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

BigNorseWolf's page

RPG Superstar 2014 Dedicated Voter. FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 20,890 posts (21,711 including aliases). 12 reviews. 4 lists. No wishlists. 23 Pathfinder Society characters. 3 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 20,890 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge ***

Lab_Rat wrote:
ElterAgo wrote:


I asked around a bit. Everyone of us assumed the risk of falling and breaking your neck would count as immediate danger.

Not much is immediate about a pit. I can stand there all day and stare at it and my neck never breaks.

I tend to classify immediate as "If I just do nothing, I am likely to take damage in the next round or so." A lot of GMs I know define it by the initiation of combat rounds.

But if you're standing there looking at it you're not making the roll. When you're making the roll you are in immediate danger.

Shadow Lodge ***

He's right though that there's a serious problem with NPCs being so treasure reliant to provide a challange. In one scenario, the party of level 3-5 pcs went offscript a bit and managed to tick off the level 11 fighter... and beat him. The lack of gear makes them far weaker than their alleged CR, especially when action economy doesn't go in their favor. There are too many ways to get knocked out of a fight, and without gear NPCs can't cover them all.

Shadow Lodge ***

Codanous wrote:

If someone has a +11 to acrobatics and wants to take 10 to jump a 10 foot pit I'll let them giving them a result of 21, why slow things down. Similarly at higher levels when that same person has gone from being level 4 to level 9 and now has a +21 to acrobatics I won't even have them roll because why waste time unless they wish to jump the pit and then some.

That falls under the unofficial "I take 1 " check: where you don't bother to roll because you can't fail. Commonly used by handle animal at +11.

Shadow Lodge ***

Theseus' ship replaced a nail
The boat is broken, and will not sail.

Shadow Lodge ***

Probably not unless its the actual chronicle sheet. Information/compilations are allowed.

Shadow Lodge ***

Michael Eshleman wrote:
3.5 PHB Take 10 Example wrote:

For example, Krusk the barbarian has a Climb skill modifier of +6 (4 ranks, +3 Strength modifier, –1 penalty for wearing studded leather armor). The steep, rocky slope he’s climbing has a Climb DC of 10. With a little care, he can take 10 and succeed automatically. But partway up the slope, a goblin scout begins pelting him with sling stones. Krusk needs to make a Climb check to get up to the

goblin, and this time he can’t simply take 10. If his player rolls 4 or
higher on 1d20, he succeeds.

That example is actually part of the problem. Note that krusks minimum climb check 1+ 6=7 vs a dc of 10 means that krusk can't fall: He's never in danger of falling. Failing a climb check by less than 5 means you don't make progress.

Shadow Lodge ***

Benjamin Falk wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Can unchained rogues with archetypes that trade out uncanny dodge but get the option to get it back as one of their rogue talents do so?

What talent would that be?

Never saw one that does this trick.
You could multiclass for that though.

Vexing dodger does that for one. I think there's another few that do the same thing.

Shadow Lodge ***

Michael Hallet wrote:


No immediate external danger. To me that is the difference. I think the rule is referring only to dangers external to the hazard itself. Otherwise "penalty for failure" in the take 20 rules is redundant.

Thats not what it says though. Might be what it means, but you can't expect DMs to read it according to words that aren't there.

Shadow Lodge ***

Michael Hallet wrote:
The counter argument is that is "penalty for failure", which is additionally called out in the take 20 rules, but absent for the take 10. The penalty for failure in jumping over the pit is falling into the pit.

You have to admit its a might strange to be leaping over a 100 foot drop, over lava, with electrified magma sharks circling below and say "Nope.. no immediate danger there"...

Shadow Lodge ***

claudekennilol wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

A 10 foot pit is a bit of a stretch, but SKRs post say the interpretation isn't supposed to apply even if you're leaping over hot lava or something, which is counter intuitive as hell.

Not only are you pretty clearly in immediate danger, but things like that ARE the difference IRL between a balance beam 3 inches off the floor and one over a chasm. People will stroll over the first one no problem but freak out and fall off the second. (I did not put the hikers there as a sociology experiment I just took notes afterwards...)

When you say "the interpretation" which interpretation are you referring to?

Sorry, thought nosig would be here already :)

___
I'm not an athlete, but I can easily to a standing broad jump of 5-6 feet, over and over again without fail. It doesn't matter if I'm jumping over a piece of tape on the floor or a deep pit... I can make that jump. With a running start, it's even easier. If I were an adventurer, a 5-foot-diameter pit would be a trivial obstacle. Why waste game time making everyone roll to jump over the pit? Why not let them Take 10 and get on to something relevant to the adventure that's actually a threat, like a trap, monster, or shady NPC?-SKR

_____

My counter argument to that would be...

There's a park nearby with a lot of 5 foot gaps in between the stones and 20 foot + drops. You really can just step accross them. But every year people wind up falling down da hoooole because people DON"T perform when there's danger the same way they do when there's a nice safe tape on the ground. The adrenaline kicks in and people do reaally stupid things like second guesse themselves and stop at the wrong time, or look down when they should be looking ahead. Its not rational but it IS human nature and is reality.

And without having read the post thats probably what a lot of DMs are going with, because thats what the text says and they see in their lives. its MUCH easier to perform when there's no pressure.

One way to interpret it is "not in any immediate danger from the act and one is "not in any immediate danger from anything but the act. SKR's post says the the latter. The FAQ about contacting another plane leans towards the former.

You know now i really want to set up a double dare style obstacle course with foam blocks at gen con to test this...

Shadow Lodge ***

A 10 foot pit is a bit of a stretch, but SKRs post say the interpretation isn't supposed to apply even if you're leaping over hot lava or something, which is counter intuitive as hell.

Not only are you pretty clearly in immediate danger, but things like that ARE the difference IRL between a balance beam 3 inches off the floor and one over a chasm. People will stroll over the first one no problem but freak out and fall off the second. (I did not put the hikers there as a sociology experiment I just took notes afterwards...)

Shadow Lodge ***

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Locally the option isn't well known or used.

Not many people know the rules for it, and some of the rules are more than a little open to interpretation.

Whoever says "I'm not in immediate danger" is the first one the monster eats though. Law of the horror movie, sorry.

Shadow Lodge

Storyteller Shadow wrote:
Best episode of the season I thought. Barely any scenes from the books interestingly enough.

They can either pass the books, install some action by changing things, or have nothing happen. (they've been doing some of each)

Shadow Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Kegdrainer wrote:
Did the feat ever get sorted out? I see that it was mentioned 3 years ago but no mention if it was banned or not since it can be used to craft Magic Armor/Weapons and Wondrous items by non-casters.

Something to point out: Master Craftsman cannot be used to craft magic items. It can be used to qualify for feats that allow you to craft magic items, but not to craft them directly,... and those feats are already banned.

Since Master Craftsman also gives you a +2 bonus on your skill that stacks with everything, I could see someone who really wants to max his day job roll wanting to take that feat -- so I don't think it's appropriate to ban it.

Its a craft feat, so its banned.

Really, if someone has taken skill focus craft, AND the +3 to dayjob checks feat out of the primer and is STILL eyeing this as a feat you're doing them a favor by stopping them.

Friends don't let friends waste feats on dayjob checks...

Shadow Lodge ***

Can unchained rogues with archetypes that trade out uncanny dodge but get the option to get it back as one of their rogue talents do so?

Shadow Lodge

So, what weapon do you chose for the zombie apocalypse?

FEEET!

Shadow Lodge ***

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
My suggestion would be for them to let item creation feats work kind of like Gunsmithing - instead of working normally, all the feat does is grant a substantial discount (20% sound good?) when purchasing such items (for purposes of balance, we'll say that the Fame requirement for purchasing a given item is still pegged to the full price).
Fame is neigh irrelevant for scroll purchases. (The no scrolls over X level until you are Y level thing is very relevant though)
Wondrous items and enchanted armaments are another matter entirely though, aren't they?

Not really without crafting.

Level Fame* PurchaseLimit WBL Purchase limit as a % of WBL
3_____10_____1,500________ 3,000_____50%
5_____21_____5,250 _______10,500_____49%
7_____31 _____16,500______23,500_____70%
10____47 _____41,000______62,000_____66%

Pardon, formatting is terrible and this computer doesn't have excel.

*assumes 1.75 per adventure. Most PFSers are well above this.

Unless you only buy/upgrade 2 items, your fame allows purchases far in excess of what you can afford to get. Fame quickly becomes.. not worth checking.

Quote:
You bring up a worthy point, however - maybe we'd legalize every item creation feat except Scribe Scroll, since A) Wizards getting Scribe Scroll is supposed to be about them sharing their own knowledge, and this would be too much like them scribing scrolls of spells they don't even know, which would make it B) unbalanced against Alchemists and Witches, and besides C) I rather like getting free Spell Focus instead, anyways.

Brew potion would be the least problematic: thats really just like buying a scroll since potions cost so much. One issue with it though is that an alchemist crafting a potion at full caster level +alchemical allocation basically gets 3rd level spells out of second level slots

craft staff would make staff prices reasonable...

Craft wondrous item would be the MOST problematic. Thats nearly doubling your WBL and as you can see above fame isn't going to limit it all that much.

Craft arms and armor... doesn't seem that bad. Because the weapon price increases exponentially you can basically afford an extra +1 on it. Paladins and Magi can already do that without too much disruption.

Shadow Lodge ***

jtaylor wrote:
Yes a wand is 2.5gp more expansive, but provides better action ecomony.

It does not. You can have multiple copies of a spell on a scroll. (in pfs they all have to be the same spell). Drawing a scroll of 25 magic missiles and drawing a wand of 25 magic missiles work the same way.

Quote:
When decided to make comments that degrade my opinion or derail the argument instead crafting argument against my opinion that is when you began to cherry pick my responses you would respond to.

Disagreeing with your opinion is not insulting you you. Pointing out that what you are holding up as fact is an argument is not degrading your argument.

The only things I've deleted are responses where I would just be repeating myself. No cherry picking occurred.

Quote:
Really then why bring it up that you been doing it this way for 9 years??

You are arguing that the balance MUST be there or teeerrrible things will happen. Terrible things have NOT happened. Therefore that argument is wrong.

Quote:
No I arguing that there has been unseen consquences

If you've seen them then they're not unseen.

Quote:
that aren't being addressed by blanketing banning all Item Creation feats. I cited rules that assume that certain ones are in play, and even a class that uses one as a key ability. You have yet to provide an objective material for me to reconsider my opinion.

I don't think that's on me.

You do cite rule A. You do cite rule B. The connection between them however is entirely of your own creation.

Quote:
The reasoning behind doing so is that the original format of the game assume that this class has to feature, therefore constructs challenges that reflect that that assumption. I stated this clearly multiple times. You are either ignoring this statement or choosing to omit it.

Or I think thats a really really horrible argument that lacks sense, reason, or any factual basis and have been explaining whats wrong with it

Its a silly argument. You're acting as though one tiny change in the wizard or alchemist class prevents the entire thing from working and it just doesn't.

Quote:
Yes it is subjective that is why I using objective evidence to support my argument.

You have not done this.

Quote:
Paizo as Pathfinder Society decided not to allow it in organize play, which only means they ignored there own rules that they can then reinstate. I arguing that they should, because it is their own rule when they designed the game.

Thats a silly argument.

You haven't responded to the idea that the "original elements of the game" include a DM overseeing one party and limited crafting time, things that DON"T exist in PFS. Some modifications to the game necessary for organized play necessitate other changes. This is one of them.

The heads of pathfinder society work with the people who write the rules rules of the game and confer regularly on what rules in the base system will not work under the structure of organized play. And there are MANY.

Quote:
I do not simply lose because a arbitrary ruling, which this is, was made in the past, nor does my objective stop being objective because the arbitrary ruling happens to come from similar associations.

Just because something is in the base system it does not follow that its right for every campaign and PFS. Stating the objective fact that "its in the base system" does not in any way shape or form objectively lead to the idea that "Therefore it should be in pfs"

Quote:
Really beyond tenuous. More feelings instead of objective evidence.

The argument is bad. Its a total non sequitur. If you know how to show that objectively MIT could use you in the artificial intelligence department.

Quote:
Are you saying that the CR monster does not go through some formula or play testing for it to be created?

No. No it most certainly does not. It gets eyeballed and estimated... on a good day. There are guidelines, there is no math. Its an art, not a science.

objective evidence

Quote:
quote Erm... no. You buy scrolls of things you use occasionally. You buy wands of things you use all the time. You buy a staff if you use a spell a lot and need to cast it at a high caster level. Its a completely different thing than a +1 sword +2 sword +3 sword.
How so?

I'm not sure how you mean regular item progression. But scrolls, wands, and staves aren't in the same progression. They're used for different things.

Cure light wounds is a bad scroll to get. its more expensive than a wand if you know you're going through 40 of them and you know you will.

Spider climb is a great scroll to get. you only use it occasionally and your caster level doesn't matter that much.

Endure elements is a horrible spell to get on a staff: the effects don't scale and either does the duration. Fireball on the other hand is an amazing spell on a staff , since the DC and number of D6's scale with your level.

Even if you have a wand, you will still have scrolls. Even if you have a staff, you'll still have wands and scrolls.

Quote:
Quote:
The alchemist can do things the cleric can't, like hand out "potions" of shield and alter self.
How??

The infusion discovery. It works with spells that are normally only self only. If you toss in combine extracts, Mixing your barbarian a combination cocktail with truestrike AND enlarge person mixed together will get you called back to most tables.

Shadow Lodge ***

Jtaylor wrote:
I disagree. Gold per adventure still limits this completely. Do I make four scrolls of magic missle for 100gp or do I save for a wand of magic missle when I get 9 PP.

If you have scribe scroll that isn't a question

Wand: 750 gp. 50 charges =15 gp/charge

Scroll: 25gp 1 charge = /2 for crafting= 12.5 gp/charge.

Quote:
Also stop cherry picking quotes to make responses to without consider the entire conversation.

I am doing no such thing. You need to consider the possibility that your responses are not nearly as air tight as you think they are. Case in point..

Quote:
Yes we been doing it this way for a hundred years so it must be right logic fallacy. Yes that is a logic fallacy

It is not however the argument.

You are arguing that the balance MUST be there or teeerrrible things will happen. Terrible things have NOT happened. Therefore that argument is wrong.

You are mixing that up with the argument that things would be better with scribe scroll. That WOULD be a fallacy against that argument (appeal to tradition). But this leaves you completely naked without any basis in cr challange ratings, or the wizards build

This is also rather ironic from someone arguing that the wizard traditionally comes with scribe scroll therefore he must have it.

If your argument is that the wizard MUST have scribe scroll... you're objectively wrong. If your argument is that the game would be better with scribe scroll you have to make that point, but it will be entirely subjective.

Quote:
Unsupported?? Pazio says Wizards have Scribe Scroll and Alchemist have Brew Potions. Pazio says what the CR of the monsters are in its game.

1) "Paizo" also says that you don't get scribe scroll in PFS, because PFS is part of paizo. If your appeal is to paizo, you lose.

2) The argument connecting CR to scribe scroll is yours and is beyond tenuous.

Quote:
Scroll goes to wand which goes to staff.

Erm... no. You buy scrolls of things you use occasionally. You buy wands of things you use all the time. You buy a staff if you use a spell a lot and need to cast it at a high caster level. Its a completely different thing than a +1 sword +2 sword +3 sword.

Quote:
Staffs aren't consumables, and I am sure there are other Wonderous Items that can give a Wizard spell like abilities that aren't consumables. This statement ignores this with hope that the audience ignores natural equipment progression.

Ok, that is the second most inane accusation of dishonesty I've seen on these boards. And that's saying something.

Quote:
Or could be a Cleric or Buffer type Class and do it cheaper and faster along with doing as you sugges.

The alchemist can do things the cleric can't, like hand out "potions" of shield and alter self.

Shadow Lodge ***

jtaylor73003 wrote:


The basic argument has been that the item creation feats, even scribe scroll and brew potion, would make it the challenges to easy for the writes to create interesting challenges. I point out that the CR of monsters already assume a Wizard has scribe scroll, and that this argument was baseless. You defended this baseless argument.

Leaving aside how many of the systems assumptions NEED to be in place, the system assumes scribe scroll with limited crafting time and a sane dm.

That means we have to either
1) limit time (which causes paperwork)
2) Institute limits on it that gamers are going to try to argue around (which causes headaches)
3) Not have crafting.

Quote:
If you weren't defending those statements you should make that clear.

I really can't track everywhere your thought process is going, its kind of scattered. You're tracing one thing leading to another leading to another and getting waaaay off topic.

BigNorseWolf wrote:


The more you put into crafting the more gold you effectively get out. Its not really a limiting factor.
Quote:
Pathfinder has be balanced with the idea that a wizard could show up with a powerful scroll

No. No it does not HAVE to be balanced that way.

And that i think is the big gaping whole in your argument.

The campaigns been going on for 6 years without crafting. Cats are not singing with dogs. Frogs are not raining from the sky. Wizards are not being overpowered by fighters. Wizards get a very nice free feat in place of scribe scroll and it balances out very well.

Your rather unsupported assertions are contradicted by evidence.

Quote:
Soon this spending gold on a consumble will be phased out for better equipment

Erm.. no. He just buys better consumables.

Quote:
Right now only a Mad bomber type or a Mr. Hype plays well in PFS.

The friendly pharmacist buffing his allies can do very well. Haste takes a wand, but popping alter self/bullstrengthed combo potions for a +6 to strength or dex is pretty nice.

Alchemical allocation extracts and a bag of holding full of situational potions makes you damned near a spontaneous caster for your entire party.

Quote:
Look at this way a fighter can only attack once per round with a decent chance to hit without having to buy a feat, you wouldn't argue to ban Two-weapon fighting would u?

I have NO idea what you're getting at there.

Shadow Lodge ***

I can't decide if a succubus should just be flat out immune to unnatural lust or not even get a save...

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Who the hell let a necromancer with mythic levels into the E 6 campaign!?!?!?!?

Shadow Lodge ***

Talib Aguiye Ironsi wrote:
I also have a 4th level Zenj Paladin of Rowdrosh (this profile) that I enjoy immensely. The Zenj are the nomadic Mwangi people that herd livestock out on the plains. Not everyone from the Expanse has to be from the Jungles.

But... but.. single biome continent!

Shadow Lodge ***

jtaylor73003 wrote:


Still to claim that Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion would break the CR system is still a bad argument.

You are the only one I see talking about the CR system.

Quote:
You are right that in a home game downtime is controlled by the GM to a point. The most deciding factor with any item creation, even crafting as a whole, is Gold.

The more you put into crafting the more gold you effectively get out. Its not really a limiting factor.

Quote:
A scroll to a wizard is like a sword to a Fighter. A fighter has to decide when to buy that new +1 weapon based on how much gold he gets per outing. A wizard has to decide whether to make that higher level scroll or get some other useful item.

Its more like an extra cheap potion: You carry a swiss army knife of them to break out of the appropriate occasion. Fighters buy 1, maybe 2 magic weapons. Wizards walk around with small libraries.

Quote:
The point stands Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion should be consider by PFS to be added back in because there are classes focus on using them to be compitive in combat.

The wizard and the alchemist do more than fine in pfs without it. You're trying to fix a problem that simply doesn't exist. The classes are not so balanced against each other that altering them slightly from core will mess things up enough to try to implement crafting.

Shadow Lodge ***

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
My suggestion would be for them to let item creation feats work kind of like Gunsmithing - instead of working normally, all the feat does is grant a substantial discount (20% sound good?) when purchasing such items (for purposes of balance, we'll say that the Fame requirement for purchasing a given item is still pegged to the full price).

Fame is neigh irrelevant for scroll purchases. (The no scrolls over X level until you are Y level thing is very relevant though)

Shadow Lodge ***

jtaylor73003 wrote:
Finally PFS made decision to remove all item creation feats, for what reason I don't know.

What stops item creation from getting out of hand in a regular campaign is usually the DM limiting downtime. In a shared campaign there's either no limit to downtime, or you need to track it in a campaign that already has more than enough paperwork.

Quote:
I stating that PFS should reconsider for certain classes because it goes against the core rules.

There's nothing wrong with going against the core rules. The CR system is a guideline, not an absolute mathematical equation that goes all wonky at the slightest deviation.

Shadow Lodge ***

Nothing keeps that from working with two weapon fighting...

Shadow Lodge ***

Yuri Sarreth wrote:
ok that is how its written but thats just insane.. Sorry your plate mail armor and shield dissolves from acid bomb but your longsword in the other hand is perfectly fine..

Its much easier to hit that 3 foot by 6 foot human covered in the armor than it is to hit his 3 inch wide sword.

Shadow Lodge ***

Its.. erm.. a baby grand?

Shadow Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dhenn wrote:

I just retired a Witch, and I was never sure how this rule interacted with that class. There's no gp cost associated with learning a spell from another witch. If you used the same rules as wizards, you could learn the whole witch list for free (150% of 0 is still 0), assuming you could make the spellcraft checks (which should be pretty easy for an Int based caster).

I never ended up trying to have an NPC caster teach me a spell, though I did swap with a PC witch a couple times. I ended up purchasing scrolls to add them to my familiar to avoid the grey area.

Its available for witches

I just always pictured there being a Great old owl sitting in the library of the grand lodge, eating mice and teaching new familiars spells.

I think it would still be 50% of the scribing costs, as its library fees and training cost.

Shadow Lodge

They stack, as long as they're both legal critters for the class.

A paladin and cavalier would stack... its under the druid of all places

Under druid:

Unlike normal animals of its kind, an animal companion's Hit Dice, abilities, skills, and feats advance as the druid advances in level. If a character receives an animal companion from more than one source, her effective druid levels stack for the purposes of determining the statistics and abilities of the companion

They FAQ'd this one

Cavalier: Do animal companion levels from the druid class stack with cavalier mount levels?

If the animal is on the cavalier mount list and on the list of animal companions for your other class, your cavalier and druid levels stack to determine the animal's abilities. If the animal is not on the cavalier mount list, the druid levels do not stack and you must have different animals (one an animal companion, one a cavalier mount).

So the question is whether the undead skeletal thing is on the cavaliers list.

I would be inclined to say yes, because taking your loyal, trusted steed and raising it as an unholy mockery of paladins mount is a very antipaladin thing to do.

Shadow Lodge

Wheres the other thread?

I hope they clarify it to be 10 by 10.. by 10, so that you don't have to declare looking at the floor, each wall, the door, the ceiling, under the table, on top of the table...

Shadow Lodge ***

Jericho Graves wrote:
Thanks, some of the language confused me. What with "future purchase" and "past seasons" its alot of legalese that sort of went over my head and could have been a bit more explicitly stated for a dumb-bum. :)

Its not you. The guide is a little dense and legalistic (they're working on that for next season though.) Partially because its grown organically over the years, and partially because you have to keep the gamers from misreading things...

Shadow Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You're all clear to sail.

Liberty’s Edge faction PCs qualify for Andoran faction
vanities and mission boons available in past seasons.
Likewise, Dark Archive faction PCs qualify for Cheliax
rewards, Scarab Sages as Osirion, The Exchange as
Qadira, and Sovereign Court as Taldor. Without a boon
that states otherwise, a PC cannot earn Sczarni vanities
or boons.

page 18 on the guide.

AHOY!

Shadow Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Joseph Kellogg wrote:
Playing a vuvuzela is considered an evil act.

Well yes, torture is one of the few things that are called out as always evil acts in pfs...

Shadow Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pretty much everything other than a theremin should be ok, and they really need to include one of those in occult adventures for the sound effects...

Shadow Lodge ***

Quote:
and concluded your meta was toxic

Thats kinda harsh from one comment from one player that may have just been taken the wrong way.

Shadow Lodge

Ninjas can take archetypes. Not many, but scout is a really good one.

Shadow Lodge ***

pH unbalanced wrote:

It all depends on how your area has decided to do things.

I've used Meetup successfully to find games. In Michigan, michiganpfs.org is what everyone uses. If I'm traveling, I'll check warhorn, although depending on the area, I've had better luck with google.

Which is kind of inefficient for people trying to find the games.

Shadow Lodge

Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
They do different things. Hard to say which one is better now. An unchained rogue can take major magic with Vanish and achieve much the same thing as a ninja with vanishing trick.

The ninjas vanish trick is a swift action, which allows for some pretty nasty combos like attacking and THEN going invisible that you can't pull off with just vanish.

Shadow Lodge

*chants*

GREG OR STEIN! GREG OR STEIN!

Shadow Lodge ***

Quintin Verassi wrote:
Google? (this is not sarcastic, I am actually thrying to give advice.)

Is very good at giving discrete information but not connecting the dots geographically. Its good for finding PFS in A town but not in all the nearby towns.

Quote:
Hanging aroud gaming stores and talking to the owners/employees is what orginally lead me to my local asylum... I mean PFS crew.

If I were to try to find my own game by that method it would take me about a solid day of driving and 2 tanks of gas.

Shadow Lodge ***

outshyn wrote:
Are you guys using paizo.com to find games? I just use warhorn.net and use CTRL-F to search the entire list of games for things in my area. It works really well, actually, because once you sign up for a game at a local store/home/whatever, warhorn saves it in your list of recent locations, allowing you to always see what's going on locally.

Warhorn is great if you're in Dallas, new york city, or los angelas and want to find a game in that city. Its not as user friendly if you want to find a game outside of a specific city. If you live in Boondoggle New York your chances of finding a game IN boondoggle are pretty low. If 20 minutes away the nearby town of BanjoMusic has a game though that can be harder to find, but you're not going to search EVERY nearby town in your state and possibly neighboring states if you live on the border.

Trying to find games on warhorn, even when I know what town they're being played in, just returns "Upstate new york locations" and "new zealand" because the towns name has new in it.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to propose something to make finding PFS groups easier. Currently if you live in between venture officers listed in the guide it can be a little tricky and possibly offputting to ask around to where the games are, as VC's tend to cover some pretty huge and and always intuitive swaths of territory.

When you report a game it comes with a location. That location gets saved somewhere . This part already happens.

What would be nice is if you can input your location and see where past games have taken place and how long ago they were to see where/how active the groups are and who's playing. If you see that there was a PFS at Bookend Comics last week there's a good chance of an active group. If you see there was a game played there last year you know there might be a group you can dust off.

Shadow Lodge ***

I was wondering why i couldn't find my own games on here when I tried that...

The best way atm to find a game is to say "I'm in ____" where are the games?

They really should save PAST games games on the site (which have a location specified) let you plug in your lat/long and have it point you to the nearest games that have been played recently in your area.

Shadow Lodge ***

Kalindlara wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:

Awesome! Thank you. ^_^

EDIT: @TimD, I'm waiting for a) Inner Sea Races, just in case; and b) a PFS group anywhere near here. ^_^

Where's here? The actual organization between The society as a whole and the individual places where games take place can be a little patchwork.

warhorn is one place to look. But their search functionality is a little... Nuts.

"Here" is West Michigan. I'll admit I haven't tried looking that hard; I haven't really been leaving the house much at the moment. ^_^

I know there's not currently a group at the games store I'm most accustomed to, although I may start one sooner or later. I've discussed it a little with the owner.

Getting that store started will be a lot easier if there's other players in the area, and trying to run pfs just from reading the guide without ever seeing it strikes me as trying to drive just from reading the manual. Really really really helps to see it done. I'd try to pop over at least once even if its too far to make it a regular thing.

The guide has a list of venture officers in the area, they should know where the nearest games are.

.. or even better posters popping up as soon as you announce your geography...

Shadow Lodge ***

Kalindlara wrote:

Awesome! Thank you. ^_^

EDIT: @TimD, I'm waiting for a) Inner Sea Races, just in case; and b) a PFS group anywhere near here. ^_^

Where's here? The actual organization between The society as a whole and the individual places where games take place can be a little patchwork.

warhorn is one place to look. But their search functionality is a little... Nuts.

Shadow Lodge

Required warning:

[admiral ackbar]The ijiatsu strike is beyond underwhelming. Its a meh amount of damage that only crops up once in a blue moon. Two weapon fighting rogues will be laughing at how infrequently it goes off. [/admiral ackbar]

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

1) Need to get two people with the same concept at the same time. Doesn't always happen

2) They are weak. Their design does not seem to have taken into account that its effectively TWO feats to get the benefit: one from each party member taking it. They're often not that great when evaluated at the cost of 1 feat, much less two.

3) In practice, positioning requirements make them even less useful than they are in theory. (ie, worse than "not very")

Shadow Lodge ***

Generally when you catch that sort of error you just cross stuff out and move the paperwork without worrying about the reporting.

1 to 50 of 20,890 << 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.