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

Chris Kenney's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,108 posts (3,997 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 5 Pathfinder Society characters. 10 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,108 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I think the goal was to try to keep it relatively balanced with the Core races. Flight's expensive with the Race Builder (and correctly so), so you probably can't get everything you want. If your GM doesn't mind a little more power, you can probably add some of that in, but not all.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

1) Yes.

2) Yes.

3) No. "Magus Spells" in the Magus Armor Proficiency refers specifically to spells from the Magus class.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jonah "Deadshot" Johnson wrote:
at the end of it i think it came out to almost a 40 RP rating...

That should be your first clue that it's massively OP. Zero HD races should average around half that. 26 would be pushing, 40 is beyond the pale.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I also think there may be a cultural aspect to it. The gestures are close to universal, but casters taught in one school may exaggerate the motions, creating sweeping gestures that have some "force" behind them to try to ensure accuracy, whereas others make the shapes in a manner that is tight and controlled, with precise angular motions. It's the same spell, looked at through slightly different lenses.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Eh, not sure it's that cut and dried. The proper way of phrasing this is "Do you get all the Domain Spells unlocked at 1st level and are just unable to use them, or do they get added to spells available as you level?"

Before you ask, this is actually possible. Gnome Oracles have the ability to advance their Curse class feature faster than their Oracle levels. When combined with the Haunted curse, this starts adding spells known that are above the highest level the Oracle has access to. She knows the spells, but cannot cast them (absent a metamagic feat that reduces their effective level.)

EDIT:

Domain Class Feature wrote:
Each domain grants a number of domain powers, dependent upon the level of the cleric, as well as a number of bonus spells. A cleric gains one domain spell slot for each level of cleric spell she can cast, from 1st on up. Each day, a cleric can prepare one of the spells from her two domains in that slot. If a domain spell is not on the cleric spell list, a cleric can prepare it only in her domain spell slot. Domain spells cannot be used to cast spells spontaneously.

Reading that, I think that you get the spells from your domain immediately on gaining access to the domain, whether you can cast them, and the Domain slots as well. But I'm not positive.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

To clarify further - Psionics references in Golarion are mostly confined to the pre-PFRPG days, specifically the old "Pathfinder Campaign Setting" and maybe a few splatbooks. The rub is that they're not really Avistani, coming from further east (Pretty much between Avistan and Tian-Xia by land.) There are a few other references as well, like Aboleths and other monstrous races with access to the abilities.

They're rare, require training that comes from beyond the core campaign setting, and even then are acknowledged as just being an unusual way to access magic. I might not have any issue with it in a "kitchen sink" party, banning it as simply unavailable even though it's in the setting because, say, you want the players to all be Andoran slave liberators or from the Land of the Linnorm Kings is well within your perogative.

Asking politely for the above references so you can decide whether it fits the local flavor you're going for wouldn't be out of line, but you want to be careful about not escalating it into a challenge.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:

Erm, yeah, your mileage varies quite by a lot there to the one used by Paizo themselves. By official stats, the weakest demon lord is pegged at CR 25 and true deities don't even have an assigned CR, because they are beyond CR 30. Baba Yaga is mythic because the party is not supposed to fight her, after all.

Now, that she is as powerful as the most powerful demon lord is another thing, but arguable. Still, your CR scale is way off in regards to what Paizo themselves assume. For them, true deities are invulnerable even to high-level mythic characters (at least in their own realm) and can utterly annihilate entire metropolis with a single attack (see: Saranrae, Gormuz).

Thanks, said it better than I could have. Only going to add that Mythic power isn't meant to be "relatively normal" at all. At least in Golarion, having it represents nothing more or less than the start of apotheosis.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Magi only really function well as pure melee blasters. You are just too dependent on the blast spells for your damage to waste much of your store with buffing. This makes sense, since this was the specific gap in the bard's repertoire the Magus was designed to fill.

If you want to go the self-buff route, Bard, Inquisitor, Warpriest, and Cleric should be your go-tos. Probably in that order. The Bloodrager may actually join that list in the final version, probably at the end as a partial caster.

The Eldritch Knight is an interesting approach, but it does have the disadvantage of being mostly-caster for about half the campaign, more or less (assuming a typical AP.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
chaoseffect wrote:

I think one issue here is what is meant by "spell you know." That's 100% clear for a spontaneous caster, but what about a Wizard? Does that mean spells you've prepared for the day or spells in spell book? If it goes by spell book what is the limitation of how the shield can draw from it; ie I lost my spell book will it still keep making spells from it? If the spellbook needs to be present, what if I have specialized spell books called "Blasting," "Save or Suck," and "Battlefield Control" and then choose to "lose" all but Save or Suck for the day after prepping spells by giving them to someone else to throw in the bag of holding?

Perhaps I'm over-thinking this, but I have no idea how it is supposed to work for prepared casters.

It's old terminology left over from the pre-3E days. "Spells Known" for prepared casters is "every spell they have access to." For wizards, that means every spell in every spellbook you've ever owned. For a witch, this presumably would apply to familiars, and Divine Prepared casters it would mean every spell ever printed. (Not that they can actually use the item, but you get the idea.)

In case you're not familiar, prior to 3.0 wizards had a hard limit on the number of spells of a given level they could store in their spellbooks, linked to Intelligence. If they wanted to learn a new spell outside of this limit...they were completely out of luck, since the "spells known" were permanent and even if you lost the spellbook they took up a slot.

Very few groups actually played this rule as written, if at all.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Charender wrote:
Which is why a lot of people houserule around it....

Well, yeah. Just thought the explanation would be helpful since the logic is fairly non-intuitive.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
CKorfmann wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
CKorfmann wrote:
I've never seen anything to suggest that. ***
There's actually a FAQ specifically saying they're not compatible archetypes, though it does recommend what you should do if you choose to houserule it
Interesting. I'd never even heard of there being a controversy about it prior to today. I don't see an issue with it. The recommended house rules are sort of obvious and make sense.

Basically, it's down to Wildblooded not functioning the way it really feels like it ought to. It's not a "separate" bloodline that's very similar to an existing one, it's actually the same as the base bloodline abilities with an archetype applied.

Once you understand that, all the logic falls into place really. Since it's an archetype, and functions as such, the abilities replaced are archetype abilities. Crossblooded replaces all bloodline-related abilities, including Arcana, while any Wildblooded selection will inevitably replace at least one of them. Hence, by RAW, they conflict.

It's just kind of silly and awkward.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Please correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't Infernal Healing originally limited to worshipers of Asmodeus back when it was printed in Gods and Magic? Yes, that's a 3.5 source that's been superseded, but that does seem to indicate at least original intent.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
jobysama wrote:
Would both revelations apply to the Cleric healing or would it be more prudent of me just to make my Changeling a full 10 Life Oracle?

Go fully one or the other. If you absolutely, positively must have the ability to heal in melee, a Cleric with the Merciful Healer archetype can be useful.

Also, quick lesson in Pathfinder Healing - As you go up in levels, it becomes harder, and eventually impossible, to do the "Holy Trinity" bit during combat. Damage will eventually outstrip pure healing capability over the course of a single combat (but not an adventuring day.) The Heal spell helps with this when you get it, but you can't keep that up to the pace necessary.

I don't go so far as to say healing in combat is useless, but you seriously need to be looking at other options. Holy Word/Blasphemy is the same level as Heal and can potentially prevent far more damage. And of course there's a reason the saying "The best debuff is death" exists.

Short version: Even if you want to be a "primary healer" pick yourself some kind of secondary role and make sure to get spells and feats to support it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thaX wrote:
It never mentions size, neither the character size nor the weapon size.

Precisely. Therefore, these things are irrevlevant.

Quote:
It even goes as far as to assume the reader already knows that the EB is a Two Handed Weapon.

This is an appeal to designer intent, and therefore not relevant to the discussion and a distraction. We already believe the designer didn't intend the feat to work this way, but that's not the topic. The topic is how it works. There have been many cases over the past five years where the designers either didn't foresee how rules would interact, or simply made a formatting error. PFS-RAW says that you use how they wrote it until a specific FAQ (the lowest level of errata) says otherwise. You have posted many FAQs that speak to intent, but none specifically speak to either the feat or the Earthbreaker, so they too are not relevant.

The only thing that matters is the strict words on the page, and what they mean. Until you can explain why "You may treat X as Y" with no other qualifiers means anything other than that, you're wrong.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Thax, what you're missing is that this is a fairly obvious case of the design team trying to simplify the feat and screwing up to make it now do a number of things that weren't intended.

However, PFS-level RAW (the standard of this sub-forum) doesn't care about that. The feat does EXACTLY what it says and nothing else. You're trying to argue that the RAW and the obvious RAI match, but some of your own quotes pretty much prove that isn't true. There is literally zero room for interpretation on this point, but you keep trying to twist logic around to 'make' it so.

Specific always trumps general, as well. So if you have a feat that says "You may treat X as a one-handed weapon" all that the feat says is that you have the option to use the rules for a one-handed weapon when you are wielding a weapon that happens to be named "X." It needs additional text to limit that to a specific size category.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Agreed. To further clarify, these are all good seeds for backstories, much less so for mid-campaign events if the GM isn't on board. It sounds like your GM isn't on board.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Weird thing is that I'd regard the character as high Cha with no ranks in Social skills save possibly Intimidate. She certainly leaves a strong impression, it's just usually a negative one.

That said, this is likely a bad idea. PF being a cooperative game, making a character with the intention of being a jerk to the other PCs is almost inevitably going to come off as being a jerk to the other players unless it's in a group of close friends. You indicated that this is a concept looking for a game, which means that you'll most likely be playing with strangers or acquaintances.

All in all, I'd save it for a group of people you know exceptionally well, and even then have a very long talk about it before the first session with everyone who will be involved.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My assumption has always been that arcane summoning functions as a sort of pre-fab contract. Since the summoning doesn't really put creatures out too much, they get some nebulous bit of something that the spell can conjure for them for "free" (to the caster.) Once they take the 'something' they agree to fight, and appear via astral projection. If one particular creature doesn't agree, another will take it.

Ergo, all summons are willing in the technical, although if you repeatedly do so to force things summoned to serve against their basic nature word might get around the Great Beyond.

*

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

From that link, I note the rules on Haunts are "intentionally vague" per their own writer.

This tells me they're not suitable for Organized Play.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hmmm...for Elsa in particular, might I suggest using a cross-blooded (Water/Draconic (silver)) with pre-chosen powers? Essentially make it a custom bloodline for her with the archetype built in, and gloss over the actual draconic nature of things. For a young player, the disadvantage of Crossblooded (fewer spells known) might prove to be a strength, since it's less for her to keep track of.

When she starts to advance and wants to know more of the rules, show her exactly what you did and what might have been done differently to make a different character, as part of teaching her character building (in both senses of the term.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thaX wrote:
The Earthbreaker has no exceptions, the character treats it differently when he uses it in a specific way.

This is not what Thunder and Fang says. You can't twist around this point no matter how you want to. It says you treat the weapon as one-handed. There are no caveats, no exceptions, no further requirements. When the text says "You treat X as a Y weapon," and doesn't give any qualifiers, it means that, for that character, it is always, in every way, a one-handed weapon.

The rules text you are looking for is "You may wield an Earthbreaker appropriately sized for you in one hand." THAT would cause the rules to fit your definition, but that's not what the feat says to do.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
John Compton wrote:
With that out of the way, let me address the conclusion that you've presented: in effect, that the character can buy anything on one of these Chronicle sheets at a moment's notice—even if that character is a mile underground in a sealed demiplane—so long as it's not during combat. This is not the case. Items that show up on Chronicle sheets are not kept in a nebulous storage capsule of things that you can purchase retroactively at a moment's notice. They are items that are added to your legal purchase list (normally consisting of the "always available" list and anything you've unlocked with Fame), but one must still go through the standard channels for acquiring them.

...although looking at it now, that sure does seem like a neat one-off boon to have, doesn't it? Makes some of those older mods sheets potentially useful under the right circumstance.

Michael VonHasseln wrote:
John Compton wrote:
Items that show up on Chronicle sheets are not kept in a nebulous storage capsule of things that you can purchase retroactively at a moment's notice. They are items that are added to your legal purchase list (normally consisting of the "always available" list and anything you've unlocked with Fame), but one must still go through the standard channels for acquiring them.
Reading your response, does this mean that Fame requirements do not need to be met to purchase something listed on a Chronicle? Or do those Fame requirements STILL restrict that purchase until the fame level is hit? I ask this because I may be doing a grave disservice to my players; they have been waiting until they reach Fame requirements, just to be safe.

Fame requirements do not need to be met in order to purchase items off a chronicle sheet.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Actually, we do have a pretty good idea of what the weight gain looks like thanks to the Bloatmage Initiate feat. Since it's equivalent to a medium load, it's not beyond saying "to calculate the weight gained from taking the Bloatmage Initiate feat, use your strength score. Add the low number from the "Medium Load" column to your maximum weight." Done.

Whether that's worth the time to put on Additional Resources, who knows.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well, I suppose in the PFS sense it's legal (if drawbacks were PFS legal) but that's so cheesy I'd really expect any sane GM to push back.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Of course, it's beta. "Because we haven't made a call yet and don't want to deal with feedback involving known corner cases" has some validity.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Biggest problem with that is legacy - how do you determine what faction older characters are?

It's a neat idea, and one that I actually suggested way back in season 1, but at this point implementation is complicated by five-six years of characters made under the old assumptions. I guess a "soft reboot" along the lines of the S0-S1 changeover could do it, where a character who is converting could pick a faction based on either current boons or their original selection (and getting a boon chronicle that lets you pick one faction's boon a number of times equal to your level to represent past service.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DundjinnMasta wrote:

@Chris Kenney

That final escape hatch is not necessary since the Amatatsu Seal can actually turn people into Amatatsu Scions, giving them the ability of divine rule if no other heir is present/alive. Which basically means that the backlash for Amatatsu Scions dying isn't as great as one would believe.

There are at least three places where the Seal can be plausibly lost to the party and beyond recovery built into the AP if the party is too slow to respond to various things. If they haven't opened the Seal between those occasions, they can lose the ability to invest new Scions.

If they manage to lose the Seal, the entire party to attrition, Ameiko, and their last-ditch replacement...well, at that point they were probably never meant to succeed


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Short version: It gives an explanation for why there wasn't a massive backlash when the heirs of the only possible ruling family started dying, and it provides one final escape hatch if all of the original party and Ameiko dies (a missing heir of one of the remaining families needs to be found since the last Amatatsu is gone.)

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Also, for Taldor in particular, well. . .

Spoiler:
No time to find the quote from Brock right now, but the basic point is that the faction started the year on their last legs. He even originally said that, and I believe this is a direct quote, "feel lucky that you even have a faction." Lady Morilla not being able to get support at home and needing to engage in some elaborate theater to make it look like Taldor's doing is a reflection of that. If the Taldor faction fails to accomplish the Mission this year, it's curtains, another faction closed for good.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Devilkiller wrote:
If you feel like the new Crane Wing is useless I guess you feel not only that a +4 bonus to AC once a round is useless but that Total Defense is useless too.

In every live table game I've ever been in, a +X to affect any one thing that you're not doing is useless because most GMs won't hold up to tell you when he's looking to hit you, he'll just figure out your AC and announce "3 hits, X damage" (And most of the time not even the number of hits unless you have DR) unless you force him to hold up the game for every time you're attacked, which annoys everyone.

Total Defense means no one bothers to attack you, as a rule, unless you're the only target in reach. So that's pretty close to useless too.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
voska66 wrote:
We thought the Master of Many Styles was too good too at first but then we realized we missed that part of losing Flurry of Blows. Then the Master of Many styles monk in our game was no so good any more. Very defensive but had no offensive ability, the player retired that character for that very reason.

One level of MOMS for Crane Style + Crane Wing. X Levels in the one-handed weapon user of your choice (Lore Warden's popular with the powergamer kiddies, but really almost anything is good). You're invincible against most single humanoid opponents until 6th level anyway, so you might as well just build normally thereafter.

EDIT: Sorry, forgot you need to be human to exploit it for a one-level dip at first or second (assuming you pick up Dodge to get the prerequisite for Crane Style with the human bonus feat). Dodge is. . . well, +1 AC is always nice even if it's not wholly impressive.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
lantzkev wrote:
you'd eliminate the need to multi stat at all.

Incorrect. Check your numbers - maxing out AC (the point of a high dex build) still requires a minimum Strength of 14 at first level for armor, a fair investment when you consider that you still need Con as high as you can get it, and probably don't want to skimp on the Wisdom either. Yes, this leaves you with two "dump stats" but the stat distributions look remarkably close, and the Dex character is still behind on damage by a very significant margin.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Personally, I think the problem wasn't really Crane Wing, but MoMS. That archetype lets you get plenty of feats at first level that are fine when you're supposed to have them, and utterly broken when you slap them on a 1st level monk even without flurry. Crane Wing's just the biggest offender, far from the only one.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The spells you are looking for are Suggestion and Mythic Contingency. Particularly the latter. Otherwise, the person's behavior is always altered enough that there will be questions.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Spoiler:
Really, if anyone is going to be punching the Doctor's clock for good, it has to be either the Daleks or the Master. Cybermen might get away with it if the story was nothing short of incredible. The Master was seen in the last Regeneration Story, so I can understand a reluctance to bring him back now. So mostly it has to be the Daleks and others.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Physical attacks targeting touch-AC (which only a few monsters are well-protected against, with fewer as levels rise) combined with (with some doing or using advanced firearms) all the various feats that make archery otherwise the best single-target damage in the game.

Really is that simple - archery is already borderline overpowered, and combine that with the ability to almost automatically hit every attack pushes gunslinging over. The recent rulings on the weapon cord tone this down somewhat (it now takes serious magic item investment to pull off the reload trick) but you're planning on letting your players bypass that anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

So we can't have Paladins in Golarion because they're constantly forced between freeing slaves (Highly chaotic act in direct violation of the core ethos "respect legitimate authority") and not freeing slaves (apparently always an evil act.)

Well, that settles that, since they obviously don't exist.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Short version - Pharasma does not tolerate undeath under any circumstances. She's a goddess of the cycle - almost but not quite nature-oriented in this aspect. This has limited overlap with Gozreh as god(dess) of nature. Pharasma is also a goddess of fate, and has far more creative ways to punish wayward followers if this were to come up. On the side of major gods of the undead, the only one I can think of is Uragotha, who is very much into the 'chaos' aspect of 'Chaotic Evil.'

In short, in Golarion the concept of the lawful character "blessed" with undeath by one of the major gods is invalid. Your best bet will be looking through the lesser devil lords for something that fits - Book of the Damned Volume 1 is your go-to on this. Unfortunately I don't have it handy.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Wraith235 wrote:

I personally have a semi retired Character from a year ago ... (Sitrting at level 8) and have had no working concept for her since the Undead Lord got banned ... Im anxiously awaiting the official release of this .. this may actually allow me to scrape the Dust off of her

I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting or expecting that your situation applies here - you're stuck as a standard cleric.

This is about the very real possibility that an entire class is currently undergoing a rewrite of its' core mechanics or (at the most remote) being banned altogether for not playing nice with PFS wealth rules. Not an archetype being removed with an obvious path to compensation. A cleric can do just fine as an undead-herder without the Undead Lord archetype anyway, just roll with the punches.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Roberta Yang wrote:
Quote:

Swashbuckler

We are investigating ways for the class to get Weapon Finesse at an appropriate level

After much consideration I think I may finally have obtained a solution. Watch this:

Quote:
At 1st level, a swashbuckler gains Weapon Finesse as a bonus feat.
It took a lot of effort to solve this extremely difficult problem but I hope that helped clear things up.

I think they're hoping to avoid making the Swashbuckler an obvious 'dip class.'

Didn't stop them with the Warpriest, mind, but I don't claim to know what the thinking is with that one at all.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Too late to go back and edit - what just hit me about what is confirmed as a definite change for the Arcanist is that it will be able to destroy magic items to fuel its' own spellcasting in some unspecified manner. This may not be PFS compatible depending on how it's implemented.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Michael Brock wrote:
If something drastically changes about a class, such as a primary stat changing from INT to CHA or some such...

I'm at work so don't have time to find the exact quote, but I believe this is already confirmed as under discussion for the Arcanist. And that's the minor change to the class.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Mike, let me see if I can clarify why people are upset.

Right now, your ruling is consistent with the way the last two playtests played out. While the Gunslinger saw a farily minor revision, and the Ninja got some fairly serious balance tweaks, the soul of the three UC classes was pretty much intact throughout. There were no major revisions to the Magus either.

Even going back to the APG, no Playtest class has ever received a core mechanic change, and there's definitely an argument that the Summoner needed one badly.

Right now, we've been told about a third of the ACG playtest document just hit the cutting room floor, with more all but guaranteed to follow. This isn't just the usual playtest revisions, this is reaching the level where one class may be completely rewritten and huge changes still to come.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Easiest explanation: The "War Doctor" exists entirely within the period covered by the "time lock" on the War. So even though the Doctor escaped, he regenerated into Nine during the war, and thus nothing about the "War Doctor" persona escaped the lock.

IF this is correct, the War Doctor's presence in Day of the Doctor would then suggest the lock is gone. This would probably be bad.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Pretty much all APs are railroads - there's only so much material in X pages of adventure for going off the rails. Even Kingmaker has invisible rails in the form of areas that will kill you dead if you stray from the current volume before you've finished. Some are better/worse than others, but that's the nature of the beast.

Now, I will agree with the above posters that a decent GM can hide the rails in a pretty ride, but there's only so far you can push before you'll find them no matter how good the GM is.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
James Becker wrote:
the other idea I saw that I liked that I didn't see get much traction was the... "Buy the book get the boon" Idea... I think if someone plops down the cash for book X that is all about a certain race, then let there be a 1 time only use boon in the back to let them play that race. Sells more books, period. Heck I'd make the Boon on the inside back cover so you'd have to sharpie your player # and character name right in the book... keep folks honest and they'd never forget their source material that way *wink*. If this means that 30 people in my lodge buy a book about werefolk and want to play that, so be it.

This isn't possible - Paizo wants to encourage some level of PDF purchases as well, which would bypass any "security measures" to keep it one-per-purchase. And adding such would probably require another complete overhaul of the website which likely isn't in the cards.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
HolmesandWatson wrote:

I play two MMOs and am a dedicated Pathfinder fan. Your last paragraph is the key to the PvP issue: will the penalties be severe enough to prevent 'jerks' who just want to go around killing other players? All the posts on the boards, explaining why PvEers (like me) will like PFO PvP, are moot if the penalties aren't harsh enough to discourage the behavior. Maybe they will be. Based on the history of MMOs, I'm skeptical.

If PFO PvP doesn't end up being different enough to satisfy those who don't like PvP, then some people just won't play the game. No big deal for either side (I can keep playing other MMOs), as long as PFO's player base, without potential players like me, is big enough to sustain the game.

Thank you, I've been trying to find a way to phrase this for the past hour while reading the thread.

It all comes down to the jerks. To go back over a decade, the "PKs". As long as they're allowed to run free, PVE vs PVP is and will remain a zero-sum game. There will remain a subset of players who specifically make it their hobby, mission statement, and religion to ruin the fun of anyone who wants to do anything other than play the game their way. As long as that's gumming up the works, PFO can't appeal to the crowd who doesn't like PVP, because of why they don't like it.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Massive HP boost and BAB advancement (can use it as a sort of rolling combat debuff with the poison, flanking, and invisibility), scaling and selectable skill points (turn your wizard into a true skill monkey since its' intelligence is so high compared to an AC), and you can use its' feats for a decent selection of alternate forms for combat or utility spell-likes.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Alternately, Irori as a Lawful Evil worshipper - pursuit of perfection of the self and absolute discipline over all other concerns, least being the petty 'morality' of those who lack the will to do what is necessary.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I really have nothing to add here.

1 to 50 of 1,108 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.