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

Cheapy's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 6 Season Marathon Voter. Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 16,971 posts (17,276 including aliases). 21 reviews. 5 lists. 1 wishlist. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 12 aliases.


1 to 50 of 2,303 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Marathon Voter Season 6

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A wee bit melodramatic, no?

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If anything, they increase the availability of options at the tables I play at, as the options were banned previously.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My cavaliers only ride horses with three spoilers on the back.

Marathon Voter Season 6

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The overwhelming majority of these nerfs being aimed at casters is just undeniable proof that Paizo hates casters.

Marathon Voter Season 6

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Wait, people actually thought Divine Protection was balanced?

Huh.

Marathon Voter Season 6

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

They are already useful and competent. Ample playtesting has shown this out repeatedly. In-combat things are not the area they need help in. Buffing them up, or replacing them with a set of classes that just further exacerbate rocket tag and bring the levels that it's active at much lower won't help as much as working in logical out-of-combat abilities, and that's where you should focus your attention if you want to be successful.

Marathon Voter Season 6

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

No no, this new thread someone will make will totally have a new perspective that hasn't been brought up in the past 15 years. It's definitely not rehashing the same thing over and over.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Which is what Mum-Rob just said, d'oh.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Well said.

This is a messageboards problem and one seen predominantly in the games of people who are on the messageboards. Regardless of which messageboard it is. A tempest in a teacup.

There can be issues, but only when things are pushed to their limits, and in many many MANY games, martials are by far the most powerful characters.

This is especially true at the levels that most people play at (lower levels), and in the average game.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yes.

There's also this too.

They've been saying that it'd be released between those dates for a few months now. It's not really a surprise.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I get the feeling there's some context I'm missing, but I'm not so sure I'm actually missing much.

Reading the rules strictly and without trying to determine the intent isn't the best idea. In fact, I'm not even certain it's possible. It's easy to see why as well:

Written words have one purpose, and one purpose only: To convey the intent of the designer. The words and rules they encompass did not appear out of a void. The words first appeared when a human being typed them on a computer. And that wasn't the first time the rules came into being either. Previously, they were in the designer's head, jumbling about and sorting themselves out. They were bouncing off myriad other ways to implement the desired behavior. How can I best capture this feeling and action I'm trying to encapsulate? Should it be a bonus applied in a certain situation, or something that gives a new ability in that situation?

And, as surprising as it is, it turns out that the designer does not suddenly become a robot when they are designing new rules and transcribing their thoughts into words that convey their intent. Or if they do transmogrify, it sure as heck doesn't happen to me or any other of the many designers I know. This means that they are still just human. They can still make mistakes when conveying their intended rules.

So yes, applying common sense is necessary. Sometimes it's needed to fill in the gaps when mistakes are made during when transcribing rules from the mind to the document.

Of course, coming at the rule without preconceived notions is also very helpful. Sometimes the designer wants to do something that doesn't actually fit what would be called "common sense". Usually this involves being very specific about something to show how it's different from the norm.

And this isn't even getting into the idea of design blind spots, where you are so deep into a system and you know it so well that you simply do not realize that one of the rules in your head is not actually written down, and your mind just fills-in-the-gaps when you are re-reading everything.

But it all comes down to the designers not being robots. Things will never be perfect, and you need to try to figure out what the intent was in a fair manner in the cases where things are odd. There are often times very strong hints that point one way or the other, with a few principles that can be applied to figure out the intent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, unofficially, I think it'd be fine for that case, although if they took other damaging tactics, I'd keep them at d8. It's feat for an effective +1 damage increase. You can also just say they have bastard swords, but some also have daggers that they use now and then, and then between pommelsmacks and thrown elbows, that accounts for the B,P, and S damage type.

The other reason Linda and I went with this model was because it ensured we could have better handle on the balance. When we removed the possibility of outfitting your own troop, it meant that the class wouldn't get massively more powerful or weak based on the wealth that the party got, which is a factor we can't really control. We wanted to take a complex concept, someone in charge of a bunch of people, and take away as many of the the aspects that made the archetypical idea difficult to run without massive spreadsheets. And part of that included outfitting the troop personally. (And paying them, although we experimented with that a bit and Linda made a great system for how to handle it.)

One thing I'd recommend though is to sort of divorce yourself from the thinking that it's exactly like an NPC. It's fine to just say "Yes, they all have bastard swords", without giving them the feat. The squad weapon is never really specified, so it can be whatever you want. In the base adventure that introduced the troop subtype, the auto-damage represented rifle buts, elbows, knives, bayonets, and the occasional-probably-too-close-pistol fire. It was just whatever the troop had in hand.

Fluid Tactics would probably help though, letting them switch easier between two-handing the bastard swords, and using them one-handed with shields.

In the game I'm playing in, I have a General that leads a group of half-elfs that are outfitted with a mix of longswords, falcatas, shields, crossbows, and shovels. Their squad name is the Ditch Diggers, which is somehow a term of honor given our nascent kingdom.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Also remember that they changed how stealth works. If you start in cover or concealment, you can get to another place where you have that and make the stealth roll again, even if you're darting in open sight.

Stealth is unfortunately one of those skills where people don't really follow the rules.

Marathon Voter Season 6

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I start punching trees until I get enough wood to make a crafting table, then I make some wooden tools. I then start to progress my way up the tech tree until I get killed by an exploding green thing.

Marathon Voter Season 6

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Ezren.

Because Ezren. And dat chin is the stuff of dreams.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I have this weird condition where if I see someone seriously complaining that "martials can never have nice things", I just forget everything in the post I read.

It's weird, but it actually makes the forums a lot more enjoyable to read than before I developed that.

Marathon Voter Season 6

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Additionally, here is commentary from a former member of the Pathfinder Design Team ranting about the rods.

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Honestly, I think all of the metamagic rods are cheesy and should be removed from the game. The metamagic feats are already annoying and weak and there's no strong incentive to take them, and on top of that you can pick up the rod as a cheap feat-in-a-can and not have to prepare the spell ahead of time, and on top of that, they can bypass the 9th-level spell limit (normally you can't quicken anything 6th or higher with the feat because there are no 10th-level spell slots), so the rods are even better than the feat.

The parenthetical statement is clearly at odds with the idea that the rods allow you to prepare the spells ahead of time using the metamagic feat, as if that were the case, you couldn't use the rod of quicken, despite what the statement above states.

Marathon Voter Season 6

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Caused too many questions to arise and unbalanced things that were made under the ruling they weren't spells.

When there are guides on which race to pick to get which spell of which casting tradition and which spell level, just so you can make a build using something that was never the original intention, things have gone way, way too far.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Seems like the immunities are doing their job fairly well :p

In our groups, we usually see minor forms of this, with wasted actions now and then. But we generally prefer more interesting combats than facerolls, which tend to happen when all those wasted actions happen.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

4th edition had one such table, and it was one of the most hated things about the edition, as the characters never actually got better.

If you really want to go ahead with that, just make an excel chart that sets chance to succeed at 50%, and make an average build against that, putting every rank of a skill into that, etc.

You'll have to do that for ability checks too, because ability checks are already screwed up and scale much slower.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

"Doesn't need to be playtested," is the common refrain from those who armchair analyze, "it's obvious how this will work, given X, Y, and Z."

But the thing is that if you want your opinions to be considered more, you should still playtest. And playtest fairly! Because armchair analysis is prone to missing details and people on the forums almost invariably want things stronger during the playtests, so it's hard to separate actual good ideas from the usual "buff buff buff buff buff", and playtesting reports helps with that greatly.

I'm quite glad to see that others are planning on more playtests. Since high level playtests are rare, I will probably aim my own tests there.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Saying that the design team doesn't know how to design is going to do an amazing job of getting them to listen to your ideas, good job!

Marathon Voter Season 6

16 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hmm, a Tengu Stalker Vigilante.

Let's get dangerous.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If they didn't have the extra staggered spells from bloodlines, then it would be an absolutely no-brainer choice for 99% of all sorcerers.

How would you go about trading out a weak ability that you probably won't use past level 2 for an extra set of actions, the most important thing you can get in Pathfinder?

Marathon Voter Season 6

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

On the plus side, if you assume the game is written from the perspective of elephants, it makes the "What's the Acrobatics DC to jump a 10 foot pit?" question really simple.

Marathon Voter Season 6

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

One thing to keep in mind is that the rules were made with innumerable assumptions of what is common sense. For example, nothing in the rules prevents an elephant from jumping, even though it is impossible for an elephant to jump.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The Strategy Guide has a lot of concepts at the front, with recommendations on how to build them with the core classes.

I'm thinking Spheres of Power could use a document of that sort, just to ease people into the new system.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for the review, Eric!

To answer your questions:

Flagbearer was indeed altered here. We thought it fit well, but that as written it'd be a bit too good.

Skirmishing is sort of a different way of damage than anything else in the system, so here is how it is supposed to work:

You have a dice pool. It's comprised of a number of d6s. If you get the tactic as soon as possible, your dice pool will have 1d6 in it. You also get 2 lines when you use this. Each line will do 2 points of damage, and you can assign any number of the dice from the dice pool to either line. If taken ASAP, that basically means you'll have 2 lines, one that does 1d6+2 damage, 1 that does 2 damage. Once you get a 2nd d6 in the dice pool, you could have 1 line that does 2d6+2 and the other doing 2, or two lines that do 1d6+2, etc etc.

The lines will follow the usual rules for line effects, same as spells. So, act like someone in the troop's squares is casting lightning bolt, and resolve it that way. :) Hopefully that helps.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bandw2 wrote:
Lamontius wrote:
Currently prepping Heresy of Man pt. 2, which contains one of the worst riddles I have ever heard.
?

"What's brown and rhymes with Snoop?"

Not sure how that one made it into a PF module, but there you have it.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A while ago, I calculated the value of the human sorcerer's favored class bonus.

Unless other races can get the equivalent of two artifacts plus 72k, I think they win :)

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Whenever I refresh a page, a pop up, well, pops up, saying "f" with an OK button.

Then another pops up with 27, a radio box to say "Don't pop up again" essentially, and an OK button. And then another one pops up after I click that one, saying another number.

This is for every page, and another user has seen this happen on theirs too.

Version: 1.14.23352.166.23352 (2015-06-01 11:11)

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bob Bob Bob wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Sure, GM how you like.

My point is that at least I seldom use way lower enemies that often, nor do I suspect many others do.

I might use 4-6 enemies of roughly the same CR as the party, and I *might* use a sizeable band of enemies CR 1 lower than the party, but aside from that?

Any time the party encounters enemies lower than that I'm expecting a curbstomp by the party, it's not expected to be a challenge at all.

I'm not talking about my GMing, your GMing, or anyone's GMing. I'm talking about the guidelines for encounters laid out in the GMG. Encounters with CR from APL-1 to APL+3, doubling the number of creatures increases the CR by 2 (and a table from 2 creatures to 16).

That you don't follow those guidelines means nothing except for games you run. I would never presume to guess how other people run their games or even that I've met the tiniest fraction of people who run games. The GMG is on its third printing, I think? How many thousands of people is that? All I can use for determining encounters is the listed guidelines Paizo has provided, which include allowances for up to 16 lower CR creatures in a battle.

The question I'm trying to have answered is if combat maneuvers are significantly more effective against CR=APL-2 or CR=APL-4 monsters and therefore encounters with twice as many monsters two CR lower or four times as many monsters four CR lower would be a possible solution to make combat maneuvers more viable (while still keeping the difficulty scaling of higher and lower CRs). I don't know what CMDs Cheapy was comparing to, I guessed CR=APL and was hoping to get CR=APL-2 and CR=APL-4.

Your assumption about using CR equal was correct.

Amusingly enough though, I actually have a bit better numbers than that. When balancing a class I wrote, I tried to determine the average number of creatures in an encounter*. The numbers worked out to about 2-3 creatures per encounter for a given CR.

*:
I think I checked 3 PFS scenarios and 2 AP modules? Not exactly representative, but do you have any idea how time consuming that is? :) The main module I remember was The Dead Heart of Xin, a real dungeon crawler with lots of encounters, and I used that one for high levels.

Which means for the average encounter, it's better to use not CR equal, but a CR equal to APL - 2 as the target numbers. Not that the numbers aren't entirely fair: if the party is level 15, a CR 17 encounter could be composed of 2 CR 15 critters, but for the numbers below, it's using level 17 CMB numbers for that. However, the original numbers already cover that case.

So, starting at 20, using a maneuver that can replace attacks but doesn't use a weapon, as a full BAB class that only uses things from the CRB:
1-6: 89%
7-12: 94.16%
13-20: 92.5%

Starting at 17 Str, other assumptions untouched:
1-6: 83.5%
7-12: 89.16%
13-20: 87.5%

Also, noticed a small issue in my formulas. Subtract about 5% from the level 1-6 range for all previous numbers. The other ranges are unaffected by it, and this post uses the corrected numbers.

Here are the numbers for against CR = APL+1 targets. Keep in mind that as CR overtakes APL, there's a much greater chance that we're getting into single target territory, and then the creature is going down fast anyways. This does not include the flanking that will generally happen in a single target situation.

Starting Str: 20

1-6: 61%
7-12: 66%
13-20: 58%

Starting Str: 17

1-6: 53.66%
7-12: 55%
13-20: 47.5%

Marathon Voter Season 6

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

126 posts before the "But, wizards!" argument was brought up in a post about martial combat.

Maybe the forums are starting to get better about that.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's because it has the coolest name.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Awesome to finally see all the hard work pay off, Michael!

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You're making a lot of interesting claims about scaling and how it affects CMD/CMB/AC, etc. I presume this means you have some tabulated data by CR on each of these, and I'm curious if you have that available to look at? Because I've been wanting something like that for a while!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

IronDesk, regarding your first question on the demiurge, my idea was that the facsimiles would be best used more like tools than as an eidolon. Based on Paizo-released classes, versatility is highy valued, and the ability to create the right tool for the situation seemed very powerful for the demiurge. And even if you did have a facsimile that was weaker for a given task, it could at least help buff another one.

The tend to have a different role from the Summoner, being able to fit the roles of knowledge monkey, Face, and swiss-army-knife. Enlightenments allow them to focus on other things as well. All told, I think that it's a class that will fair decently against the Unchained Summoner. I'm glad I wasn't balancing too close to the original summoner, given the recent patch of it. :)

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

To allow for a popular visual aesthetic.

Marathon Voter Season 6

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:


I don't think anyone would complain if we had 2 FAQ's again next week. :)

I definitely wouldn't mind myself, but I recall hearing that part of the agreement on carving time out for weekly FAQs and enshrining that time was that it'd be 1 FAQ a week.

If I had to guess, the original FAQ this week was for the courageous weapon property (which, to be honest, I didn't actually think anyone thought it was intended to work the way the text said), but the Acrobatics DC one was so easy and getting so out of hand that the Design Team, in Their Infinite Wisdom And Grace, did decide to tack that one on.

If anything, maybe next week the FAQ will include a second one on if PCs need to wear underwear beneath plate mail. Of course, wizards need to ensure underwear doesn't interfere with the somatic components of their spells, so they will most likely be allowed to go commando while the fighter will need to wear underwear of some variety.

Marathon Voter Season 6

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Similarly, I believe you could do an all Rogue Genius Games one as well. If the classes of a setting are there to fit the needs of the setting, it would certainly tell an interesting tale. Here's a world where the children of gods walk amongst mere mortals, the world flush with dragons and their riders constantly fighting the forces of undead, led by death mages and death knights. Due to the constant warring and colossal states, it's figuratively and literally a gloomy world, well suited for shadow assassins to keep track of others and take them out efficiently. The archons and rivenmages peel away at the current foundations of magic, looking for any trump cards they can use in the war, all while the time wardens battle the time reavers, the latter intent on bringing the end of the world. This is a world where almost everyone has magical abilities of some sort, from being able to paint magic as a mosaic mage, to blending martial might with eldritch knowledge as the vanguard. In such a magic rich world, one would need dedicated witch hunters.

And then the Hellion is like "I'm an underappreciated class that has a really cool concept, so I'm going to go pout and put a hex on someone."

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Personally, I'm actually pretty fine without knowing the answers to a thousand different bits of rule minutiae regarding jumping over a hole in the ground.

Marathon Voter Season 6

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Not a colossal screw up, just an easy-to-make mistake that one guy made where he missed 4 words as part of his 2,000 word turn over on weapon abilities. Just about anyone who does game design has made similar mistakes.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nefreet wrote:
Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

Answered in FAQ!

FAQ wrote:

Jumping: If I want to jump over a 10-foot pit, is the DC 10, like the table says, or is it higher, since I need to move a total of 15 feet to reach a non-pit square?

The DC is still 10 to jump over a 10-foot pit. You do move a total of 15 feet when you make that jump, but some of that is not required to be part of the jump. One way to visualize it is to think of it as walking/running the 2–1/2 feet from the center of your original square to the edge of the pit, jumping the pit right to the other edge, and then walking the 2–1/2 feet to the center of the new square.
Well, serves me right to respond to comments as I'm reading them =/

Trust me, it's so much easier to ignore comments.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You should get Mark started on the Not An Action action.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thank you again for the time you've spent on this review, Endzeitgeist. It is very inspiring.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's also sometimes called the bag of rats test. EZG's version of it definitely gives a more emotional response tho!

Basically, when working on something, one should ask themselves if a bag of rats would unbalance the ability you just wrote.

Marathon Voter Season 6

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Remember folks, if the answer is anything but DC 10, then it's because a wizard cast create pit and Paizo hates martials.

Marathon Voter Season 6

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Malcolm, I had some similar thoughts when I was reading the class for the first time. Some concepts seemed un-defined to me, but I was able to eventually pierce things together (sort of like how precision damage is never defined in the core rulebook, but it's referenced in a bunch of places).

Might be worthwhile to find someone else who hasn't read the thing to go through it with you, and note down all their questions :)

Marathon Voter Season 6

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Reminded by Endzeitgeist's review, here are all the references that the Demiurge's Rhetorics make. This is mostly for people who are interested in Ancient Greek philosophy.

Rhetorics:

  • Zayaster's Razor is named after my brilliant developer Linda, and is a simple pun on razor's being things that cut away at other things, be they ideas or goblins.
  • The Illumination Rhetoric may as well be called Plato's Cave: The Class Feature, with the Argument Fascimile taking the role of the Fire, and the Arguer being the shadows it cast.
  • Zenotic Rhetoric is a reference to Zeno's Paradox, with the arguer facsimile not actually changing position, all said and done, but to the creature it charged, it certainly seemed real.
  • Gygian Rhetoric is a reference to the Ring of Gyges, which was a parable that Plato gave of a man who found a ring that made him invisible, and how he was eventually corrupted by this fact. That should sound familiar. While I'm usually loath to balance abilities by adding drawbacks, I felt that going mad / being confused was very fitting for this rhetoric.
  • Socratines Rhetoric came from Socrates' style of arguing, where he was more asking questions of others, being slippery in his own views, but leading others towards them through rhetoric and discussion.

    Oh, and unrelated to the Rhetorics, but the Knowledge Enlightenment is basically the Warrior-Philosopher-King from the Republic, which explains the somewhat odd marrying of knowledge and martial prowess they receive.

  • 1 to 50 of 2,303 << 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.