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

Blackbot's page

FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 496 posts. No reviews. 7 lists. No wishlists. 4 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 496 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade *

Wendy Bryan wrote:
There are no healers or rogues of any kind...and everyone is arguing about who is buying all the cure light wounds potions...

Why the rogue? To UMD?

Silver Crusade

Auxmaulous wrote:

After one more edition plus splats:

Pathfinder 3.14159265359.....

You say that as a joke, but TeX actually does that.

They reached version 3 and from then on always just added the next digit of Pi.
Current version is 3.14159265. The previous version was 3.1415926, the one before that 3.141592 and so on.

Silver Crusade *

That is something more suited for the Archives of Nethys. PathfinderWiki is about the world of Golarion, not about rules.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm a tad bit reminded about Ephebe, a country on the discworld. They were a Republic.
Everybody could vote!
Except for women, of course. Politic is for men.
And slaves, nobody would want slaves to vote.
Mad people don't get a vote too, because that would be insane.
Or foreign people. What do they know about Ephebian politics?!
And poor people, don't forget about poor people.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I do think this depends on the kind of game you want to play.
I know one of my first thought about Golarion was a certain sadness that there are no "classical" kingdoms - no castle to where the heroes could be summoned by a benevolent ruler to go forth and save the kingdom.

Though most fantasy settings take place somewhere in the middle ages (or at least the middle ages as seen in movies, books and similar things).
And the iconic ruling system in those times were kings, queens, nobles and the clergy. I'm not a great history buff (so maybe I'm part of the problem?) but I don't think there really was a republic in between the Roman empire and all those revolutions (France, Britain, America). Not in Europe at least.

Because sure, they CLAIMED to be heirs of rome ("Holy Roman Empire of German nations" leaves little room for interpretation there), but "democracy" is such an ugly word. God gave me the right to rule, and why should I share?

That said, there are plenty of settings I know of where there might be a king or emperor, but with limited power. Where he technically is the ruler, but is being held in check not by advisors, but by a council of people (though they are usually nobles as well).

And let's be honest - how much cooler is it to say "The king of the land honored me!" than to say "The currently elected leader of this one party honored me, but they screwed up the tax system in the years after and now they are not really elected anymore but oh well, I got this shiny medal out of it"?
I do think there is a reason some Western countries have kings and queens to this day, however limited their power might be.

Silver Crusade *

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Especially considering there a certain scenarios written under the assumption that at least one character has a wayfinder on them...

Silver Crusade *

Did you delete unused Character slots?
Like if there were 4 players (for example), did you delete the unneeded two character slots?

Silver Crusade *

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Rule of thumb:
If someone is bothered, stop doing it.

If everybody seems to enjoy it, keep doing it.

I can see plenty of things being fun and memorable but quickly devolve into annoying when used too much. The singing is an example - if the mood is good it can enhance it, if everybody is annoyed at a fight taking long there will probably someone who will fight his urge to strangle the singing bard.

Silver Crusade *

Which is fine and dandy. My characters' backstories also tend to get quite long. As long as you don't get frustrated about how you can tell it everything is fine.
It won't come up in every scenario and usually not even in half of them.
But it can be nice to know about your backstory, and it adds quite a bit of flavor if the half-orc grunts "Don't worry about the frost giants. I know how to kill 'em. Did so quite a few times back in my homeland."

If you shout "THAT'S for my mother, you big ugly piece of ice" after killing one everybody can assume things about your backstory and maybe even ask.
But don't expect the opportunity to delve into a half-hour monologue about how you found her body after they raided your village because your little brother stole their frost sheep and that this all happened because you destroyed the barn when playing with a doll a mysterious stranger gave you who happened to pass by when the king died which was quite strange because he was healthy and goodness me, look at the time the slot is over.

Use your backstory to get a feel for the character and maybe sprinkle details into the game, don't get disappointed if it doesn't come up much is what I'm saying.

Silver Crusade

Friend of mine played a paladin of Shelyn.
He had realized her code stated nowhere that lying was forbidden, so he made lying into an art form. Not lying just for the heck of it, but if he had to choose between lying and confrontation he'd lie his ass off everytime to protect his enemies from an untimely death.
"Why of course we have the permission to escort these prisoners out of here, didn't the chief tell you about it?"
"No, we are not the Pathfinders you are trying to capture. We saw them a few towns over, though."

He was fully aware to expect table variation with his interpretation though (this was PFS).

Silver Crusade *

Just to make it clear (and good morning from Germany, my Switzerland neighbor):
You want to use the PFS scenarios without actually playing PFS, correct?
Do you plan on having your players be PFS agents? This would change some answers - the Confirmation, for example, is a great introductory adventure to the society. But it loses quite a bit of its charme (in my opinion) if it's just used as scenario without these connections.
Some scenarios work fine if you start them with "X hired you to do Y" (or something along those lines), while others are quite a bit more interwoven with the society (All those "Your predecessors screwed up, go fix it" scenarios).

It should also be noted that while all PFS characters have to belong to a faction, faction missions are gone from society play. There are sometimes boons in scenarios for members of a certain faction (e.g. "Zarta Dralneen asks Dark Archive members before the scenario to do X"), but it's far more in the background than before.

Silver Crusade *

He's a bard. His versatile performance allows him to use performance(comedy) instead of bluff.
While you might be right in saying that backstory-wise it would make sense to have at least one rank in bluff you could always assume he started out as a really bad liar and only started getting better once his...jokes improved...yeah, I have no idea where I was going with this.

Silver Crusade *

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Swiftbrook wrote:

3) the first item they sunder and destroy, (or the second if your a nice GM and want to bend the rules), tell the party you're crossing the item off the chronicle sheet they are earning and reducing the gold value for that item. (actually 1/6 the gold value I think).

On what grounds?

You may reduce gold if they fail to solve an encounter usually. Not because you feel like it.
You don't cross off potions the enemy drank, you don't reduce the charges of wand the enemy used, you don't cross off the items of an enemy you threw off a cliff.

Silver Crusade *

8 people marked this as a favorite.

While not a VO, I do this all the time. Primarily because I'm simply not willing to invite total strangers into my home and/or our faculty rooms at the university (because if something breaks I will be responsible because I let strangers in).

I also encouraged my brother and my girlfriend to run a few games in such a private setting because it makes them feel more comfortable as opposed to "Let's play at the FLGS where everybody can show up and everything can go horribly, horribly wrong!"

It's easier for introducing friends to the hobby because it's less a "Hey, come over to FLGS and play this game you don't know the rules of, though we have tight time constraints and you won't know anybody!" and more a "Hey Alice, I invited Bob and Clarice to play Pathfinder Society, care to try it out? We can explain the rules on the way and there will be pizza and beer!"
Also we can be much more inappropriate when we are alone and not in a public space.

Silver Crusade *

The views are certainly interesting. I never viewed having low CON as bad behavious. I tell every new player "Look, I play this game a bit longer than you do and believe me, you WANT to have at least 12 CON as a new player, or even 14."
If they refuse, they have been warned.
Personally, if I pick 10 CON on a character (and I don't think I've ever done that, though most of my characters are melee anyways) I am quite aware that he could die horribly, though I never considered the effect on the rest of the group. I might have to think about that in the future.

That said, I have seen quite a few utterly suicidal characters. A player (as far as I know the only one had multiple character deaths at my lodge) was unaware the age rules do not apply in PFS play, so her concept was an old (or even venerable?) cleric. The character was fixed, but even then she had little to no CON and still wore padded armor because before the fix everything else was too heavy for her STR.
Characers like these have a big "PUT ME OUT OF MY MISERY PLEASE" printed on their forehead. If a goblin has no trouble hitting you (as a cleric!) and can screw you over even without crits you have a problem.

Silver Crusade

Seems to be fixed, I just downloaded a file from

(Well, the download is still crawling along wigh 20 kb/s, but you know what I mean)

Silver Crusade

Also, it really depends on the AP. Rule of thumb: The older the AP, the less stuff from newer books you'll need. For example, I ran Carrion Crown and didn't need anything aside from the Core Rulebook and the Advanced Player's Guide (and Bestiary I and I think II) to run it. All rules needed to run an AP are available in the PRD as Feros already said.

Most APs also have supplementary books you can use to enhance the experience (Rule of Fear is a book detailing the life in Ustalav, for example), but these are absolutely not necessary.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Aside from that - welcome to the wonderful world of Pathfinder. Get ready to be amazed by how quickly players can go from "I don't understand the rules at all!" to "Hey, look at this combination I found that totally breaks your game and OW STOP HITTING ME WITH THE CORE RULEBOOK!".

And get used to seeing the image of the goblins fighting the computer. It's an image you tend to see quite often around here. ;)

Silver Crusade *

They should really put a huge "THIS POST IS 2 YEARS OLD" in red letters above the thread title when a thread gets necro'd.

I read half the first page and was all like "Why do these idiots completly forget the warpriest?" before I noticed the date.

Silver Crusade *

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

EDIT: I really, really hesitate to say this, because it's acquired a negative "buzzword" feel I don't like, but: PFSOP is sort of like a video game.

Not in a bad way. It's just that it gives you a preset scenario and there's not much opportunity for deviation from the base rules.

Believe me, you only say this because you've never experienced a player who complains (or tells anecdotes) all the time how this would work in a video game and that you'd only enter the dungeon to kill things and not to discuss anything and that this whole plot is unnecessary and how he'd just replay the scenario to gain the maximum out of it and that he could farm that scenario and how this would work in a video game and how that would work in a video game...

Quite eye-opening in how even PFS is totally not like a video game. ;)

No, I know what you mean. I agree to a certain point. The important words are "sort of", though, because you still have FAR more freedom.

Silver Crusade *

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There was a great example told by Spoony.
He told the tale of him GMing some older form of organized play (maybe LG, maybe something else). I his story he complains how it is not fun, not hard enough et cetera and while the encounter in his story IS kinda laughable, it outlines the problem:

In this scenario the PCs were attacked by 3 wizards. These wizards had all prepped magic missile. In the olden days wizards could (so I've been told) cast one spell per day (thus one magic missile per wizard) and every wizard had 4 hp (these wizards had at least).
Not fun because easy, right?
So he changed the spells to - I'm not sure anymore, but at least one wizard had sleep.
He managed to kill two PCs (and got booted from the event).

While I quite like Spoony's tales, this is the exact reason why PFS is what it is. GMs who take up a "them vs. me" mentality are a problem even now in PFS sometimes - could you imagine how horrible it would become if they had free reign? "Oh, the party is quite strong - I'll just add a second orc" can easily escalate to "Ah well, I'll just double the number of demons, they can handle it."
And then one PCs (or even the whole party) dies.

In a home game you can retcon such a thing easily, or introduce a new character at seventh level, so not much is lost. The show goes on.
In organized play you can't. The dead player has to start from scratch.

That said - I've GMed the same scenarios for multiple partys and you'd be surprised how different they try to solve the problems at hand.
It is true that you cannot get too creative with the scenarios themselves - because as other people said not every GM is created equally and there are far more GMs over- than underestimating their skills. Even if you're a perfect GM there have to be rules in place to prevent the bad GMs from screwing things up too badly.

I myself take my fun not only from running combat (I like the tactical aspect) but also from presenting the scenario in a fun way. Describing the places, getting a bit creative with the NPCs (which sometimes necessitates a "Look, time is running short, could you please go back to fetching the MacGuffin and stop trying to learn everything about this NPCs aunt second grade?") and such things while not really deviating from the scenario at hand.

Another thing to keep in mind is that in most home campaigns the PCs goal is far less clear most of the time - most modules I've read start out with the party figuring out what the hell is going on and what they're supposed to do to fix it. In PFS the PCs are pathfinder agents - they get a mission and they have to solve it. They are quite free in how they do it (going full murderhobo, going the diplomatic route, going the stealthy route) sometimes, but they have a clear goal. That alone limits how far they can "stray from the track" because if the group suddenly decides to take off in the other direction they can do that, but they'll fail the mission.

If you love running freehand, getting creative, making your own adventure up on the fly - that's great too. But PFS is probably not the place where you can do that.

Silver Crusade

19 people marked this as a favorite.

Group was engaging kobolds.

Me: "The kobolds hurl insults at you in a language you don't understand."
Bard: "I speak draconic, what do they say?"
Me: "Um...your momma's so fat she had to hatch from two eggs!"

Silver Crusade *

Blakmane wrote:
If you search for 'readying an action outside of combat' you will see a great deal of threads talking about it.

I will look those up, thanks. This was one of the few cases where I had no idea what to search for.

Silver Crusade *

So. The situation was this:
The party goes through a jungle and approaches a swarm.
The scenario is contradictory at this point - it states that the party can go around or wait for the swarm to calm down. The swarm tactics, however, say that " ...they attack the PCs as soon as they come near enough to witness the scene."
I decided that they see the swarm crawl around and that it doesn't immediatly attack.
They pull out some alchemist's fires and go closer to throw them. I ask them how close they want to go, deciding that if they approach closer than 4 squares the swarm attacks. They go far enough to reach that square and the swarm attacks.
Initiative gets rolled, the swarm wins, it moves first.

Long story short: No major damage, nobody poisoned, swarm gets killed farily quickly (partly because I messed up the splash weapon rules - I thought you only needed to hit the swarm's square instead of the swarm itself), a bit of healing required afterwards. The scenario overall was also well received, so this is not about some day-ruining argument or anything.

However. A few players were fairly unhappy about the swarm acting first because they clearly approached it with the intent of striking first once it reacts. In the end I called "even or odd?", they called even, I rolled odd, so the ruling stood and the swarm moved first. No hard feelings on either side. Though I got thinking: How would you have ruled in this instance?

My reasoning: You cannot decide that all of a sudden you're in combat. They inched nearer and nearer but were still surprised at how quickly and suddenly the swarm attacked them (displayed by initiative).
Their reasoning: "Implied" initative, they moved & readied their action to throw constantly. Thus they should've been able to throw once it was the swarm's turn.
I feel like this reasoning is a difficult one - it opens the door for things like "We approach the guys working at the docks. The fighter and the paladin ready an action: If they turn out to be aggressive we want to hit them as soon as they enter an adjacent square.", making initiative useless for fights where both combatants are aware of each other.

So...your thoughts?
(I'm not sure whether this should be in the rules question forum, but because it strongly interacts with some PFS scenarios [and because we're bound by the tactics noted] I feel like it should be here.)

Silver Crusade *

5 people marked this as a favorite.
godsDMit wrote:
Jared Thaler wrote:

No more "I check for a tea set" in every room.

Right. Now we have faction cards, so it's:

What country are we in?

Is this guy a slave or captive?

Do they allow slavery in this country?

Yeah. I hate players who want to know where they are. And those who want to know more about that country or even NPCs they interact with are the absolute WORST.


Silver Crusade

Yes, that's something I wish I had done back when I started. It just seemed so...contrived that people from all over Ustalav (and in one case Lastwall) were invited to come to a funeral and all arrive JUST when the funeral begins.

Additional ideas: If they choose to wait and lack any direction some traveller could talk about "Some old fellow dyin' over in Ravengro, terrible thing, a Professor or something" in the tavern. That might get them going. Bonus points if Lorrimor mentioned that he thinks he's onto something and it might get dangerous in his letter.

Silver Crusade

Mr. Dodo wrote:
On the carriage thing: how should i justify it? Like, why are they on that carriage, instead of trying to reach the Ravengro on their own? Who paid the carriage? why did they meet in another town? Who introduced them? >_<

They could gather in a town because the Professor wanted to meet with them. He doesn't show, they take the carriage to Ravengro and arrive just in time for the Professors funeral.

Makes more sense than "You gather from all over Ustalav and arrive JUST in time!". ;)

Silver Crusade

Did they read the Player's Guide?

Also, how much do they know about the AP and Pathfinder in general?

If they know that CC is a horror adventure path and they are experienced, they can pretty much guess they will face undead first because most other horror creatures kill low level groups outright.

If they know the title of the module they can figure it out.
If they are experienced Pathfinder players they should be able to handle it.

On the other hand I feel like the module slowly introduces undead and if you buff up the shopping abilities in town they should be able to buy stuff to counter the undead.
Another idea I read was that the characters should start out on the carriage going towards Ravengro. This way they get to know each other and you can set up what they should expect without trapping them with the monsters (for example, you can throw in a broken down carriage with two zombies in it or a swarm which disbands naturally after a few rounds) - introducing them to the monsters and setting up the mood without actually endagering them too bad.

Silver Crusade

You couldn't have picked a wronger forum. Yes, that's not even a word, I know. ;)

Pathfinder Society is all about playing "by the rules", no homebrew-stuff there. You're looking for the Homebrew/Houserules forum. I flagged the thread so that it will be moved there. :)

From first sight, though: It seems as if the fighter loses very little (first feat is predetermined, no heavy armor) and gains very much (2 skill points, new (arguably better) class skills, more choice in bonus feats - he's not even forbidden from using his bonus feats the "normal" way but instead gains it as an option.
Honestly, as it is written I'd just choose it as an archetype for most of my fighters and just would not bother with picking up investigator talents. That's an indicator it's a little unbalanced. ;)

Suggestion: He's not proficient with heavy armor, perhaps he could lose some of his Armor Training class features?

Silver Crusade *

Thanks for answering and giving insight into the writing process of trilogy scenarios! :)

Silver Crusade *

I have decided that this happened:

Scions of the Sky Key I&III:

Before Scions I - Sharrowsmith destroyed part of the ruins. This not only majorly angered the kobolds but also awoke the Golden Guardian from his hibernation. He noticed that he kinda dropped the ball by letting all the kobolds into "his" city and proceeded to kick them out.
The kobolds decide that they have to appease their god and because obviously the miners are at fault they will be appropriate sacrifices.
During Scions I - The PCs come in, rescue the minors and slay some kobolds. Now they have no sacrifices and dare not kidnapping more miners. They decide to use their mining capabilities to get some gold.
Between Scions I and III - The Golden Guardian calmed down somewhat and decided that it's kinda cool to have his own tribe of worshippers as long as he doesn't have to do anything about it. It's beneath him to help them clean up their city, but as long as they present him with some gold he kinda likes his new life. Hey, he's CN - he can change his mind like that.
During Scions III - He still is not in the mood to clean up the caves. But as the PCs enter something changes - these are not primitive people like the kobolds but obviously people on a mission. These folks are usually bad news and he has to do SOMETHING to impress the he attacks.


Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mr. Bubbles wrote:
Taldor doesn't discriminate against Sarenrae anymore?

This is exactly why I wanted to start this thread. If most people (me included) read a thing once it will be "valid" in our heads until we read a contradiction.

Also, please not let this thread devolve into ANOTHER discussion about why Erastil's (or any other) change was good or bad. As James said, it was an error, plain and simple. An interesting one perhaps and nothing prohibits you from using him this way in your own campaign, but an error.

Silver Crusade

9 people marked this as a favorite.

It was not my intent bringing up content with a "We were robbed of this!" outcry. That's absolutly not what a retcon is for me.
I think it's more the different perception of crunch and flavour: Both things fix errors that have been made, but one thing seems to only exist in the present (as in "That's the rules now, they changed") whereas the other thing changes the world how it always has been - a retroactive change, thus retcon. The changes happen in subsequent books, not in an errata document attached to the original (Like "In Book X, change "All gnomes have green hair" to "All gnomes have green hair until adulthood" or something like this).
I'm not saying these changes are bad changes - in fact I think most changes fix errors or problems with the world.

I've seen time and time again people digging up older material as evidence for things that have been changed since then and nowhere to point them to and say "Yeah, but in official right-now Golarion this has been changed."

I thought it would be cool to point out these things as "Look at how much Golarion has changed, how it evolved, how the canon changed to remove errors that have been made."

It's something that is rarely seen - most worlds I know tend to sweep things under the rug but not really change them (Uberwizards who just don't get mentioned anymore, for example) whereas Golarion actively gets changed to a new, improved state with a blatant "Yes, we thought this was a cool idea, it didn't work, so now we changed it."
So quite the contrary, I believe some elements gain traction because they don't get mentioned and many game world tend to do that with content they'd rather forget, not with content that is deemed changed. So often times people will say "Yeah, it's this and that way, I read it in an old campaign setting book!".
I think it can be important pointing out that certain things have changed because that's part of what makes Golarion such a great world, that you guys tend to rethink aspects that don't work.

Silver Crusade

  • The Slohr - A ghost busters reference. Potentially legally actionable according to James Jacobs. Phased out.

  • Silver Crusade

    8 people marked this as a favorite.

    Hi there!

    While reading the Pathfinder TVTropes entry and looking up some stuff about Taldor I noticed some retcons in Golarion.
    Now, James Jacobs has said numerous times that if they decide to change something about Golarion they just "phase it out" and stop talking about it.
    I think this is confusing - if something is described in a source book but not in the next one, did it change or was it just ignored for space reasons?
    For that reason (and because I find it fascinating to see how Golarion changed over the years) I'd like to collect retcons, big and small ones.
    Sources would be appreciated.

    • Paladins of Asmodeus - Let's start with an error. As far as I can tell it was Mother of Flies, a module in the Council of Thieves AP that Asmodeus has paladins. Obviously kicked out because of alignment problems.
    • The Darklight Sisterhood - From what I can tell the Darklight Sisterhood were some kind of Chelaxian anti-pathfinders. The Aspis Consortium got the job.
    • The bearded/unbearded class structure in Taldor - Deemed needlessly complex and silly, thus removed (or it was in place once, but is not in modern times).
    • Erastil's misogyny - This seems to have been added when building Golarion on James Jacobs' original notes and has been retconned out later.
    • Tiefling/Aasimar ages - A minor one because this seems to have been an error, plain and simple. Aasimar and Tieflings are supposed to age at the same speed as humans do but have quite a long lifespan statted out in the ARG.

    This are some things I found.
    Please do add your own!

    Silver Crusade

    James Jacobs wrote:

    1) The whole bearded/unbearded thing has been retconned for some time now. It's not a thing in modern Taldor—like the church of Sarenrae being outlawed, it's now a part of Taldor's history that's been abandoned by the people of Taldor for the most part. The nation still has a class structure, though. It's just not mired in a silly beard/no beard thing.
    4) We're not done talking about Taldor, but we have no Taldor-themed books announced at this time.

    Okay, one follow-up questions:

    Inner Sea World Guide doesn't mention anything about the bearded class structure, neither that it exists nor that it has been abolished.
    I cannot find information on Taldor besides The ISWG and Echoes of Glory.

    So, I assume there a list of all the retcons that happened so far. Does Paizo plan on releasing this at any time?

    (It's quite frustrating not finding information on a subject and the only mention of it being retconned is on TVTropes or buried in some forum thread. Also for the historic value. ;))

    Here's the leery-post. As I said, it's a bit old and I stumbled upon it while looking up some Taldor stuff.
    And I just noticed you elaborated on why you chose Andoran/Taldor as answers immediatly afterwards. I need to clean my glasses.

    (EDIT: If my post comes of as confrontational or annoyed, this is not the intention. It's just the way I write and you're awesome for answering all our questions.)

    Silver Crusade

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Hi James,

    some Taldor questions. Some referring year-old comments of yours I stumbled upon while looking stuff up.

    1. You said you want to retcon out the whole bearded/unbearded thing because it's too complex. Does this mean the whole "rigid class structure" is something you want to remove?

    2. If not, how exactly would one go about to raise to the bearded ranks? If a character joined the Taldan army trying to rise through the ranks, could he ever truly become a noble?

    3. You said you are getting leery of Taldor (though that was quite some time ago). Is this still the case and why is that?

    4. Is there another book on Taldor planned besides the now almost 7 year old "Echoes of Glory"?

    Silver Crusade *

    You might want to notify your players in advance or set up a few dummyaccounts so nobody is forced to create an account while at the table, though.

    Silver Crusade *

    To the best of my knowledge - no.

    You need to use miniatures of some kind, but if you decide to glue some chess boards together and use chess figurines as stand-ins for the characters that works.

    Silver Crusade *

    LorneGrey wrote:

    So there is no further possibility to uncurse the character, if I failed to do so during the session itself (for whatever reasons)?


    Your GM was mistaken, it's that simple. I'd recommend writing to your VL or VC.

    Silver Crusade *

    That contradicts other parts of the Guide then:

    Season 7 guide, page 37 wrote:
    Step 8: Have the player note all items purchased or sold, including spellcasting services, in the notes section (V). If the character gained an ongoing condition like a curse or disease during the scenario, the player should note that here as well. See Dealing with Afflictions on page 38 for more information on noting conditions gained and cleared during a scenario or after its conclusion.
    Season 7 guide, page 38 wrote:

    At the end of a scenario, a PC may have been afflicted with any number of possible conditions, such as blindness, curses, deafness, diseases, and poison. Verify that the player recorded any conditions in the Items Sold/Conditions Gained box on his Chronicle sheet and initial next to what he wrote (see below). It’s specifically important that conditions be written legibly so the player and subsequent GMs can understand them. If the PC purchased the casting of a spell to clear the condition, you need to make sure the player recorded that information in the Items Bought/ Conditions Cleared box at the bottom of the Chronicle sheet. If another PC cleared the condition by casting a spell, this information should be listed in the Items Bought/ Conditions Cleared box, but with a 0 gp value and the casting character’s full Pathfinder Society Number (XXXXXX) written in next to the spell’s name. If a character resolved a condition gained during a previous scenario during this one, check that the condition is listed as cleared under Items Bought/Conditions Cleared on the Chronicle sheet for this scenario, and verify that the cost for resolving it or the PC who cleared it has been recorded.

    Note: Any affliction that would result in an unplayable character must be resolved at the table once the game ends as explained in Chapter 5 of this document.

    So while this is applicable here because the affliction would result in an unplayable character this is not the case for all curses, diseases and afflictions.

    Nevermind that the Conditions Cleared box was removed a long time ago, of course...
    I suggest stopping this discussion and to open another thread to not derail this thread further.

    Silver Crusade *

    andreww wrote:
    The alignment bit is irrelevant, a curse is a condition that must be cleared by the end of the scenario or you are reported dead. Also, this particular werebear is most definitely not good.

    This is incorrect. This particular curse would "result in an unplayable character" (at least I think so because werebears are not legal for play), so it has to be cleared. But curses do not have to be cleared at the end of the scenario as a general rule, only noted on the chronicle sheet if they are not broken.

    Silver Crusade *

    andreww wrote:
    In addition it is called Curse of Lycanthropy. As such normal means of removing curses should work regardless of the time taken. Neither Heal nor Remove Disease would normally be able to remove a curse and so I read the section as adding extra options rather than limiting existing means of dealing with a curse.

    That might be the case and lycanthropy is classified as a curse.

    There are however reasons why this shouldn't work.
    A cleric has to be 12th level and cast remove disease within three days to cure it. This would be pointless if any 5th level cleric could just throw out a remove curse and be done with it.

    The problem is that there is a line from 3.5 missing in Pathfinder:

    SRD wrote:

    The only other way to remove the affliction is to cast remove curse or break enchantment on the character during one of the three days of the full moon. After receiving the spell, the character must succeed on a DC 20 Will save to break the curse (the caster knows if the spell works). If the save fails, the process must be repeated.

    This is actually adressed in Classic Horrors Revisited. I only have the German version, so I'll try to translate it back into English as back as I can:

    "Almanach der klassischen Schrecken wrote:
    Magic effects such as remove curse can be used [to remove the affliction], but are only effective during the full moon when the werewolf is at its strongest.

    Seems to me like they only forgot to include that line in the bestiary. The same rule is also stated in Broken Moon.

    Silver Crusade *

    SterMe wrote:
    Generally speaking books like MTT, RTT, and WMH have kept the classic fighter / paladin up to snuff with the new kids.

    Books like whatnow? Multimate TombaT? RultimaTe Tombat? Wultimate Mombaht?

    Silver Crusade *

    Bearing in mind I GM mostly for newer players, my players tend to stick to the core classes. Exceptions are my girlfriend (witch) and one D&D 3.5 veteran and powergamer (magus kensai bladebound/fighter).

    When I GM in our FLGS the owner tends to play an inquisitor while the VL goes for an investigator.
    Most other players played core classes IIRC.

    Silver Crusade *

    Strictly speaking it's not.

    But the consensus on this boards has always been "If it was an honest mistake, fix it with as little changes as possible" - in this case I'd argue you'd have to remain a magus but are able to change feats and ability scores.

    Just ask the VC/VL.

    Silver Crusade *

    I feel like I missed something between scenarios.

    Scions I: The kobolds prayed to the guardian. He was hibernating until [INFO FROM Scions I REDACTED] woke him up and he kicked out the kobolds.

    Scions II: Irrelevant.

    Scions III: The kobolds are back downstairs and pray to the guardian, yet he starts attacking the PCs as soon as they enter...why, exactly? This part does not make sense to me. He turned back to tolerating/ignoring the kobolds (or even hibernating, this is not quite clear) but immediatly attacks the PCs?

    Silver Crusade

    BigNorseWolf wrote:

    20 foot move speed is the devil for melee. AVOID!

    Save up for the mithral breastplate.

    Never bothered me much. Let's agree to disagree!

    (It really is a tradeoff between AC and mobility. There will be situations where you curse your slowness and situations where you curse your lower AC. Guess it depends what you feel fits your character better.)

    Silver Crusade

    Just to be clear here: We're talking about the hybrid-class skald, not the bard archetype savage skald, right?

    Well then.
    If you go for oratory you don't need an instrument.
    Medium armor is a given.
    Your axe already deals slashing damage, so you should consider the "usual" problems:
    Bludgeoning, piercing, cold iron and silver.
    While you theoretically could make your greataxe a cold iron or silver weapon, I would not suggest doing that. Cold iron makes it expensive to enchant and silver lessens the damage.

    Give Painlord's What to Expect at a PFS table a quick read. You should not treat it as gospel obviously, but it give some good suggestions - a silver morning star is great because it's both bludgeoning and piercing, for example.

    Torches or (in my opinion better) sunrods are always a good investment - last time my party went into a dungeon they were surprised how little a light spell really illuminates. Not to mention the headache it generates if only one person has it prepped.

    Other than that - consider buying a few scrolls. For example, comprehend languages is something you rarely use, so you probably won't learn it. But if the need arises and you have a scroll handy you will be celebrated.

    As for throwing weapons...I hate those things and always go for a bow, sling or crossbow. But in my experience as a melee character you rarely need to go ranged in low levels (I know, blasphemy!) and if you do the fight is often over after five to ten rounds.

    Silver Crusade *

    This is the only time something other than "their loot" is mentioned:

    The Segang Expedition:

    The looters’ spoils consist of a sack containing [REDACTED].

    But I just noticed that the looters both use light shields, so they can carry something in their shield hand.
    Hooray, I can read! m(

    1 to 50 of 496 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

    ©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.