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

Deadmanwalking's page

RPG Superstar 2015 Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 7,459 posts (7,652 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 7,459 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

GeneMemeScene wrote:
Slashing Grace also lets you treat the weapon you use as piercing, so the difference between Rapier with Fencing Grace and Cutlass with Slashing Grace is the Rapier has a +2 against disarm while the Cutlass can get through DR/slashing. Both can beat DR/piercing.

This is incorrect. To quote:

Slashing Grace wrote: can treat it as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon...

Emphasis mine. only counts as piercing for Feats and Class Abilities. Nothing else.

Liberty's Edge

Avoron wrote:
Deadmanwalking, I think the idea is for the character to not be dependent upon specific gear, so that if you gave them, so that "if they had level appropriate gear could fight against most threats reasonably well," even without any specific magic item.

That's not precisely what was said or how people were answering it. So...yeah, clarifying the intent was what I was requesting, really.

Liberty's Edge

Well, what stats and build are you aiming for?

Still, the most common use of Traits (extra Class Skills) is mostly superfluous on an Investigator. You can get a Save Bonus or an Initiative bonus, but you have a third Trait for one of those already, if you like.

Liberty's Edge


Master Summoner, or Synthesist with a 4 level dip in Oath of Vengeance Paladin are also valid options, if you like.

Also, the 'no non-magical gear' thing really screws this hypothetical in terms of usefulness for what you say you want. A character built to not have any magical gear is exactly the kind of 'niche' build you're complaining about...only worse than many of them, since it's less likely. Especially built at 20th level, since that results in a lot of builds that are...less than spectacular at low levels.

Now, the same hypothetical with no items not in the corebook instead of none at all...that's a lot more viable to determine what you seem to want to determine.

Liberty's Edge

N. Jolly wrote:
Are you reading it on a different device or something? I ask because in my doc, there's a line break there which is why I didn't include a space. I threw one in because I could fit it though.

I'm just following the link. So...I really dunno.

N. Jolly wrote:
And for the Inquis, the problem is that their weapon selection almost forces a ranged character, which is where I thought their combat styles were limited.

As Lemmy notes, they get their deity's Favored Weapon, too. This makes them as limited in melee options as a Cleric, but better at range.

N. Jolly wrote:
Let me know if you can think of a better 'problem' with the class though.

Like Magi, they can burn through resources really quick if you aren't careful. Bane is wonderful, but very limited and you get fewer Judgments a day than there are fights for much of your career. Spells help with this, but unlike Magus, take up turns you could be fighting.

Obviously, you'd need to sum that up in a slightly shorter format...

Liberty's Edge

cnetarian wrote:
In a PF style fantasy world the most powerful people on the battlefield are armor lacking magic users. This means all the logic that rapiers were the result of armor wearers no longer controlling the battlefield would have applied earlier in the evolution of weaponry in a fantasy world, resulting in rapiers developing in tandem with greatswords instead of sequentially.

This is an excellent explanation, actually. :)

It's not universally true, but it's common enough for weapons to be made for the situation.

Liberty's Edge

The thing people seem to be forgetting here is that level is based purely on accomplishment, not birth or status.

Historically, most peasant revolts failed rather definitively unless they had a competent and charismatic leader of some sort, as they fell apart completely due to lack of coordination. In the world of Pathfinder that leader simply needs to be high level to boot...and even that only eventually, with leading a revolt being a great way to rise in level.

Liberty's Edge

Student of Philosophy effectively allows Int on both Bluff (for everything but feinting) and (in combination with Empiricist) all Diplomacy. Take that.

For your other Trait, as Some Other Guy notes an initiative or Save booster is always solid. While Armor Expert can be handy and Fate's Favored is good if you ever get Luck bonuses. Inspired is a solid choice, too.

Liberty's Edge

Very nice. I approve this immensely.

Though I'd put an extra line between Dex and Con, to make them match the rest. It looks slightly off otherwise.

I also see two minor issues on specific classes:

1. You should note that Hunter animal companions are by far the most badass animal companions. That's an important part of why you might want to play a Hunter.

2. What do you mean that Inquisitor lacks options in combat? I've never found that to be the case.

Liberty's Edge

N. Jolly wrote:
Edit: Before this I never really read over the Hunter, now that I am I'm not sure why it exist.

It's surprisingly solid in several subtle ways.

The ability to use the Ranger list as a 6th level caster is great, for example. Lead Blades and Resist Energy as a level 1 character is very nice to have.

Skirmisher Tricks being available to their companion is also awesome, and the Teamwork Feat synergy is brutal. Pack Flanking allows Outflank, Paired Opportunists, and Broken Wing Gambit to all stack. By 9th level you can have all that automatically with the only price being the purchase of Combat Expertise.

Heck, as early as level 3, we're talking Pack Flanking, Power Attack, Outflank, and the Skirmisher Trick Aiding Attack from your animal Companion you can manage something like +10 to hit for 2d6+9 damage as long as you and your companion are adjacent.

It falls behind Druid at higher levels, as do almost all 6-level casters behind their 9-level brethren, but it's very solid in its own way.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Play a Gunslinger.

Take, as your Traits, Student of Philosophy and Barroom Talespinner (the latter from the Skull and Shackles Trait list).

Don't bother with Charisma (in fact, you can dump it if you like), just raise your Int to 12-14. Take Diplomacy as one of your skills, and maybe Bluff as another.

There, you're now as charming as you really need to be.

Liberty's Edge

I'd definitely put Skald in Warrior. It's only got 4+Int skills, after all (and without a class focus on Int). You could argue Bardic Knowledge and Versatile Performance make them Specialists but I don't know if that's quite enough.

Magus and Warpriest are definitely Warrior classes as well.

Hunter, I might throw in Warrior too. They have 6+Int skills but are even less good with them than Rangers (and way less than Slayers). If Ranger's in Warrrior, Hunter definitely should be. If Ranger's in Specialist it's a harder decision.

Liberty's Edge

kestral287 wrote:
If you're locked out of early entry it might be worthwhile, but otherwise... not really, even if you had the SLA, because the SLA only saves them one level instead of the Wizard's four (here's looking at you, Eldritch Blade).

This is true. Like I said, it's not worth skipping early entry. But with a racial SLA or in a game forbidding it...

kestral287 wrote:
Admittedly the Blade Adept could make for a decent gestalt gish, but for an EK it just takes too long and doesn't offer enough.

Arcane Accuracy alone is very nice.

kestral287 wrote:
No, it's your Arcanist caster level. Whenever a class feature talks about a caster level, assume it's referring to its own.

Huh? Eldritch Blade does almost precisely this.

Liberty's Edge

JiCi wrote:
christos gurd wrote:
Isn't the point of the arcanist blade adept to go into eldritch knight?
You still need at least one level in a suitable martial class because the PrC requires you to be proficient in all martial weapons; the blade adept only grants you one proficiency.

True. That's true of everyone, though.

kestral287 wrote:

Except that it works better with a Scryer Wizard.

Because everybody knows that the guy hunched over a crystal ball is really an /awesome/ swordsman.

As mentioned, that has some thematic coolness to it, actually (the Alex Verus novels are indeed an excellent example of this...and the Scryer keeps Forewarned, which is the thematic one, it only loses Diviner's Fortune).

And yeah, you don't get early entry, sans race anyway, but it's solid as non early entry builds go. Which is admittedly mostly at high levels, but still potentially fun. It's very good if your GM isn't allowing early entry.

Blakmane wrote:
I'm not seeing it. What does the archetype have over a standard diviner -> EK build? It is a spell level behind and gains... The black blade, which is of dubious benefit anyway. I guess it is probably better in low WBL games?

The ability to burn Feats on Magus Arcana (via Extra Arcane Exploit). Several of those are quite worth it. The Black Blade's a pretty cool thing to get as well.

Not worth giving up early entry, but if you have a racial SLA or other method of early entry, or early entry is disallowed, it's solid.

Liberty's Edge

christos gurd wrote:
Isn't the point of the arcanist blade adept to go into eldritch knight?

Yep. It works well, too. At least in theory.

Liberty's Edge

Giving up Brawling for Medium Armor is trading +2 each to hit and damage for a max +2 AC (I guess +3 at some GP amounts). That's worse than Combat Expertise, and a bad trade.

And it's not like I'm suggesting not putting your level up points into Str or something. Starting with 18 and going up from there is very reasonable.

Liberty's Edge

Good Drow are absolutely possible. Hell, there's a canonical CN Drow in Second Darkness. Plus, Shensen, one of the characters in the NPC Guide, was born a Drow. She got reincarnated by a Druid, but that doesn't change alignment, and she's CG.

So...yeah, this can happen. It hasn't happened in Golarion much as of yet, but it can.

Liberty's Edge

Enforcer combined with the Blade of Mercy Trait leads into that pretty well. And is pretty cool.

I dunno about the other Feat...maybe go Dodge or Toughness and retrain it at 3rd?

Liberty's Edge

If you want to, go for it. It works best as a Dex-based Barbarian (for stat synergy) or a Bloodrager (since you need decent Charisma to make it work anyway).

It's not preisely optimal, but rage cycling makes it a very valid build.

And lemeres, you need Empathy at level 1 to make it work since otherwise you can't get Rage's bonuses. At all.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Oncoming_Storm wrote:
To any potential new Pathfinder players who happened to come across this thread, I'm sorry. We're usually pretty cool people.

In the same vein:

This thread is satire, folks. Please by all the gods don't take it seriously.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fruian Thistlefoot wrote:
Im not a fan of skill monkey as a party member.

As a primary role? Me either. But Bard's a pretty solid arm that also covers that better than any other Class except maybe Investigator (which is generally a melee hammer with a side of anvil and thus probably not appropriate to this party).

And as for the fourth member doing it, no one character can cover all the necessary skills (certainly nobody who's a primary spell caster). So...having two people covering different segments of them is very useful.

Liberty's Edge

Close enough, at least on a melee or archer build. It's not the best thing ever, but free healing is solid.

It's certainly good enough not to cripple your character, so if you want to play one, do it.

Liberty's Edge

born_of_fire wrote:
Eh, the fourth player can be the skill monkey ;)

I feel like it's dicey relying on that, but maybe that's just me.

Liberty's Edge

Sure, occasionally. I'd probably do it more, but GMing usually scratches that particular itch.

Liberty's Edge

born_of_fire wrote:
In before Magda to recommend the Evangelist Cleric, basically a bard and cleric wrapped into one delicious package. Why choose one or the other when you can play both?

Skills. Nobody else in the party seems to have them, after all.

But yeah, if you don't care about skills, Evangelist is great, and the right way to do Cleric in this situation.

Liberty's Edge

I like it. I'd probably warn about Rogue and Fighter's down sides slightly more strongly, but I definitely like it.

In terms of issues:

You have Con listed before Dex. That's weird and possibly confusing.

In the Fighter description you have 'though' redundantly a couple of times in one sentence.

Liberty's Edge

Edymnion wrote:

Just something for you to keep in mind if you don't already know it.

PFS games tend to be very combat heavy, RP light, and quite lethal. As such, a buffing character that doesn't actually get into combat would be a good choice.

Build for survivability. Glass cannons are going to die, fast and hard.

Uh, he's doing an AP. Not PFS. So...this advice is pretty much not true.

I mean, everyone should always build for survivability, but aside from that...

Liberty's Edge

Cleric or Bard are solid. The party needs some healing and maybe buffing. Oracle or Druid would also be good, as would Inquisitor to a lesser degree. Witch would be very different, but also potentially work well.

Personally, I'd also go with something with a fair number of skills, since you're low on those at the moment. That'd probably leave cleric by the wayside, but the rest listed still work at least in theory.

In terms of build, offensive caster or archer are probably the right choices, since your party lacks both.

Liberty's Edge

Str 19 is...excessive, IMO. I'd drop if to 18 for more Dex, which you sorta need due to light armor.

I'd go Fate's Favored/Sacred Tattoo in terms of Trait. +2 to all your Saves is definitely worth a Trait and the loss of Orc Ferocity.

Liberty's Edge

roguerouge wrote:
Mystic_Snowfang wrote:
It's been confirmed that the Slayer's older sister is alive and been a pleasure slave of this drow since she was captured. Her tiefling daughter was recently used as bait to lure the party into a trap.
When you include a plot line of serial rape of a family member, the answer is yes before you even ask the question.

As bookrat notes...not necessarily. It's definitely something you should check with the player in question about before including, though. And also, frankly, the group as a whole.

I've had my PC personally do worse things than that in an Evil game, and I was probably the second nicest party member (after the one LN one), with some of the others being much worse. I've run a game where the PCs were serial killers (and not the cuddly kind ala Dexter) with all the horror that implied. I've had PCs personally kidnapped and tortured by main villains. I've seen all kinds of things worse than this done in all sorts of games.

All of that was perfectly acceptable because I've known the people I've been gaming with for years, and checked to make sure that sort of thing was okay beforehand. Nobody complained and those games are remembered fondly. So...this sort of darkness certainly can work.

The corollary, to reiterate, is that it's rather definitively required for you to know your players and check about this kind of thing before you introduce anything resembling it, or it can be seriously traumatic and unpleasant. If they aren't cool with it...don't do it.

But if they're cool with doing this? No inherent reason not to if it's fun for everyone.

Liberty's Edge

I built this a while ago.

That build obviously isn't intended for PC use, but it gives a general overview.

To differentiate yourself from the other Slayer consider a splash of Barbarian. A Slayer 3/Barbarian 2 works a lot differently from a straight slayer, even if you never take more than the two levels of Barbarian (which also give you Uncanny Dodge, which is pretty awesome and very thematic for Conan, more so than the Rage to be honest).

And I'd go something like what you did for stats, though I'd minimize the number of odd stats, since increasing them is tricky. Something like this would definitely work:

Str 18 (+2 race, +1 Level)
Dex 14
Con 14
Int 12
Wis 8
Cha 12

And a +1 to one of those last 3, whichever you want to boost at 8th.

That'll hurt your will Save, but Rage helps, and you can afford to grab Iron Will if you like. A greatsword (or other two-handed weapon) build isn't exactly Feat intensive.

Maybe go Dual Talented for Dex 16. In that case your Feat loadout could be Power Attack, Furious Focus (from Two-Handed Ranger style), Iron Will, and Deadly Aim. You could also grab Quick Draw next level with Combat Trick if you like (and don't have another Slayer Talent you want). Extra Rage at 7th would also be a good call if going this route.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
memorax wrote:

No one is saying that the Archeologist is useless. The archtypes luck ability could be changed to one extra performance per level. Even with a 18 Cha and Extra Performance. That comes out to fourteen rounds up until level 20. Not enough imo. As well Extra Perfromance while useful is not worth taking more than once imo.

Sure if a person takes the feat. Fates favored and Someone else takes a Bard. Too many ifs imo. Not everyone has or uses system madrery. I'm playing one but only because it's better than a Rogue and the group I'm playing in needs someone with Trapfinding. Otherwise regular Bard for me.

You're forgetting Lingering Performance. Which makes it viable at 18-24 rounds (depending on Charisma) from level 1 onward.

All you really need is Lingering Performance, though Fate's Favored makes it miles better. those two are all you require.

Liberty's Edge

LoneKnave wrote:
Grab 1 level of Swashbuckler (inspired blade) and you basically get everything good there is to get from a duelist style class.

Yeah, this. Doing this and going full-on Inquisitor otherwise would be my default advice for this build.

Liberty's Edge

Nox Caedes wrote:
Question: Do mediums have to be possessed by a spirit that shares their alignment? I kind of like the idea of a good medium being haunted and controlled by evil spirits or an evil medium being haunted or controlled by their previous victims haunting them...

They do not. Indeed, the alignment of spirits is almost immaterial. It has some effect in terms of what they influence you to do, but it's not a straightjacket or anything, and nothing inherently prevents a Medium/Paladin from channeling CE spirits exclusively.

So yeah, that works...though mechanically the Spirits a Medium channels never actually take control unless the Medium's player decides they do.

Liberty's Edge

Milo v3 wrote:
I shouldn't have to read specific book series to understand why x class has an ability. It should just be fitting for the class, and I don't really see how it is. I can't really see any reason why a occultists that aren't abjuration and conjuration based would ever really use the circles.

It's not a specific book series, those were just some examples (from a book series and a comic book respectively...though both characters have also had TV shows, now that I think about it). It's a fictional archetype common in urban fantasy, and certainly not unknown outside it. I'm honestly a bit surprised you're unfamiliar with it.

You might as well be asking why Barbarians get Uncanny Dodge and/or Trap Sense. It doesn't synchronize with their other class abilities much at all...but thematically, it represents a feral instinct for danger, which is very thematically tied in and appropriate for the Class.

There are other similar examples in various places, too. Classes are, in play, simply a grab-bag of cool abilities you can use to reflect whatever concept you desire, but in design they're usually made to facilitate certain highly specific fictional archetypes, and are given the abilities necessary to do so.

For example, you can play a dagger wielding Paladin in leather armor with sky-high Dex and a lot of skills (probably dipping Ninja to do so) but that's not what the Class is designed for. It's designed to play a holy knight in shining armor...and thus has the Proficiencies to do that, even if a particular character never uses them. Similarly, you can absolutely play an Occultist who'd never use the Circles thing, but the archetypical one can and does, so the Class has the ability to do so.

And besides, I'll bet there'll be at least one archetype that trades them away, if you really don't like them, just use that.

Liberty's Edge

Rynjin wrote:
I only counted 4, since Combat Style + Combat Trick are the only ones that aren't locked into a specific Feat.

I also count Weapon Focus (since all Fighters basically have to have it anyway), and maybe Weapon Finesse (since it's something you want on all finesse builds). Hence, 5-6.

Gun Training is really niche, so I probably wouldn't count it.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, per James Jacobs the Evil is at least in large part cultural, and IMO should not inherently prevent a Black Dragon from becoming least in theory.

The basic character definitely still works, though. Not everyone raised by a Good person is Good.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
spectrevk wrote:
I still don't understand why everyone hates the Strangler Brawler so much.

It loses Brawler's unarmed combat stuff and thus Improved Unarmed Strike, so unless human you actually can't have Improved Grapple at 1st level, which rather defeats the point of the Archetype in many ways.

Liberty's Edge

I'd probably go Destined. Destined is cool.

Primalist is also a definite option, given the desire for once per Rage effects. Spell Sunder + Strength Surge being the most obvious option.

Liberty's Edge

Chengar Qordath wrote:
True, though I would say that the martial/caster disparity is the single biggest balance issue currently in the game, if only because a lot of the game's other issues ultimately rest there.

That's probably fair, in general.

Though I do feel like the 6-level casters aren't generally too badly overpowered compared to the good martial classes like Barbarian, Slayer, or spell-less Paladin (well, barring Summoner...which is a 9 level caster that just won't admit what it is). It's the 9 level casters that really tend make with the absurdity.

Chengar Qordath wrote:
The rogue certainly wouldn't look as pathetic if there weren't so many ways to out-rogue the rogue using spells.

Yes it would. Or close enough to make no difference. You can tell by how pathetic it looks compared to Slayer.

Liberty's Edge

Chengar Qordath wrote:
Throne wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
Paizo can afford to experiment and give new authors a chance, but that means that their supporting lines occasionally end up with some real garbage that never gets fixed, like Order of the Flame Cavaliers, Sacred Geometry, etc.

The Core is the worst balanced book in the system.

They've also stated that they're more interested in protecting that imbalance than fixing it.
That's not true. Sometimes they say that claims of imbalance are nothing but myths propagated by people with an agenda.

That comment was specifically about caster/martial disparity, not imbalance in general. The two are somewhat different (though definitely related).

Also, I suspect it was not intended entirely seriously (though it certainly does reflect one of James Jacobs' views with which I personally disagree).

Liberty's Edge

Choon wrote:
+30 skill ring is cheap at lvl 20. I think it's a competence bonus.

Custom items are generally not counted in this sort of thing, as they're not universally allowed or applicable.

Liberty's Edge

I'll simply note that a LG Alignment and Cleric of Tsukiyo works equally well.

So...not inherently as creepy as all that. For the record.

Liberty's Edge

AndIMustMask wrote:
the bruising intellect trait lets you intimidate off of int, if memory serves.

Indeed, but then they can't take Student of Philosophy and thus can't use Bluff or most stuff involving Diplomacy with Int.

AndIMustMask wrote:

for bards they dont even need to actually invest in most skills--they can just invest in perform (whatever you have versatile performance for) for a three-birds-with-one-skill-point setup that works off of CHA, and combine with pageant of the peacock for bluff in place of knowledge checks (and you can get bluff as a versatile performance!), and with their skill-boost performance and lingering performance, they can get sick bonuses to it as well.

this also makes things like prodigy, skill focus, and several traits incredibly powerful for granting an effective bonus to so many skills at once.

Yep. Investigators are similarly blessed with the ability to enhance everything for free via Inspiration and a couple of Talents.

Liberty's Edge

Rynjin wrote:
The Fighter gets 11 Bonus Feats vs a Slayer's 4, but that's the only real benefit.

Slayers get 5, maybe 6 actually...and they get them over the first 10-12 levels, so in a game capping at 15, the Fighter gets 8 to the Slayer's 5-6.

And Archer Fighter has some unique capabilities. I'd still argue Slayer is better, but it has areas it's superior at.

Liberty's Edge

swifthunter420 wrote:
i trying to make a reay cool archer thats deals good damage and be able to do cool things in not just shooting endless streams of arrows im trying to make him have a high cool factor like hawkeye or deadshot but not suffer in damage is that possible?

If that's your primary goal, Fighter (Archer) probably is the way to go...though your out-of-combat capabilities are gonna kinda suck.

Dipping Slayer for skills might be worth it, but Studied Target almost certainly isn't.

Liberty's Edge

Yeah...Slayer is, in many ways, Fighter Plus. I don't see a lot of point unless there's saome very specific Fighter Class Feature you simply must have.

An Alchemist dip is a lot more viable, though dipping in general is usually not the best move possible in can be a lot of fun, though.


swifthunter420 wrote:
i took slayer mostly for studied target i plan to take two lvls of slayer and rest fighter

Why not continue going Slayer for the rest? It's better in almost every way.

Liberty's Edge

Ms. Pleiades wrote:

Reflavor the Yeth Hound

Remove the flight speed, add a 1/day invisibility spell-like ability.

If doing this, you'll want to replace Fly with Acrobatics and swap Skill Focus to Stealth.

Liberty's Edge

Uwotm8 wrote:
That's exactly how it's written, though. It affects spells, spell-like abilities, using magic items, etc. It's meant to have far-reaching affects.

Right. But not very severe ones, as the low concentration check DC indicates. Again, the primary use is making all other Concentration checks notably harder.

Liberty's Edge

That's not the main purpose of the spell, though. The -1/2 level on other Concentration checks is, and makes other concentration checks vastly harder.

If it actually shut down all arcane spells on a particular caster with any reliability, it'd be too powerful.

1 to 50 of 7,459 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.