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

Cleanthes's page

398 posts. Alias of Scott LaBarge.


1 to 50 of 398 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

Those seem like reasonable answers to me, thanks!

Where sound is concerned, if I were ruling as DM, I think I'd say that it muffles sound, but doesn't completely silence the person inside. The spell description specifically says that the spell doesn't suffocate the person inside, which suggests that the field is air-permeable, and that would suggest to me that sound waves could get through it, at least a little. But I'd probably rule that any sounds the person inside made would be a lot harder to hear.
I agree with you about the sphere not displacing stuff it manifests around. (In my mind, when the sphere comes into being it doesn't pop into existence already complete, but sort of descends from its top-most point to surround everything inside. That also explains the role of the Reflex save -- to interpose oneself in the descending sphere in order to spoil the spell. Though by that reasoning, should one even be able to create a sphere in a continuous substance like a liquid at all? Should the spell work only in air, other gasses, or vacuum?) If one can trap something inside the sphere with another medium - water, poisonous gas, lava, etc. - that opens up some interesting tactical possibilities.
I really like the idea of plunking an invisible force field in front of a dragon just as it's about to strafe with its breath weapon; going to have to try that. (Although a dragon's blindsense will probably matter.)
I think you're right about targeting a grid intersection. But still, does that mean that you only get 1 creature inside a sphere no matter the size of the sphere and the creatures' location? If you're a 20th level wizard making a 20' diameter sphere, it's conceivable that sphere could grab a lot of creatures. How do we explain it only grabbing one?
5 sounds right too, though it's kind of a shame. It would be nice to have some battlefield control even when the spell didn't catch its target.

I'm thinking my wizard is soon going to learn the resilient sphere spell (RS hereafter), and while I've read lots of threads that discuss this spell, I've got a bunch of questions I haven't found answers to. Which include:

1. Does sound pass through the sphere? If someone is trapped inside a RS, can people outside it hear him yelling? If the sphere blocks things from moving through it, why not sound waves?

2. If you cast the sphere inside a medium other than air, does it create a bubble of air inside it, or does it surround whatever other medium it was cast inside of along with the target it was cast at? For instance, is a RS cast inside water filled with water? A RS cast inside fog filled with fog? A RS cast inside lava filled with lava?

3. If the sphere is invisible like a wall of force is, what happens if something runs into it at speed? (Same question for Wall of Force, really.) For instance, if I readied an action to cast RS (or Wall of Force) just in front of a flying creature as it dove toward me, would it have a chance to avoid slamming into it? What would be the results of such a collision?

4. Can a single RS trap more than one creature inside it? Say I'm a 10th level caster and so can generate a 10' diameter sphere; If I aim it at an intersection on a grid which has 4 Medium or smaller creatures in the 4 spaces around the point, do they all have to make saves or be trapped?

5. If I cast the spell at an enemy who makes the save, does the spell fail to happen at all, or does the RS still come into being, with the target outside of it? Does it thus effectively deny anyone passage into the relevant squares, whatever else may happen?

Any responses people have to any of these questions would be most welcome. Thanks!

I'm sure he's thinking of Lamatar Bayden, right?

I know that part of the problem with boosters for me is that there's no guarantee of any rares in these. With DDM boosters, you knew you were going to get at least one rare (though obviously some rares were more exciting than others.) With these, you know you're going to get at least one Large, but in every set there are a couple Larges that aren't all that exciting or valuable, and every time I buy a single booster pack, I experience the dread that it's going to be a booster filled with commons, uncommons, and an unexciting Large. Especially when I know I could have picked up those 4 minis for a fraction of the price of the booster as singles :-p I think Paizo does a great job randomizing a case, but individual booster packs seem like a bad deal given the risks.

I also wanted to second the comment about these minis being too brittle. One big selling point for the old DDM minis is that, with a few notorious exceptions, they are extremely durable; they bend but don't break. Yes, that meant bendy weapons, but if I have to choose between a bendy spear and a mini in several pieces, I'll take the bendy spear, thanks. I wince in particular at the flying bases, which I worry about all the time. I know this is how Wizkids does things, but I wish they'd show a talent for more flexibility, in senses both metaphorical and literal.

Embed the tiny and smaller minis in some sort of transparent magical field or environmental effect, and then they effectively become a lot bigger and more durable.

As for PC/NPC vs monsters, I think it's important to keep in mind that the more vocal members of the minis community are also much more likely on balance to fit on the DM side of the scale, and to be a long-term collector. (And before you say it, yes, I know there are people who only just got into minis that don't have one of everything back to Harbinger. But I'm talking percentages here.) On the other hand, for every person like that who is much more interested in monsters, and niche monsters that don't already exists as prepaints, than they are in yet another PC to add to their massive bucket full of them, there are 10 or more new players who just want one mini to represent them on the table.

I have listings on Ebay that, in one case, let people build a collection of PC minis, and in the other case, let them build a collection of monster minis. For every lot of monster minis I sell, I sell at least 4 of PC's, maybe more. That's where the action is.

Vic Wertz wrote:
Cleanthes wrote:
I can't say I'm all that surprised about the Builder Packs and Evolutions. I keep a pretty close eye on the aftermarket, and I'm starting to see signs of retailers dumping some overstock on some of those (especially the white dragons and the undead line), which suggests that they weren't doing as well as hoped.
Our own sales of the White Dragon Evolutions pack have inexplicably accelerated of late.

I'm glad to hear it! Has the red dragon set met expectations?

I can't say I'm all that surprised about the Builder Packs and Evolutions. I keep a pretty close eye on the aftermarket, and I'm starting to see signs of retailers dumping some overstock on some of those (especially the white dragons and the undead line), which suggests that they weren't doing as well as hoped. (As an aside, I always had expected undead minis to be more popular than, in my experience, they turn out to be.) And they aren't going to appeal to players (as opposed to people running games) that much.

As for this week's minis, I like them all, but don't imagine having much actual use for the first two. The last one, though, makes an awesome roper, and I definitely want one!

Looks great, and potentially very useful! I keep thinking y'all should do one that's vertical, like a cliff face. There's nothing out there like that, but it could be a source of a great encounter.

Somehow I'm just tickled by a dragon wearing a belt :-)

Really liking all 3, though I'm also looking forward to a closer look at the barbarian when the link is fixed :)

There's another work-around. Cast unseen servant, and have the unseen servant just follow you around picking up stuff you drop. Or as demontroll says, a familiar could do that job too, depending on what type of familiar it is. If you're a decently high caster level, one casting of unseen servant can last you all day.
Alternatively, use a wand of unseen servant to cast unseen servant, drop the wand, and have the unseen servant pick it up. :-)

This is all making me want to take Craft Wand :p

Good idea! I've thought about a wand of Mage Hand as well. Maybe Spark too.

Fruian Thistlefoot wrote:
Also, grease could be used to prevent a charge even if the attacker doesn't fall.

Sure, that too, plus lots of alchemical items. My wizard's going to craft her a tiny-sized handy haversack to carry that stuff around. Plus, since a lyrakien has Agile Maneuvers, I'm going to give her a masterwork ranseur so that once in a while she can make a disarm attempt (when a bad guy is out of AoO's). But for this thread I was hoping to focus on wands :-)

Once I'm in the market for 4th level wands, a wand of Detonate might make sense as well, since my lyrakien is immune to electricity damage. A 30' spread of 7d8 electricity damage (with a DC 16 Reflex save for half) could be pretty useful. This would work well for any familiar with any kind of energy immunity. (Though it's a spell my wizard, lacking energy immunity, would probably never use himself.)

If you can find it, Monte Cook had a race something like this in his Arcana Unearthed alternative 3.5 Players Handbook. It was called the faen spryte, and was a Tiny flying race that would be *a lot* like Tinkerbell. You couldn't start as a spryte at 1st level, though; instead, you'd start as a Small flightless character at level 1 that was a lot like a halfling ("quickling faen") or a gnome ("loresong faen"), and sacrifice your 3rd level feat to transform into a spryte (not a bad deal for flight, I think.) You could maybe use his spryte as a template for your own design.

Ughbash wrote:
Cleanthes wrote:

-- Grease (making allies slippery and making foes flat-footed, even if they don't fall)

I don't believe it makes them flat footed any more (though it did in 3.5 if they had less then 5? ranks in balance).

Can you link or quote wher it makes them flat footed?

If they're standing still, you're right, they aren't considered flat-footed. But I take it that if they move (and hence are making an Acrobatics check) then they're balancing, lose their Dex bonus to AC, and are considered flat-footed. So a sneak attacker would maybe need to ready an action to attack when the target started to move.

Also, grease could be used to prevent a charge even if the attacker doesn't fall. And then there's slopes....

I suppose I could always pay for a Vanish wand with a higher caster level if I thought 1 rd. per use wasn't enough, but for the party rogue's purposes, 1 rd. is probably just fine.

My2Copper wrote:

Depends partly on the kind pc pc you play. As far as I know all of the following can get familiars even without using eldritch heritage (arcane):

Wizard, sorc, magus, cleric, inquisitor, bard and I think rogue.

I play an air elementalist wizard, presently 7th level.

It's going to be a while before I can afford a 4th level wand, but D-door and Enervate both sound like great ideas as wands. I'm also thinking a 3rd level wand of Mad Monkeys might make a lot of sense; I've certainly been getting loads of use out of that spell just as a prep, and it's not heavily dependent on caster level or saves to be effective. And if the familiar were casting it from a wand, it wouldn't be as big a deal to spend a full round casting.

It also occurs to me that a wand of Vanish might be handy, and costs a lot less than a wand of Invisibility. It would have a narrower range of uses, but it could allow the melee types to get in a quick sneak attack, or reposition safely without suffering AoO's.

More ideas! This is all helpful so far!

I'm just upgrading my familiar (thrush) to a lyrakien, and getting ready to invest in some 1st level wands. What are your favorite 1st level wands for familiars to use? Here's my short list of stuff I'm thinking of getting first:
-- Grease (making allies slippery and making foes flat-footed, even if they don't fall)
-- Speak w/ Animals (intel; otherwise our party has no access to it)
-- Faerie Fire (likewise, otherwise party has no access)
-- CLW (obviously)
-- Ill Omen (no save!)
-- Obscuring Mist (when I get Fly-by Attack at 11th level, this will be AWESOME!)
-- Prot. from Evil
-- Silent Image
-- Magic Missile (for when there's nothing else for her to do)

I know there are awesome higher-level spells out there I'll want to get eventually (invisibility at the top of the list), but I'm trying to keep it cheap for now. Any others you think I should really give a serious look to?

Yep, I was always under the impression that that's exactly (and explicitly, I think?) what it was intended to be doing.

I was assuming we were going to see some Triaxians eventually, and these look great! And I'm sure catfolk lovers will be happy too.

Question: It looks like there's something big and straight on the far side of the Dragonkin mini. Is it carrying a sword in its far hand?

These are nice! Since I sell minis online, part of my interest in new ones is always mercenary, and I'm sure the raven (given its popularity as a familiar) and winter wolf will be very popular. (Nice that the wolf is uncommon, too!) The weasel, not so much, but it's still a nice mini, and I don't think there's anything out there already that's like it. (The Fiendish Dire Weasel in DDM is smaller and never really worked for me anyway, and the only other thing remotely close was the Fiendish Dire Wolverine, which also never really impressed me.)
I am a little surprised, though, that you guys did a raven when there's already one presently available through the Dungeon Crawler line. Though I think I'll prefer this sculpt a bit.

Yup. So I'll be kitting out with my goz mask, eyes of the eagle, and headband of vast intelligence, baby. My head's going to be one big intel machine!

That's very helpful, thanks! Interesting that the lenses cost the same as the mask, but the mask gives you a couple of substantial additional benefits while the lenses give you a significant penalty. A bit of inconsistency there. Guess which one I'll be using!

I have a suspicion I've seen magic items before that permit the wearer to see through fog and mist, but I can't remember where, and I've never seen an item that does *only* that. But I would really like my crafting air elementalist wizard to make an item that does exactly that, i.e. let him see through things like obscuring mist and fog cloud. (Once he's flying at will, when the situation allows for it I intend to whip up an obscuring mist in the air and then rain down death from above while the enemy can't see me.) So, the question: how much should a magic item cost that allows the wearer to see through mists? Assume it's a slotted Wondrous Item, probably eyes, head, or neck; I'm imagining I'll probably add the ability to eyes of the eagle or a necklace of adaptation. I'd also be interested in what level wizard spell people think it would be to make oneself able to see through mists for, say, 1 minute/level. Thoughts?

As someone who sells minis on Ebay, let me tell you that G-cubes are still very much in demand. But I agree with you (Brocimus) at least so far as to say that I'd rather see stuff other than G-cubes. As I've said, a range of black puddings would be very cool, although I also can think of ways to make them for myself. (Glue gun, I'm looking at you :-)

This all strikes me as quite reasonable. I don't think you could have left these figures out of the set, but I also don't think people who aren't interested in the modern stuff should find too much here to complain about. Plus, there's sure to be people playing other RPG genres who will be interested in the modern minis *because* they're modern, so it shouldn't be too hard for PF players who don't want their modern pieces to find people who do want them to trade with/sell to. As someone who can imagine running this campaign at some point, though, I would have liked to see as well some variants on the rifleman, for instance a mortar and a flamethrower version, and I also think it would have been great to get a pale sniper. I knew it was always too much to ask for a Tsar Tank, or even a smaller animated tank, and it's probably possible to find a war toy to cover the latter, if not the former. (Have you thought of approaching a papercraft outfit like Fat Dragon Games for a papercraft version of either or both of these?) Actually, I think one approach you might consider is releasing a paper minis edition of just the minis for Ch. 5 of RoW.
Though I still haven't given up hope of seeing a Corpse Orgy in this set!

I believe the valet archetype (in Animal Archive) allows a familiar to split its move before and after delivering a touch.

By the way, Fly-by Attack would allow the familiar to move, touch, and move again, but unlike, for instance, Spring Attack, it would not allow it to avoid attacks of opportunity if it attacked an enemy.

It's not PFS approved, but if your DM will let you use 3.5 stuff, there's a cantrip in the 3.5 Spell Compendium called "launch bolt" that lets you shoot a crossbow bolt from your hand just like you were firing it from a light crossbow. No encumbrance from the weapon, no reloading. When the wizard character I'm presently playing was in his first levels, I used that cantrip ALL THE TIME, and was dealing damage almost as regularly as the party's martial characters, as well as helping out in other ways. And once he could afford it, he (an elf) bought himself a masterwork composite longbow and never fired another crossbow bolt again.
I also took Point-Blank Shot as my first feat and Precise Shot as my second feat to enable this strategy. Now I get great use out of those feats with rays.

Ashtathlon wrote:

I was one of those Old school DMs.before Polyhedron dice, and we drew numbered chits from a mug.

I would not say antagonistic DMs were the standard so much as indifferent DMs were...just let the chits draw as they may sorts.

I killed my share of players, but also fudged the dice a few times when it was needed...but I do feel some of the edginess of PC mortality has been removed in the intervening years.


I do remember less inparty fighting in those days..well before 3.0 and such (which I really loved , 3.0 that is)

Maybe due to the harsher nature of the game, players had to work together more and squabble less, since the game encouraged a more indifferent stance to their well being.

Likely its just me getting old :)

But, they did make Tomb of Horrors...that thing killed more people than the plague. :)

Yeah, I'm sure there was a range of DM-ing styles in those days too. But I ran into player-antagonist DM's a lot more then than I do now.

And Tomb of Horrors truly was terrifying. Those hideous words: "no save allowed". I just don't think you can get the same feel with updates of the module to current rulesets, where you can escape the traps with a simple Disable Device check, and you get a save for almost *everything*. Can still be fun, maybe, but finishing it just isn't the same achievement.

Just saw this in my inbox:

Coming Later This Month to Kickstarter!

Dwarven Forge Game Tiles II: Caverns – in pure Dwarvenite

We wanted to alert everyone to our upcoming Kickstarter project featuring our new Cavern set and Add-On Packs. The project will begin later this month, so start spreading the word now.

We will release a full preview in the coming days, and we would very much appreciate your support.

Best Regards,

Jeff Martin & Stefan Pokorny

I for one am very excited! I've been looking forward to this ever since the last DF Kickstarter, and I've been getting great use out of my dungeon set from their first Kickstarter.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

In the old days when D&D was young, the attitude that many/most DM's had was that they were in an antagonistic conflict with the players, and it was their job to mop the floor with the broken corpses of said players' characters. The threads the OP is troubled by seem to be of that variety. If you're working from the standard present-day expectation that the DM exists to facilitate the game and that her goal shouldn't be a constant stream of player deaths, then Ravingdork's concern makes perfect sense: the posters of these threads are misunderstanding what the game should look like. Most of the time the PC's are *supposed* to destroy the monsters; that not a bug, it's a feature. But if you were approaching the game with the old-school mentality, you might well feel you weren't doing it right if the players walked away from encounter after encounter unscathed.

Solution: explain to new DM's how the role has evolved, and that a high body count is no longer a necessary element of DM cred.

I'm probably in a minority on this one, but I think a gargantuan plant monster of some type could be cool too. Not enough plant minis, in any format by any manufacturer.

I also would love to see an Ulgurstata (massive skeleton-spewing undead worm), though that might be off-limits IP.

Neothelid and Shoggoth seem like great ideas to me. I would also love to see a Gargantuan ooze, like a black pudding, although I know that that probably seems like something too non-descript to be a case incentive. But if you made a Gargantuan ooze modular, such that you could pull it apart into smaller pieces, each of which would look fine as a stand-alone smaller ooze, that would be AWESOME.

lstyer wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:
Remember that releases are slowing down a little now, so the frequency will not be so fast.
Is that because of the D&D Minis coming up from WizKids, or is it unrelated?

My understanding is that Paizo had already decided to slow down their minis release schedule a bit, in large part because of signals from their consumer base that they were piling up the new releases too quickly. (I myself think they're better off slowing down.) I don't think WotC's new minis line had anything to do with it.

Last thought: there's also the possibility of running a parallel session just for the rogue online when the whole group isn't meeting together. That way the rogue gets to do his thing, and everyone else isn't wasting their time.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It seems to me that this shouldn't involve only the preferences of the GM and the player playing the rogue. The other players' preferences should matter too. Do they mind the rogue splitting off and leaving them twiddling their thumbs while he has his own little adventure? Are they entertained by this? Does it happen so often that it gets in the way of other people having their fun? To my mind, the issue isn't bad things happening to PC's; this player seems to me to be asking for trouble, and he has no one else to blame if he gets it. And this could involve worse things than character death; he could lose all his equipment, for instance, which for some players is a worse fate. Or there's always the law; let his character spend a month of gametime in the clink, and ask the player to draw up a back-up character to play with while his favored PC rots in jail, or have him play an NPC for a while. But the real issue is whether the people at the table are having fun or not. If the rest of the people are having fun, I don't think you really have a problem. If the rest of the people aren't having fun, then it's not just your problem to solve, it's the table's, and you should enlist the other players (and not just the players' characters) to help you explain to the rogue player how his approach to the game is making it less fun for everyone else. And if that player continues to be a lone wolf in the face of that pressure, I don't know, maybe then it's time to consider finding a different player.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

My sorcerer has woken up bound, gagged, AND naked in a dark cell somewhere deep beneath the dessert.

That must have been one huge dessert! I hope it was delicious!!!

NB: comment not intended to disparage Ravingdork, whom I deeply respect. Just enjoying the inadvertent typo.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Example from my wizard's last gaming day:
Day 1: Social day on the town. Emphasis on enchantment, illusion, divination, and utility.
Day 2: Assaulting the BBEG's lair: Emphasis on offense, mobility, buffs, and protection.

My wizard is a completely different kind of threat depending on which spells I prepare day-to-day. (And that's leaving out the way Scribe Scroll makes it easy and cheap to keep other spells available without memorizing them.) One spell slot with the right spell at the right time is worth several slots with the wrong spell at the wrong time. That flexibility is just worth so much, I can't imagine trading it for a bloodline power and a few more slots. Especially in the hands of an experienced player with good mastery of the spell rules and an ability to prepare intelligently.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the spell feeblemind. If a wizard fails his save, he becomes useless. Ouch!

I'm amazed no one has done a prepaint pack mule. There are some great unpainted ones out there that paint up beautifully, but still!

And speaking of stuff that's been looked over, I think probably the single sort of mini I use most is stuff I can use as "human thug or bandit", but there's less range out there for thugs than you'd think, especially if you're just looking for something totally generic. And in particular, there's very little out there for thugs carrying swords. Clubs, axes, spears, bows, sure. Swords? Not so much. No idea why. Same for crossbows, one of the most common but unrepresented weapons in the game.

Am I right that, assuming one can find a caster with the spell and level, it should be possible to purchase a casting of Permanency for 450 gp, plus the additional cost of whichever spell was going to be made permanent (which casting one could probably do for oneself if he had the spell?) If that's true, it makes permanent spells a pretty good deal even at relatively low levels before casting permanency for oneself is possible. I just want to check and make sure I'm not missing something!

Nothing not to like in this batch! I especially like the Pale Tower Guard, for which I can imagine all sorts of uses. Looking forward to the rares!

It takes a while, but once you've got Spellcraft up to the point where you're guaranteed to be able read any scroll with a Spellcraft check by taking 10, then I stop preparing it as one of my cantrips. But early on, it's pretty much a must-prepare, along with detect magic. There aren't many times I envy sorcerers and bards, but 6 cantrips is one.

The presence of Calistria in the Golarion elven pantheon makes at least the androgynous part of the stereotype easier to dodge! If someone wants to play a very sexualized elf, Calistria gives you all the excuse you need.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You know, I've been thinking off and on about what Wizards has been doing wrong, and I've come to the conclusion that the intellectual property they're sitting on is in some ways a curse. They feel like they have to use it, because, hey! It's classic stuff, and it's valuable! How can you *not* use it? But it's also stuff we've seen before and done before, and that's not what brought us to the game in the first place. Playing the classic adventures in the classic campaign worlds was so exciting the first time around because it was *new*, and felt like really uncovering new territory. But how many times can you run the Tomb of Horrors, even if you use a new ruleset each time? It's fun to introduce new players to it, but there's nothing quite like discovering a completely new game world, both for the players and for the DM. Wizards seemed to understand that when they ran the contest that generated Eberron, and I bet Paizo will eventually work up a new campaign world as well if they keep enjoying long-term success. But I really think that it was beneficial in the long run for Paizo to *have* to work up a new campaign world of their own, and I think it's a big source of the excitement they've continued to generate. But the more big campaigns like WotR answers the big mysteries that have haunted the setting, the more it's going to feel like we've been there and done that. Campaign settings like Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms, much as I love them, are already well into their dotage. At this point, they're holding Wizards back. Drizz't again? Really? Kind of sad.

I've been playing an elf air elementalist through the 1st couple of chapters of RotR and having a blast. In some ways he fits the stereotype -- a bit aloof and superior, though not prejudiced exactly, and I gave him a decent Charisma that makes him effectively the party face most of the time (especially with a thrush familiar, +3 Diplomacy). But I've also played him as a bit reckless, given that he has a low Con (10), and on occasion he really surprises them (taking it upon himself to finish off a captured and unconscious wizard without consulting the party, for instance, or suddenly challenging Ameiko Kaijutsu to a drinking contest.) And they're awfully glad to have him around -- he's got a lot of scouting and buffing abilities, but he kills a lot of stuff too. Especially once you get out of the lower levels, a well-built elf wizard and crafter is a very handy character to have on your side. Stereotypical or not.

1 to 50 of 398 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.