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 6 Season Dedicated Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul. 3,244 posts (7,298 including aliases). 3 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 21 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,244 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court ***** RPG Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Fromper wrote:

So maybe this should be its own thread, but since you guys are talking about high AC characters, what exactly do you consider high AC?

I think I remember reading that 20 + level as a general formula for what a front line tank should shoot for, though that's just baseline if you're not sacrificing everything else to go insanely high AC.

What level is Jon's PC with the 39 AC that goes up from there?

Taco just went through Eyes.

FWIW, I hit him regularly in Storval Stairs.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I must say that Jon's character definitely has a personality that he plays quite well. He also plays well with others. The high AC character could be used to WIN if the player wanted to, and that's a player issue. Jon wields his great power with responsibility, and Taco is fun to have at the table.

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

I would err on the side of not changing the VC.

Because certain storelines may or may not be important to specific VC's being a part of that story.

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

thejeff wrote:

More seriously, the slave could be owned by a retired Pathfinder operative and sent on missions as needed. Assuming the slave's loyalty to the owner was sufficient and the owner was known to be loyal, I wouldn't see a problem with it.

The "slave's loyalty to the owner" would be more likely to grate on me and would require some serious explanation. Janissaries and mamelukes not withstanding, slaves trusted with combat training and wide freedom of action, particularly into countries where their slave status wouldn't be enforced, were quite rare.

If I remember correctly (and I might not) Radovan I believe is Varian Jeggare's slave.

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

kinevon wrote:
josh Newton wrote:

I have wondered about this for both Aroden and Razmir. They both have items in the Gods and magic that give an additional benefit if Aroden or Razmir is your Patron "deity"

Azlant Pendant

Holy Mask of the living god

Both items are allowed in PFS. So the system has a precedent for Worshipping Aroden or Razmir and getting a benefit from these items

@Andrew: Any ideas on how to make this work?

According to your comments, these items either won't work at all, or should not be legal for PFS, even though they are specifically Golarion in theme.

Specific typically trumps general.

In this case, just like Priest (which is a trigger word for some things as well) Patron is not really defined for PFS. My hope is the new CC will define these words.

The way I'd handle it, is that while you can't worship either of these two entities, you can venerate them. I would use the rules on how to worship (i.e. one alignment step away) and just call it venerate.

However, expect table variation.

EDIT: A precedent for this type of exception is seen in PFS with saddles.

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

FLite wrote:

To expand on Andrews point by point

Andrew Christian wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


Soooo....

I want to make sure I understand this correctly, please correct any Gross Conceptual Errors.

A. You MUST follow a deity in PFS play.

B. You CANNOT follow a dead, false, or forgotten deity in PFS play.

C. Atheism is STRAIGHT OUT.

D. In addition to the above, if you seek any sort of mechanical benefit from your worship of your deity, your alignment MUST be within one step of said deity.

Does that summarize this correctly?

Nope.

A. You MUST worship a deity in PFS play only if your class requires you to.

More precisely, you MUST worship a deity in order to make use of any feature that gives a mechanical benefit to followers, priests, or worshipers, etc. of that deity.

That can be traits, magical items, classes (specifically clerics and war priests, but not oracles or druids), feats, or any other feature.

You can worship only one deity, it must be a deity on the list, and it must be within one step of your alignment. You need not worship any deity at all.

Andrew Christian wrote:


B. You CANNOT worship a dead, false, or forgotten deity in PFS play, unless that deity is allowed by additional resources.

You can however venerate whoever you want. You just won't get a mechanical benefit.

Andrew Christian wrote:
C. Atheism is completely legit in PFS.

Atheist Clerics, although hinted at in the core rule book, are not. They do not fit the developers world view, and to some extent their absence is what makes Razmir special.

Andrew Christian wrote:
"follow" is not a term officially recognized by PFS.

Actually a number of magic items mention followers in their flavor text, but I believe in their mechanics it usually uses "It the users Patron is..."

Andrew Christian wrote:
Its worship or venerate or atheism.
Or indifference or agnosticism, however those are mechanically more or less...

Not sure why you clarified my "B" when I added an "E" that basically said the same thing.

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

Bill Dunn wrote:
The Additional Resources document allows the Pantheons and Aroden appears on the cultural pantheon. Granted, it's qualified by a parenthetical (before his death) but he hasn't exactly been removed from the list. I can't really imagine anyone raising a stink about listing a character as an Aroden worshiper if you aren't deriving a mechanical benefit from your worship. After all, if you can worship none, then worshiping something that isn't a god (or no longer is one) doesn't seem a very far step.

In PFS, we differentiate between the word Worship and Venerate.

You cannot worship something that isn't in the Additional Resources, and you have to follow the rules in the guide for worshiping.

If you don't care about any mechanical benefits, you can use the word venerate instead.

It may seem pedantic and semantic.

But the point is, PFS has defined what worship means in the campaign. So please don't use the word worship unless you are going to specifically follow those rules.

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

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


Soooo....

I want to make sure I understand this correctly, please correct any Gross Conceptual Errors.

A. You MUST follow a deity in PFS play.

B. You CANNOT follow a dead, false, or forgotten deity in PFS play.

C. Atheism is STRAIGHT OUT.

D. In addition to the above, if you seek any sort of mechanical benefit from your worship of your deity, your alignment MUST be within one step of said deity.

Does that summarize this correctly?

Nope.

A. You MUST worship a deity in PFS play only if your class requires you to.

B. You CANNOT worship a dead, false, or forgotten deity in PFS play, unless that deity is allowed by additional resources.

C. Atheism is completely legit in PFS.

D. Correct.

E. You can venerate anything you want, as long as you don't expect any sort of mechanical benefit.

"follow" is not a term officially recognized by PFS.

Its worship or venerate or atheism.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Fox wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

Worship is the word PFS exclusively uses if you want mechanical benefit. You cannot worship Aroden in PFS.

Generate is the word in PFS to use if you don't care about mechanical benefit. You can Generate Aroden in PFS.

You keep using that word...

;)

Her... Stupid phone.

Venerate

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

Worship is the word PFS exclusively uses if you want mechanical benefit. You cannot worship Aroden in PFS.

Generate is the word in PFS to use if you don't care about mechanical benefit. You can Generate Aroden in PFS.

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

awesome, good job guys!

Sovereign Court

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

I finally created my fetchling, and dipped 1 level of Swashbuckler.

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

TimD wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

Um going to say the following bits with two caveats. 1) This is how I learned to roleplay, how I prefer to roleplay and I fully understand that others may enjoy this passtime differently. And 2) I'm in no way trying to say badwrongfun, but feel the opposite is being said of how I enjoy things.

There is a difference if you care about roleplay continuity if character.

Continuity is what you make of it in PFS.

Examples & blatant rhetoric:
Do you refuse to sit at tables with characters who have gone through the same scenarios that you have, but with a different group?
If not, do you tell them they're lying when they tell you about it - just to keep it "in character" as your character should have seen them there and they obviously weren't ... Probably not.

We are at 7 Season of PFS now, and not all of us have been playing since the beginning.
I played a Season 0 last night with a character than had GM credit & had to be completely ret-conned because of PFS changes. Should I make sure to break the 4th wall appropriately to ensure "continuity"? ... Probably not.

If an NPC dies in a scenario you've played and then you end up playing an earlier scenario with that NPC, do you disrupt the table in character to try to resolve the continuity issue? ... I would hope not.

-TimD

EDIT: removed what may have been construed as a personal attack on another forum member at the cost of another opportunity for a Princess Bride quote lost...

All of those can certainly be continuity issues.

But why purposely create continuity issues at the very core of who your character even is if you don't have to?

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

Um going to say the following bits with two caveats. 1) This is how I learned to roleplay, how I prefer to roleplay and I fully understand that others may enjoy this passtime differently. And 2) I'm in no way trying to say badwrongfun, but feel the opposite is being said of how I enjoy things.

There is a difference if you care about roleplay continuity if character. GM credit blobs have no continuity to maintain. Once a character has been played, using a system that was created to help newbies and allow fixes to concepts that didn't pan out, to do things you couldn't otherwise do (or typically do in a home campaign) is gaming the system.

Using GM credits just starts your continuity a bit later.

If you don't care about roleplay continuity, which I understand that not everyone does, then the difference is largely semantics.

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

Fabricate is a 4th level spell and has more restrictions on it than abundant ammunition did.

So no, it wasn't balanced.

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

congrats, and thanks!

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

4 people marked this as a favorite.

a) Yes
b) My opinion is that it is unethical to do this specifically to game the system.
c) No
d) I mind, but I don't say anything as I can't do anything to stop it. On the other hand, I do chastise those who try to teach this method to others and I see it happening.

I honestly don't see why just playing a 1st level character as is, isn't a viable option.

You could always start your build as Unchained Rogue, and then go Magus at level 2. Same net result, without breaking the spirit of the game.

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

So Paizo Con, 2014, I'm playing an early morning slot with Brian Darnell and Rusty Ironpants and a few other good friends. The GM had a soft voice, so he did us all a favor and had the VC briefing printed for us so we could read it.

He read it out loud, and we read it. And somehow I missed a very important part of it.

Scars of the Third Crusade:
My kitsune gunslinger named Forge Jorge Florinio Perez des las Alas el-Jorday Blakros, whom I play as best I can with an Antonio Banderas accent from Puss-n-Boots. I twirled my wayfinder around my finger and kicked in the sheriff's office door demanding to see the prisoners.

Rusty and Brian and everyone else turn to me and are like, "you do what!?"

I'm like, "what?"

They pointed to that line in the briefing and I was like, "Oh... oops"

I'd read it, and heard the GM read it. And yet still I somehow missed that part. Oops.

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

Hulking Hurler wrote:

Yup! It's so close I can taste Andy's excitement!

But I won't.

I am honored to offer a rowdy run fueled running of Plunder and Peril for such a good cause.

uh, yeah, please don't...

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

Lilith wrote:
Oh, hey, it's SkalCon! My artwork is among the items that are up for auction!

Yup! It's so close I can taste the excitement!

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

Well, we've covered our costs at $1,000. And last I checked we were close to $150 over that.

We need to cut a check for $2,000 to the charity to get the barber.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We wanted to use the more Norwegian version of the word rather than the Germanic... here's another interesting tidbit about what Skol means in Minnesota...

Skol

I can't tell you how many times I've been asked that as a Vikings fan. Most people think it's just a common, Scandanavian greeting...and it is. It can also translate into bowl, as in drink from a bowl. And although there are varying opinions on how 'skol' came to be a greeting, this is my most favorite one. Let's see how we can tie these two disparate meanings--(bowl and hello) together.

Back in the Middle Ages, rampaging bands of Vikings were roaming Europe and kicking the holy dog crap out of people. From Lindisfarme to France it didn't matter. For about 500 years, the boogeyman would check his closet before he went to bed to make sure there weren't any Vikings in it.

Anyway, at the end of the battle, Viking warriors would decapitate the king or leader of the tribe/army they had just vanquished and that night would drink from his skull--spelled skoll--as a sign of respect for the fallen opponent. It was only then, Viking warriors believed, could an opponent who had fought valiantly be allowed into Valhalla.

In battle, Vikings would urge each other forward by yelling "SKOLL" to one another. By doing so, they were telling each other to keep it up so they could drink from the skull (and the top of a lopped off skull looks roughly like a..wait for it...BOWL!!) of the Vanquished that night.

These days, it just is a way to urge each other on to victory in an American football game, but if you piss us off too much, we'll put Packer Nation's head on a metaphorical pole, parade it around, and then drink some Grain Belt from it, so keep one eye open, because the Vikings can go medieval on you in a heartbeat.

So, at least mythologically speaking, both meanings originate from our Ancestors kicking the hell out of some poor sap who was the leader of some hopelessly pathetic tribe that dared to give us the finger.

I mean, think about it...after a hard day of rampaging, killing, and pillaging, you're beat. You're beat. Your shoulders ache from swinging a battle axe and crushing skulls, and you got blood and brains on your new wolf fur hoodie. All you want to do is sit around a campfire, drink some grog, and shoot the breeze with your buddies. You're too tired to strike up a conversation, and as a warrior, you don't gush over someone when you see that they're still alive, so you come up with simple, one or two word phrases that capture the essence of the moment.

Today, it's "dude".

Back then, as the skull of the poor chucklehead (who hours before was some minor bigshot) is passed around, all you have the energy to do is give a wry smile over to a fellow warrior and say....skol. One word conveyed it all.

So skol has evolved from a battle cry of warriors to a common salutation or toast to friends, which in a way, it always was.

Only under much different circumstances.

And if it is just a myth, as many claim, well, it's one hell of a myth, and until someone can prove to me they DIDN'T drink from the skull of a vanquished opponent, then By God, they did. Because until then, it's just opinion, and I like this side of the story a lot better, because it's totally badass.

"May we always drink from the skulls of our enemies!"

Skol.

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

Hmm wrote:

Jon, as the Twin Cities official Poker of Beehives, of course I have a question. What does the name "Skål Con" refer to? Does the word, Skål, have special meaning for you and Andrew?

Hmm

skål

A skål is a Scandinavian toast of friendship and goodwill that may be offered when drinking, sitting down to eat, or at a formal event. Some fans of Scandinavian culture have popularized the the toast beyond its native countries, and it can often be heard in many peculiar corners of the world, especially in regions with a large Scandinavian population. The word may also be spelled skal or skaal.

Like other toasts, a skål implies a wish for good fortune and good health, and it carries very friendly connotations. There are a number of different ways to say it, ranging from a series of individual toasts in which everyone toasts everyone else, taking a sip of a drink with each toast, and a collective skål shouted out by a group of drinkers or diners. As one might imagine, in a series of individual toasts in which everyone salutes each person individually, one tends to become rather intoxicated by the end.

Several Norse poems saluting famous figures have included a “skål” or two in the lines, as in the case of “Gustaf's skål,” an 18th century song which the king later adopted as his official anthem, because he was so fond of it. In poems such as this, the celebrant is typically highly praised, with lines like “the greatest king in the north.” At some parties, people may improvise their own extended speech or toast, especially at an event where people are celebrating a marriage or another major life event.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.
jon dehning wrote:

Regarding the CRB:

I wanna give a shout out to Andy Christian. That guy spent a significant portion of his Paizocon tracking down every Paizo employee he could find and getting them to sign the book. Andy deserves much applause for that. The only person I arm twisted into signing it was SKR, who also drew a goblin. So there are two goblins causing havoc. You have been warned.

I also like that we received the "Not Cannon" stamp from Mark Moreland.

The other Goblin is a 5-minute recreation by Jason Engle (he who drew the Prestige Classes in the CRB--signed one of them too) of the Paizo Con 2015 Goblin.

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

Caylum wrote:


Not sure where your getting numbers from.
The DC for a known trick is 10

Char 7 with 1 rank is +2 Handle animals
Training harness is +2
for a +4, you still need a 6 to make them do a trick. a 19 to push it.

Most classes with animal companions come with a link ability that grants them +4 to handle animal with thier companion.

The math is:

-2 Cha, +1 Rank, +3 Class Skill, +4 Link, +2 Harness for a total of +8.

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

andreww wrote:
Mark Stratton wrote:
andreww wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
What concerns me more than the lack of using the 4 player adjustment, was the coup de grace. The tactics specifically say the gnolls try to capture the PCs to sell them into slavery. The coup de grace was out if line specifically for this scenario.
What coup de grace? I don't see any reference to it in the OP or the thread. The OP says that a couple of characters died, nothing about a coup.

Upthread, the OP (in a follow up, spoilered post), mention that his son's character was rendered unconscious, and then a gnoll did a CDG (and he used that abberviation to denote it, so if you were looking for "coupe de grace" you wouldn't see it written out like that.)

I certainly agree with Andy here - in addition to not applying the 4 player adjustment, I believe the use of the CDG was also incorrect.

Aah, I missed that. Then yes definitely looks like a case of a poorly prepared GM. Mistakes do happen and when they are pointed out the first person to look at fixing them should really be the GM. I have killed the occasional PC when I have made a mistake, if that happens the best solution is to retcon the death and move on.

I agree with this. And I'd add that in all but the most egregious situations, I will not overturn a GM decision. That isn't to say I won't discuss with them later some of the decisions made, though.

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

andreww wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
What concerns me more than the lack of using the 4 player adjustment, was the coup de grace. The tactics specifically say the gnolls try to capture the PCs to sell them into slavery. The coup de grace was out if line specifically for this scenario.
What coup de grace? I don't see any reference to it in the OP or the thread. The OP says that a couple of characters died, nothing about a coup.

As Mark noted above, it was in a later post.

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

Oh, most definitely agree William. I will almost always side with a GM in cases like this. But I felt it necessary to bring this particular error up. Not sure why the GN felt it necessary to Coup de grace the low level character at all, let alone despite what the tactics said.

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

What concerns me more than the lack of using the 4 player adjustment, was the coup de grace. The tactics specifically say the gnolls try to capture the PCs to sell them into slavery. The coup de grace was out if line specifically for this scenario.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sarvei taeno wrote:
so done with this forum, ive played under Andrew c. at paizocon. he is an awesome guy yah people do not see eye to eye on rules but this post has run its course lets not insult or degrade anyone and just be done with it. call it table variation and move on. done and done

Thanks. I appreciate the shout out. And yeah, you are right, the insults, veiled or not, are not appropriate. No matter who they come from. So mea culpa. Game on!

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

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
We are using common sense Andrew. Your implication otherwise is unwelcome.

Frankly, I think we interpret common sense differently. You are following strict RAW as you see it. But lets not conflate the two.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What I find most disturbing is that the campaign leadership did the player base a major solid, by removing the ambiguity of what constitutes an alignment shift action. Apparently there was enough ambiguity with spells with an evil descriptor, that some GM's felt that casting an evil spell meant you became evil immediately, and some players felt that casting an evil spell shouldn't mean anything at all.

There were posts by James Jacobs and Sean K Reynolds that weighed in on this.

It is no coincidence that the rule on evil spells, faction missions, and the new policy on how to police evil actions all came about at a similar time.

But now we have people trying to take the solid campaign leadership did, and apply it in such a way it was never intended to be applied. Indeed, it was written specifically to avoid this particular method of employment.

Perhaps the language is imprecise enough that it needs to be reworked once the new Campaign Coordinator is hired.

But it really is disturbing that something done as a gift to the player base is being taken way out of proportion to its intent. If we keep on this route, it may be that we lose access to all evil spells in PFS.

That solves many problems.

We won't have necromancers fighting with Priests of Pharasma or Paladins. We won't have players trying to manipulate RAW to cast evil spells with their Paladins. And so on.

Is that what we really want?

Or can we PLEASE try to use a bit of common sense?

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

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Indeed. I read it to say casting the spell is not a evil action, and will only cause an alignment infraction if it is against a code of conduct. And since casting Evil subtyped spells is not against the code, I will not cause a paladin to fall for it. It will have to actually be an Evil act before I will do so. A paladin using infernal healing to heal his allies does not fall at my table.

That's certainly fine. Which is I why I indicated it was Table Variation.

But lets consider the following:

I have.

Fair enough. I'm fine with agreeing to disagree.

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

The expanded narrative boon is not restrictive to season.

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

Holding Paladins to being Honorable.

It breaks the part of thier code where they have to be honorable.

Let's step aside from the Paladin argument for a second and consider alignment infraction discussions. There are so many opinions on what is evil, that you can't possibly define it 100%. From canabalism to torture and assassination to coup de grace on helpless victims. You'll find more opinions on it than you can shake a stick at.

So I say that being Honorable is equally ambiguous. And a GM has every right to declare casting an evil spell as dishonorable.

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

Chernobyl wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Chernobyl wrote:

why nerf abundant ammunition so that it doesn't affect special materials?

Because it was never intended to negate the actual cost of using ammo made of special materials.

so at this point the only use of the spell is to give you something that effectively costs pennies. so it now has basically NO point.

There are lots of spells you can cast on ammo, that you can cast on the quiver or container after you cast abundant ammunition, that make using the spell fairly useful.

But consider, why is it balanced that a 2nd level spell can essentially replicate thousands and thousands of gold in adamantine?

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

Sarvei taeno wrote:
the faq just states casting evil spells will not cause an alignment shift. while the faq may have only stated half the post it does not mean the other half the post gets tossed away.

Yes, it actually does. The FAQ was created to communicate what his post said. It supersedes the post. You can use the post to help you determine intent or context if you wish. But the post itself is no longer valid due to the fact it was condensed into an FAQ.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Indeed. I read it to say casting the spell is not a evil action, and will only cause an alignment infraction if it is against a code of conduct. And since casting Evil subtyped spells is not against the code, I will not cause a paladin to fall for it. It will have to actually be an Evil act before I will do so. A paladin using infernal healing to heal his allies does not fall at my table.

That's certainly fine. Which is I why I indicated it was Table Variation.

But lets consider the following:

PRD: Paladin wrote:

Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

Associates: While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.[/b]

That's the Paladin Code. While nowhere does it say, "you can't cast a spell with an "evil descriptor" and in PFS, the campaign leadership has been nice enough to remove the potential for an alignment infraction by simply casting a spell with an evil descriptor, I strongly feel that you are going against the Paladin's code. You are knowingly using something evil. Whether it constitutes an evil act or creates an alignment infraction is actually inconsequential.

You are doing something that is akin to consorting with evil. The spell itself is still an evil spell.

If you start allowing a Paladin to use infernal healing how far away is allowing them to animate dead as long as the undead are used for a good purpose?

It breaks their code, because a Paladin who would willingly use an evil spell, no matter the end result, is not being honorable to himself, his deity, or what being lawful good means.

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

Chernobyl wrote:

why nerf abundant ammunition so that it doesn't affect special materials?

Because it was never intended to negate the actual cost of using ammo made of special materials.

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

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Sarvei taeno wrote:

i fully support table variation until i see a post by brock stating as campeign leadership that a ruling is so. at that point wether im the gm or the player i will go by what brock says. i would xpect the officers to support something that the campeign leadership decides. this subject really should not have that much table variation.

1. pali code says you can not commit an evil act.
2. it does not say you can not cast an evil spell.
3. no where does it state that is a spell with an evil discriptor is an evil act.
4. campeign leadership has stated for purposes of pfs that casting an evil discripor spell is not an evill act, more precisely healing a party member with infernal healing is not an evil act.

based on those 4 points a pali should be just fine, people may not agree and that is fine as you are welcome to your opinion but the powers that be made an official ruling and as officers, gms and players we are expected to honor what they decide.

1) The guide says message board posts are binding, unless superseded by the FAQ or Guide.

2) The FAQ that sprang up from Mike Brock's message board post, supersedes the message board post.

FAQ wrote:
Casting an evil spell is not an alignment infraction in and of itself...

Secondly, as one of the VOs that helped Mike write this FAQ, I can unequivocally say that the lines in the FAQ that finish the above quoted sentence

Quote:
...as long as it doesn't violate any codes, tenents of faith, or other such issues.

was intended so that Paladins and other good aligned clerics would NOT be able to cast infernal healing.

You can quote RAW all you want, but RAW supports my stance. RAI supports my stance. My inside knowledge supports my stance. And good common sense supports my stance.

You don't have to like it. But please don't lecture me about upholding campaign rules when you are just trying to use a narrow view of RAW to loophole your way into what you want.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Table Variation. That's the key takeaway here.

If you don't like that answer, then err on the conservative side, and don't do the action that's questionable. How do I know its questionable?

The fact it was asked at all, and this thread prove that its a questionable act.

I prefer to look at what is written. Figure out what's intended by looking at what's written, context, and the many conversations had by the venture officer corps when this query came up. Then come up with an answer that I consider common sense and that makes good sense given what Paladin's are supposed to stand for.

I believe that with what's written, RAW fully supports causing a paladin to fall. Even given the FAQ, the clause that paraphrases as, "except for those with a special code," indicates that Paladins might fall if they cast an evil spell. What was intended also fully supports this. My version of common sense supports this. And what Paladins stand for supports this.

So I'm 4 for 4 that says Paladins will need an atonement to not be considered an ex-Paladin if they choose to cast infernal healing.

Others may disagree with me. And I'm fine with that.

Thus, Table Variation.

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

I go with one reroll per chronicle granted.

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

Joe Ducey wrote:
Assuming you mean the new Crane Wing Errata, it completely overwrites the old Crane Wing. -Most of the new errata are the old FAQs or didn't exist at all. In the case of Crane Wing it's the newest ruling from the same source so it's the legal one.

And in the case of Feral Combat Training, it completely supersedes it, since the bit the FAQ is talking about no longer exists.

Hopefully in the next week or so, that FAQ will be cleaned up to match the Errata.

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

Why does that make no sense? It got a boost.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Imbicatus wrote:
The change to Feral Combat Training invalidates this faq. Since the line “as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike” is missing, that means FCT no longer allows monk unarmed strike damage. The FAQ should be removed or updated to use the new rule.

This is also true for several of the other UC FAQ items.

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

Natalie Saratov wrote:

Regarding the double barrel weapons:

Page 138—In the Musket, Double-Barreled Musket entry, in the first sentence, change everything after the semicolon to “each barrel can be shot independently as separate attacks, or both can be fired at once as a standard action (the attack action).”

It causes some confusing in my group that it says standard action (the attack action) as to some thinking they can still use it as a full-attack options while others, including myself, think it's the same kind of action as vital strike uses.

What is the official way to interpret this new ruling?

The FAQ on Vital Strike should solve this question.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Congrats! And good job!

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

Wrong forum for that complaint. PFS doesn't make the changes. The Design Team does.

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

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Regardless whether casting an evil spell is considered an evil act for the general character populous or not. Its still an evil spell. As such, a paladin would fall at my table if the knowingly choose to cast this spell.

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

Congrats! And thanks for all the hard work.

1 to 50 of 3,244 << 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.