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. 1,982 posts (6,034 including aliases). 3 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 13 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,982 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
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

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

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.

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

2 people marked this as a favorite.

And there we have it.

My concerns are allayed.

Sure some of the rules were slightly off, but the end result was a GM trying to be merciful rather than hard core or vindictive.

Only thing I'd caution, unless these are brand new players, allowing the scenario to claim its victims can actually do far more to teach them to be better prepared rather than bending the rules to help them live.

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

The delivery of a touch spell on an enemy would break stealth/invisibility. But delivering a touch spell to an ally does not.

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

nosig wrote:
Dragnmoon wrote:
nosig wrote:
Do you say to the other players ..."I'd rather we go home than risk having a bad experience due to a GM that didn't prep the game earlier...."
Yes, as politely as possible. Just like I will leave a table politely if there is 7 players.

good. I would also leave from a 7 person table (though I would first offer to split the table and run another table... as I feel that two 3 player tables is better than one 7 person table).

The reason I ask is I had this come up at DieCON this year (actually twice). A group of three friends and I pre-registered for two games and asked the local VL to sign up to judge them for us. (One of them was the scenario he had written - we had been delaying playing it until we could get him to run it for us.) At the last minute the VL was called into work and had to Cancel. So we were presented with a choice - back out (in mass, that would be 4 players dropping the game) leaving the other two persons who had signed up for them without anything to play (different two people in each game)... or sticking the organizer with the task of finding a game for these guys with seats open that they could play...

Rather than cancel two games (we found out at least two of the players were from out of state...) we elected to play. I don't really know if the Judge ran totally "cold" - (he did a very good job, but I would expect that here - we have judges experienced in running things "cold") and we didn't get the Author, so I know we got "a lesser game", but it was totally a lot of fun! (and special thanks to our judge who picked up and ran both of them for us).

I do wonder though, would you also leave if the environment was to loud? I have experienced this in the past, often by getting the center table in a ball room at a CON. One where the players across the table from the judge often can't hear him when he talks in less than a shout. (This is why I will normally print up copies of the VC briefing, so that as I go over the mission,...

I don't want to call anyone out specifically.

But frankly, if a GM knows that they are "on call" then it is a bit irresponsible to schedule themselves to run a game that would likely put another GM and/or the coordinator in the position of either canceling a table or offering a sub-par session where a GM would run cold.

At Con of the North last year, I had a GM email me at 8am the day of the convention and tell me that he couldn't make the entire convention.

I had to scramble, while trying to do a half day's work, to get someone to cover. Fortunately Jon Dehning had run the 5-9 at our slot-0, so he could take that, and another guy stepped up and the 1-5's weren't slated to run until the second slot, which gave him about 8 hours to prep. Not ideal, but at least we didn't have anyone run cold for those slots.

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

nosig wrote:
roysier wrote:
Dragnmoon wrote:
I would rather a game did not happen so it could happen another day with a better experience.

Yep, I'm in this boat also. I'd rather go home then have a bad experience due to a GM not being prepared.

so, let's put this in context.

You are signed up for a scenario at the local shop, and when you get there you learn the Judge that signed up to run it had to cancel. The organizer says - "Jo says she can run it, she played it last week and seems to feel that she'll be able to run it cold - or with the prep she can get in in the 15 minutes we have setting up..."

Do you get up and leave?

What if you're the 4th player - and if you drop they'll have to add in a Generic (another thing for the judge to keep track of) or just cancel the game?

Do you say to the other players ..."I'd rather we go home than risk having a bad experience due to a GM that didn't prep the game earlier...."

In context:

How many times does a GM back out so last minute that you literally can't find another GM and give them at least 12 hours to prep?

How many times is it the same GM that does this?

Why is this GM depended upon to run a table?

In the 3 years I've been a Venture Officer, I have yet to have a GM back out on a game day and cause this situation to come to fruition. I've had players back out last second or no-show. But never a GM.

If a GM did this to me once, I'd see if there was another GM who had run that at some point, and ask them to step in (I did this for a fellow coordinator in my region once.) Or I'd let the players figure out what they wanted to do amongst themselves.

But ultimately, if the GM doesn't show last second, I would cancel the table and apologize to the players.

If this same GM just no-showed, or didn't have a really good reason for last second canceling, I would never ask them to GM for me again. If they do it to me a second time even with a good excuse, I would never ask them to GM for me again.

Why? Because even with good excuses, if you are unreliable, then I can't use you to make sure my game day goes smoothly.

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

roysier wrote:
Dragnmoon wrote:
I would rather a game did not happen so it could happen another day with a better experience.

Yep, I'm in this boat also. I'd rather go home then have a bad experience due to a GM not being prepared.

I generally agree.

I think people insisting a table run, is because they are operating out of a sense of fear. They are afraid if they turn people away, that those people will not come back.

All the regions that use an RSVP system, and turn folks away who haven't RSVPd, are evidence to the contrary.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm not so much concerned about the rules of perception vs. stealth, or grapple vs. moving, as those can easily be mistaken and ultimately don't make a huge difference with this situation.

What I'm more concerned about is the GM arbitrarily negotiating the release of the familiar(spellbook) for 2,000gp. That is clearly not in the scenario.

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

YogoZuno wrote:

So, a dragon (even a small one) cannot fly away with a centipede (normal, not giant)? Ridiculous, regardless of what RAW says. Clearly, birds grabbing their dinner in the real world don't go by those rules...

Now, if the thing being grappled was closer to the relative size of the grabber, sure, I can see this being more realistic.

One of the actions you can take while maintaining a grapple, is to move half your speed.

PRD; Grapple wrote:
Move: You can move both yourself and your target up to half your speed. At the end of your movement, you can place your target in any square adjacent to you. If you attempt to place your foe in a hazardous location, such as in a wall of fire or over a pit, the target receives a free attempt to break your grapple with a +4 bonus.

But unless you have the Snatch special ability, you cannot fly away with a critter you've grabbed on the same round you grabbed them.

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

Nice!

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

Good points Walter and ones I was going to make.

Its unfortunate that you experienced misbehavior at the table. VOs are not an exception to the fact that mistakes can be made.

But this is not a problem exclusive to VOs either.

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

trollbill wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
I'm not sure why a nature based faction would care to involve themselves with the society.

That is actually sort of the point. If there is no reason for a nature based faction in the society, then there is no reason for a nature based character to be in the society. Yet there are many nature based classes, races and archtypes. This is one of those cases of the Pathfinder Society in Golarion, not matching up with the Pathfinder Society in the real world. I am suggesting they make a change so that the two match better.

And, again, it doesn't need to be a new faction. I could just be an existing faction that found a reason to become more nature friendly. For example, freedom lovers and nature lovers seem to be common allies in the real world, so Andoran might actively seek out nature allies during Season 6.

In fact, doing something like this in Season 6 almost seems like a logical response to the technological threats of Season 6.

I think you are missing the trees for the forest.

An individual, nature based or not, could find their own individual reason why being a part of the Society was for them or not. It is not likely they would be doing so for strictly nature based reasons.

Nature based factions, however, are going to be focused on nature things, not gathering artifacts. So I don't see why a whole faction that's nature based would care to have influence in the society.

Coming up with a reason for that is not the same as individualistic reasons, and I think would feel very forced and contrived just to support a niche that doesn't have direct faction support.

I don't feel its necessary or good for the overall story integrity of the organized play campaign to try and shoehorn something like this into the campaign, unless there was a driving metaplot reason to do so.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm not sure why a nature based faction would care to involve themselves with the society.

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

Talon Stormwarden wrote:

I think the confusion stems from the fact that this is a module. Scenarios (recent ones anyway) have specific instructions to reduce the gold reward if certain things are missed or to reward if certain things are accomplished (it looks like this has changed from season to season).

The guide alludes to this on pg 35 in the instructions for filling out the chronicle sheet.

Modules however contain no such instructions, nor do the chronicles for those modules.

@Andrew Christian: Where do you find instructions for totaling gold and dividing by 4 etc?

There aren't any rules for it written anywhere that I'm aware. But modules are written for four players, so it makes sense.

It does not make sense to award max gold even if say they miss half of it.

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

I don't believe there is anything to fix here.

SCPRedmage... I believe you are aware that old things are most often not updated for new rules, even if new rules apply. So your argument that the chronicle only says tier 1 us not a very strong argument.

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

I do not believe scenarios are in excess. Modules I think are.

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

But to answer your question, yes you will need the book to play your character at gen con.

You can buy it at Gen Con I'm assuming as well.

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

If you subscribe to the hardcover line, you can tell them you'd like to pick up your subscriptions at Gen Con. Not sure about preorders.

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

I don't believe that's true Charon.

If they flat out miss something, total up the gold they found, divide by 4, and if it equals or exceeds what's on the chronicle, don't remove any. If its less, then note the lesser amount.

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

I know the OP is just trying to get advice. But I just wanted to point out, that by all evidence, the death was not illegal. That implies willful cheating by the GM.

If it was indeed a mistake, then that's all it was. A mistake does not make it illegal.

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

I'm with Bob on this Pirate Rob.

For me it isn't about authority or power, but rather a necessary part of the job that I don't particularly like.

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

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Talk to your GM first. You always have the option to talk to your VL/VC afterwards.

1 to 50 of 1,982 << 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.