The Extra Hex feat should be banned.

You were my first.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

andreww wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
But dipping a level of crossblooded sorcerer (orc/dragon) so you do +2 damage per damage die with your Wizard spells

Finally, a way to actually get vaguely encounter relevant direct damage spells as opposed to the anaemic rubbish they are without it. Also you missed the Goblin Fire Drum for +3/dice. The move from 2e to 3e murdered direct damage as an effective form of magic as HP scale far faster than damage dice do.

Quote:
or dipping a level of Cleric of Gozreh so you can get the Growth subdomain so you can enlarge 7 rounds per day with your otherwise reasonable Dragon Disciple...
Or they could just cast Enlarge Person, its only level 1 and lasts 1minute/level. Dipping and losing yet another caster level seems like a terrible idea.

Uh, what?!

Not sure how you can argue with a straight face that magic is underpowered and the only way to make it worthwhile is to make a dubious single class level dip to amp it up.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Finlanderboy wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:


But dipping a level of crossblooded sorcerer (orc/dragon) so you do +2 damage per damage die with your Wizard spells or dipping a level of Cleric of Gozreh so you can get the Growth subdomain so you can enlarge 7 rounds per day with your otherwise reasonable Dragon Disciple...

... is perfectly fine.

Or maybe is badwrongfun if you are that type of bully.

I don't appreciate being misrepresented. I don't bully anyone.

But nobody can sit here and say that dipping particular classes just to specifically eke every last ounce of power out of the game rules isn't overpowered.

If that's how you have fun, so be it. You just happen to have fun with overpowered options.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

FLite wrote:
Because the druid doesn't have any limiting language on what ACs it can take. If something is an animal companion, the druid can take it. (Barring certain archetypes.)

A legal source granting access to something, is exactly that, a source that essentially adds to a list of what you have access to.

So the archetypes that expand cavalier mount options or ranger animal companion options are exactly that: another source granting legal access to something.

In this case, the Roc animal companion entry in the Bestiary is not expanding the ranger's list of options. It is merely saying that rangers and druids that take the roc...

In the case of a druid, it isn't the Bestiary that is granting the druid access, its the Core Rulebook that grants the druid access to the options in the Bestiary.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I would allow a Worg with order of the paw.

I mean a Worg is just the magical beast version of a Wolf.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

When I ran this a week or so ago, the players summoned a large air elemental, it went up and sucked all the bad guys into a vortex, and then they climbed with communal spider climb.

It was quite anticlimactic.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Congrats!

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Starglim wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
What if you retrain a 1 level class into something else. The way I've read it, to me it doesn't imply that you actually lose the stuff you got from the previous class or gain what you would normally get from the second without also paying to retrain the feats/class features.
If you retrain a level, you remove the class features you got for that level and replace them with those granted by your new choice.

Note: when retraining class levels, you retrain backwards. In other words the first level of a class you can retrain is the last level you took. You can't cherry pick which level to retrain.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

And Lirianne has no special materials and barely any money to buy them. So is nearly completely ineffective vs DR.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

andreww wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
NPCs decidedly do not follow all the same rules as PFS PCs.

NPC's may use different rules to PC's at the point of creation and may have access to material which PC's do not have but once they hit the table they use the same rules for play as everyone else unless something in their stat block calls it out as being different.

Quote the Pathfinder rule that disallows this then.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Woo!

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Sammy T wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Otherwise a wizard could stand in the 5' square behind his 2 fighter friends and not have to make concentration checks to cast defensively against an Ogre.

That wizard has cover and does not provoke while casting if there is a wall of PCs between him and the Ogre.

** spoiler omitted **

Yes, now go read the soft cover rules and half high walls rules on the next page, either if which can be used to say a Large Ogre that's twice your size can consider you not cover if its closer to the cover than you. Or if the cover is half your height. And the fact that soft cover states you don't get other things cover grants.

So if its Ogre who's 10' or taller and two fighters who are roughly half height by the way the grid works, and the wizard... It could be argued that the fighters provide partial cover at best, and being the same distance away from partial cover essentially negates the cover.

Would you rather the +4 to your AC or have to cast defensively?

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Iron Giant wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Pirate Rob wrote:

Probably a slight misunderstanding of:

CRB wrote:
Friend: You can move through a square occupied by a friendly character, unless you are charging. When you move through a square occupied by a friendly character, that character doesn't provide you with cover.

No. My understanding of the rule of soft cover, is that it only provides an AC bonus vs ranged attacks. That it otherwise does not act as cover and thus does not stop an AoO.

Otherwise a wizard could stand in the 5' square behind his 2 fighter friends and not have to make concentration checks to cast defensively against an Ogre.

Careful with the details though. A reach weapon counts as ranged for the purpose of cover.

My example would be moot if that wasn't assumed.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pirate Rob wrote:

Probably a slight misunderstanding of:

CRB wrote:
Friend: You can move through a square occupied by a friendly character, unless you are charging. When you move through a square occupied by a friendly character, that character doesn't provide you with cover.

No. My understanding of the rule of soft cover, is that it only provides an AC bonus vs ranged attacks. That it otherwise does not act as cover and thus does not stop an AoO.

Otherwise a wizard could stand in the 5' square behind his 2 fighter friends and not have to make concentration checks to cast defensively against an Ogre.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Iron Giant wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
Iron Giant wrote:
If you want an almost guaranteed rules debate, try going into stealth using an ally for cover, then move straight to a non-flanking position for a flat-footed sneak attack.
Yeah, starting your turn off by doing something the rules explicitly call out as not working tends to cause people to point that out..

I suppose that was a bit ambiguous. The soft cover stealth part is the catch, but otherwise it's legal as far as I can tell. I use it as an example because 1) the stealth with soft cover catch is strangely buried under the main heading "cover and attacks of opportunity" in the pfsrd, while the CRB places it under "soft cover" rather than "cover and stealth checks". In other words, it can be hard to find even if you're looking for it. 2) the stealth rules have been changed in an errata, so even if someone did know them, they might not now. 3) said errata is ambiguous, so you have to actually dig up a post on here by Jason Bulmahn to verify that yes, you can sneak attack from stealth.

Soft cover does not disallow attacks of opportunity, nor can you use soft cover to stealth.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

It also says that GM's may apply credit like players.

Just because in that particular paragraph it doesn't specifically say it, doesn't mean you can't.

You gotta take the entire section in context with itself. Not read each paragraph as a separate entity.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Sniggevert wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Unless I've misunderstood something, when you assign a higher-level pregen chronicle to a 1st-level PC, you can "scale it down" (reduce the gold to 500gp) and apply it immediately.
True for pre-gen...not an option for GM credit though.

In all cases, you can apply GM credit exactly as you can apply player credit.

The language in the guide is not 100% clear on this, but certainly you can take a higher level GM credit and downsize the gold and give it to a brand new 1st level character if you wanted.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Kyle Baird wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
I'd remove multiclassing.
This would solve almost all the problems of OP builds.

But it's for flavor I swear!

There's still crazy powerful builds with single classes (any summoner, twf gunslingers, most druids, etc), but it would certainly remove a lot of what some consider badwrongfuncheese.

*disclaimer* 1/2 my characters are multi-classed.

I have multiclassed characters as well. Many of the Prestige Classes require multiclassing to be able to take them. Bbauzh wouldn't exist in his current form if it weren't for the Rage Prophet requiring multiclassing.

But dipping a level of crossblooded sorcerer (orc/dragon) so you do +2 damage per damage die with your Wizard spells or dipping a level of Cleric of Gozreh so you can get the Growth subdomain so you can enlarge 7 rounds per day with your otherwise reasonable Dragon Disciple...

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kyle Baird wrote:
I'd remove multiclassing.

This would solve almost all the problems of OP builds.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

TriOmegaZero wrote:
^ What he said. Playing the game by yourself while your players wait is a waste of time. If/when I run this, I'm tempted to just fiat those turns.

That's pretty much what I did.

I was like, "Ok, they do some stuff to these guys, and these guys do some stuff to them."

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rogue is fine.

I'd cut the Witch.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

They would be affected as per the gaze rules. But talk to your GM beforehand. If you have no intention of exploiting the Charm in play, the GM may be inclined to handwave that part.

As long as you aren't doing or making them do anything detrimental to their characters, it would not fall under PvP.

As always, expect table variation.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

I ran it in about 4 hours time, and if I remember correctly, Walter ran it more Quickly for us when I played.

The key, as the GM is to really abbreviate the battle against yourself in encounter 2.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

What, the Con or the Vasectomy?

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

SCPRedMage wrote:

I'm amazed that people are missing what I thought of as the most important part of that post, Jiggy...

John Compton wrote:
We also recognized that these conditions would enable however many people to exploit the system and create a dozen new native outsider characters for a rainy day. In a way, that's a feature and not a bug. Although I scratch my head a bit at stockpiling aasimars, I'm also aware that the campaign serves a wide range of play styles and interests, so if someone is wild about aasimars and wants to play a bunch of scenarios in a month, that's his or her business.

One of the guys who runs the campaign has publicly acknowledged that they ARE aware some people would stockpile a bunch of aasimars and tieflings, and that he, at the very least, considered that the player's business, not his.

To reiterate, John Compton has outright stated he doesn't have a problem with people stockpiling grandfathered races.

You can't use single lines of text to make your case, while ignoring other lines of text.

In the same blog, it was also stated that 10 was probably excessive and asked everyone to use good judgement and to please respect the intent of this change.

You can't ignore that just so you can make your point.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Jiggy wrote:

For reference:

John Compton wrote:
From there, we drew up a fair window to allow players to lock in another native outsider or three and resolved to require only 1 XP on those characters--the aim being that most participants would have the opportunity to create and play at least one new character in that time.

(Link to full post)

Now, let's zoom in a little, adding some bolding:

John Compton wrote:
From there, we drew up a fair window to allow players to lock in another native outsider or three and resolved to require only 1 XP on those characters--the aim being that most participants would have the opportunity to create and play at least one new character in that time.
I think it's safe to say that it's fully within the intent for players to intentionally "bank" more than one soon-to-be-restricted PC. Somewhere there's a blurry upper limit, but I think it's very reasonable to say that "bank more than one on purpose" is definitely within the spirit of the grandfathering rules.

I would say the limit is somewhere between 3 (your post highlighted the number 3) and 10 (the number John and Mike use in the Blog as a number identifying what would be excessive.

And if you want to use RAW as an argument, I'd say that 3 is the upper limit, because 3 is the number used.

He says, and I quote, "another native outsider or three."

In context, I agree that the language is being ambiguous and just giving an example.

But if we need a hard number, I'd say its already in the blog.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Hey Walter, I guess we ran it wrong. :)

I got something wrong on this when I ran it on Thursday for a Pre Paizo Con pick up.

I thought the geyser was 1 minute of explosion every 1d4+1 rounds instead of a momentary explosion every 1d4+1 rounds over the course if one minute.

Made that fight really difficult.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

If folks abuse the very generous grandfathering, by doing exactly what you were asked not to do, why would you think the next time would not be different.

I mean seriously. Campaign leadership asked us specifically to not abuse this. And so if you basically ignore that, abuse it, you are essentially spitting in their face.

Make a Tiefling. Make two even. Make sure you gave an XP on it. If someone wants to be overly officious because your second game is after August 14, then ask your VO then Mike to intervene. As I feel they are also breaking the intent if the openness of this grandfathering.

But please don't abuse it. If rampant abuse actually happens and is observed then you can expect this level of trust to disappear.

Why? You might ask. Because you are breaking a trust. You don't have to like it or even agree with it.

But its a trust they asked you in good faith to honor.

So will you honor that trust or spit on it to satisfy your own desires?

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

If the first person fails on their knowledge check and says the wrong thing, then a second person can try. But the first person cannot try the knowledge check twice.

** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
Hall, not City or Citadel name. Koldukar and Jandherhoff are the names of the respective cities or sky citadels. Not the name of a clan hall within Jormurdun.
Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

andreww wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Majuba wrote:
David Baker - Manitoba VC wrote:
followed by Summon VI for perhaps a Huge Ice Elemental ...
So far as I know, only the core Air/Earth/Fire/Water elementals can be summoned with Summon Monster X.
For PFS PCs.
And NPC's work to the same rules.

NPCs decidedly do not follow all the same rules as PFS PCs.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Jonathan Cary wrote:

If they trigger the collapse:

- how many tubes do they have to destroy?
- where are they located?
- are they all accessible to non-flying melee characters?

It appears there are 16 separate columns and 2 staircases (I'm assuming that's where the railings are).

So they'd have to do 18 separate checks to break the tubing.

There are 10 columns accessible on the 1st level and 8 on the 2nd level (2 are the same column on both levels) and since they are columns they should be accessible to anyone. And the railings on the stairs are accessible to anyone as well.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

TriOmegaZero wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
I thought it was a clan name. I don't think the sky citadel names are clan names?

If the first person fails on their knowledge check and says the wrong thing, then a second person can try. But the first person cannot try the knowledge check twice.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Majuba wrote:
David Baker - Manitoba VC wrote:
followed by Summon VI for perhaps a Huge Ice Elemental ...
So far as I know, only the core Air/Earth/Fire/Water elementals can be summoned with Summon Monster X.

For PFS PCs.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Dhjika wrote:
Apocryphile wrote:

It ain't rocket science; pay attention, know what's going on, and know what you're planning on doing before the GM points at you and says "go!".

I read so many times that people should know what they are going to do when it is their turn but I can't count all the times I was ready to do something and the person who went ahead of me changed the situation so much that what you had planned won't work. that is far more likely in the higher level play.

So don't blame inatention when someone has to figure out what to do on their turn - it could be their plans have been dashed to pieces by other events just before their turn.

But if they are paying attention, it shouldn't take more than 30 seconds to tecalibrate.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm eating a twix bar...

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

All the above.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Jiggy wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
That should be good enough for ant concerns.

I never realized that PFS could help with home pest control. The more you know!

;)

He he... Stupid phone.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Jiggy wrote:

My wife's been wanting to play an aasimar for a while (specifically the "cool green-haired one" whose stats I don't think she even remembers), but had trouble settling on an idea.

Meanwhile, she also has a 3XP slot that's been a couple different things; I *think* the most recent was a human brawler.

She finally settled on an idea for an aasimar fighter/cleric archer, and wrote up the character sheet, using that 3XP slot.

Unfortunately, she hasn't had a chance to actually play that character yet. She might not in the next 30 days, either.

So if she comes to a table in September, finally ready to play her freshly-2nd-level aasimar archer/healer, whose XP is all from months ago, who was last played as a human, and whose character sheet was written as an aasimar in June, where exactly does she fall on this grandfathering clause?

Jiggy. If you finish the build prior to August 14, and don't have time to stop by one of my game days for even 5 minutes, scan me in the rebuild and I'll email you back an approval. That should be good enough for ant concerns.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Avatar-1 wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
As long as folks don't abuse things. It will all be fine.
Someone was talking about creating 3 aasimars and 3 tieflings and getting them to 1 XP while they can. What counts as abuse?

This would. It breaks the request that we respect the intent of the change.

But if just a few do so, then it probably won't be an issue. If lots do it, then it becomes an issue.

Personally, I'm not going to spend the time trying to police it. If someone local to me keeps having "legit" aassimars and or tieflings over and over, then I can take them to the side and request they honor the spirit of this change.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

3 people marked this as a favorite.

This proposal defeats the spirit of the generous grandfathering rule.

As long as folks don't abuse things. It will all be fine.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

From per, that's pretty much the rule already.

As long as folk don't take advantage, GMs shouldn't be denying things.

Now say 10 months from now someone plops down a level 1 Tiefling I'm gonna be skeptical.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

That also isn't true.

Items made specifically for an animal can be used by them normally.

So a horse could use magical horseshoes and magical saddles without needing a feat.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

8 people marked this as a favorite.

John and Mike were extremely generous in how open they left the grandfathering.

In the spirit if that, I'm not going to make any assumptions about what a pregen or gm credit baby really was prior to your (re)"building" it.

But if I know what your character was prior to your rebuild, and you come to my table without at least one more credit on the character that is also before August 14, and the current date us after August 14, I'll have to deny that particular rebuild.

Mike and John asked us to please respect the intent. If enough people break that trust, then they may revoke or further restrict the grandfathering.

So please let's not get overly officious or lawery about this. I for one will assume a player is on the up and up until they prove to me otherwise.

I request that all other GMs do likewise.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

No. He's talking about scenarios.

Each person must own their own copies. There are some family exceptions.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Each type of performance has two or three skills it can act as for versatile performance.

You need to spend skill ranks separately for each type of performance.

1 to 50 of 2,002 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©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.