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

Durngrun Stonebreaker's page

1,529 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,529 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Quote:


Gang Up: Does this feat (page 161) allow you to flank a foe with ranged weapons?

The Gang Up feat allows you to count as flanking so long as two of your allies are threatening your opponent. The feat makes no mention of ranged attacks being included, and since flanking specifically refers to melee attacks, ranged attacks do not benefit from this feat. (JMB, 8/13/10)

I noticed that...


Never said I don't like role playing or item descriptions, but when my character takes effort to find out what his magical item is and the DM responds "no, sorry it's just too magical for you to know," then that is aggravating.

Have you ever thought if the possibility your players don't express their disappointment with you because you treat anyone who complains as a petulant child? Might stifle discourse a little...


Jaelithe wrote:

I've never had an eye roll, a "This is BS!" gritted teeth or any reaction other than a determination to employ whatever resources the PC could bring to bear on identifying that which had come into their possession. To me, and to them, that's a great deal of the game's fun.

To you it's fun. For you players you think it's fun because they don't roll their eyes even though they become determined to use whatever resource they could bring to bear just to end your little mystery.

Like I said, saying to your group "you find a +1 sword" might be boring or immersion breaking. But when casting Identify doesn't identify the magical properties it gets old, fast.
Of course if you have never used a magic item from the CRB, as you claim, then you've never had a + anything weapon in your game (because those are listed in the CRB).


Rerednaw wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Rerednaw wrote:

@CK18

Ah, sorry.

I think you are limited to 1/swift. 2 weapons could be on cords. that would 1/swift and 2 move actions to recover 3 weapons in 1 round?

Weapon cords are move actions now.
Um yes...what's your question? Called weapon as swift...and two move actions. The main problem I see is two different hands mean fighting with an off-hand.

My bad. Misunderstood what you were saying.


mysticbelmont wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Allowing them to build stronger base items would essentially give them unlimited resources or allow other classes to buy their enhanced items.
And?

And in the first instance you are removing one of the balancing factors of the game. In the second you are regulating the alchemist to a NPC class as you could be any other class and then just buy the alchemist class abilities at the store.


Chris Lambertz wrote:
Removed some posts. Bigoted/racist comments and personal attacks are not OK here. Take a moment to revisit the messageboard rules. We're keeping an eye on this thread, as it seems there's a lot here set to induce grar, so if these comments can't be kept out of the discussion, the thread will be locked.

Ha! I got to read it before you deleted it this time. Too slow today, Chris.


Mojorat wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Mojorat wrote:
Or just read th ring which explains it only helps part PFS th skill.
You have got to get a bigger keypad on your phone! (Emoticon that denotes I'm joking)
Sigh I noticed lately its tried auto correct for specific game terms. So ill be talking sbout grapple and mid sentence it will say sandpoont.

I honestly don't know if you are joking or not but if you are, you are hilarious. I tip my hat to you, sir.


Thanks Calybos1 and Daenar. I think it will work pretty well. I'm looking at +15 attack dealing 4d6+14 damage. Now I'm wondering if I have enough bombs but with Extra Bombs only giving you two extra bombs I'm not sure it's worth a feat. I guess without Fast Bombs I can go for 13 rounds a day and keep my move action for positioning. With my falchion and Alchemical Weapon ability I have a decent backup.

I wonder if Immolation Bomb would be helpful. Fire off one or two immolation bombs and then draw my sword...
I assume Targeted Admixture would work with Immolation, would I get my other bonuses to damage? 1d6+19 for four rounds while I go to town with my falchion might be nice.

Also, can't believe I didn't mention it earlier, I have my mutagen that could boost my Dex if needed. That would give me another +2 to attack and +3 to AC (with the natural armor bonus)


Mojorat wrote:
Or just read th ring which explains it only helps part PFS th skill.

You have got to get a bigger keypad on your phone! (Emoticon that denotes I'm joking)


Jaelithe wrote:
Threeshades wrote:
That was Durngrun, not me.

Uh ... really?

You didn't say:

Quote:
GM: Elrond inspects the sword carefully before he speaks: "This is Orcrist, the Goblin-Cleaver. A famous blade forged by the High Elves of the West. My kin. May it serve you well." It's a +3 Longsword of Goblinoid Bane.
That's to what I was referring.

I believe threeshades was replying to thejeff.


More like an extensive retraining of the character. Same stats, same class (although different archetypes), but it's the same character.


Wasn't thinking of a ranged build per se, just a bomb throwing build (although I like that belt of hurling idea). I like Grenadier for the Directed Blast ability. With Strafe Bombs and regular Bombs that gives me cones, lines, and bursts. I could take Breath Weapon Bomb (I think that's the name) but it doesn't combine with Explosive Bomb like Directed Blast and Strafe Bomb.

I have Force Bombs for anything fire doesn't hurt. Was thinking about Frost Bombs for staggered.

Not sure I could get approval to change his stats (I know it seems arbitrary when I'm changing everything else but my DM can be kind if a stickler).

I do like Beastmorph but I'm really trying to focus on bombs.

Sorry, not trying to slap down all your suggestions. I try not to overshadow the other players who don't spend as much time on this as I do. I guess I could just spend less time on it but where's the fun in that!


Why not multiclass? Inquistor/Paladin could be a deadly combination.


Stats are Str 14, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 20, Wis 10, Cha 8. Locked in gear is Adamantine Folding Plate, +3 Keen Falchion, and Cloak of Resistance (+5). Character was a scholarly type in an isolated city, joined the army when war broke out, was "retired" and then called in for one last mission. I do plan on switch hitting some (I only have 13 bombs!). Half-Orc, might should have mentioned that. My group are casual gamers so I don't need an uber build, just looking to have fun. One character is the aforementioned fighter/rogue. The other player missed last session so I don't know what he will have (but most likely a TWF ranger). We also have a NPC gunslinger with us but I'm not too concerned with stepping on her toes!

Trying to keep the two characters similiar. I simply changing his focus from his falchion to his bombs. First version was Fighter (Unbreakable)/ Alchemist (Chirurgeon).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:
Is your suggestion, perhaps: "I got stabbed? Alright, I drop prone, roll around in 'agony,' and forfeit my turn, because it hurts."

Yeah that sounds about right. I mean, clearly your only two choices are that or ignore it entirely.


Tumble was a skill in 3.5. In Pathfinder, balance, jump, and tumble were combined into acrobatics. The book tells you what skill to use and what the DC is for the check. How you describe it is entirely up to you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
1d4+1 is comparable to a dagger. Does getting stabbed with a dagger "tickle?"

It's actually more like, "comparable to a low-damage melee weapon wielded by a character who devoted almost nothing to melee damage."

And with the way D&D/PF does "health?" Yes, that does, in fact, tickle. ;)

Oh, right. I forgot you are not supposed to role play in Pathfinder.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

It's kind of a re-work of an already existing character that is Str based and I'm trying to change his focus without changing the character as much as possible. He is also locked into an Adamantine Folding Plate so his Dex doesn't affect his AC really.

Weapon Master Fighters do not choose a weapon group. Their weapon training simply applies to their chosen weapon.

Well...as a Str based character, why go Bomber at all? Melee Alchemists are quite frightening, after all.

You can even do that and switch-hit via bombs with literally no investment beyond class levels, if you like.

Yeah he actually was a pretty brutal Melee alchemist! He was originally built with vital strike and devastating strike. I'm changing him (with DM permission of course!) because after our first game I found out our fighter/rogue character also had a vital strike build. I build a lot of characters so changing mine was the easiest route. Since we've already played one session so I want to keep it as close as possible to the original character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can understand describing something as a +1 sword can be immersion breaking but speaking as a player it is incredibly annoying to not know your weapon's properties. When I first started playing my DM was like that. Even after getting someone to cast Identify, he would just give some mystical description so every attack was "I rolled X to hit and X dmg plus whatever my sword does." Gets old quick.


Ilja wrote:
Yeah Risner i think youre far off in this case. I agree with you abouy how it should be run, and also think theres often an anally awkward RAW-hysteria in these parts, but reading it as "any morale bonus" isnt awkward, its the most obvious way. That doesnt make it correct necessarily but its not in any way twisting words or an "awkward" reading. Give someo who doesnt know the game an exerpt of the Rage ability and this weapon enhancement and ask how big bonus someone with a +4 courageous weapon raging gets to strength and youll probably get the answer "six".

Give someone who never played the game a Barbarian and a Courageous weapon and I doubt they ever realize their ability increases are "morale" bonuses.


Just to be clear, the acrobatic check to jump and an acrobatic check to avoid an attack of opportunity are two different checks. The only way the jump check would avoid an AoO is if the player jumped completely over the opponent's threatened area. So jumping over a medium creature would mean jumping from more than five feet in front of it, clearing the top of the creature by five feet, and then landing more than five feet behind it. Otherwise you are making an acrobatic check to jump, to which the ring would apply, and an acrobatic check to tumble, to which the ring would not apply.


Deadmanwalking wrote:

Sure, lower Dex can theoretically work...but why?

I mean, bomber Alchemists need Int and nothing else except middling Dex and Con (Say 12-14 each). What stat do you gain by dropping Dex lower than that? Why bother doing so when Dex is one of the best stats in the game? Especially given that you sacrifice Rapid Shot, which is one of the things that makes 8th level or higher Alchemists so dangerous.

As for the build as a whole...bombs are not a listed weapon category and thus inapplicable for Fighter Weapon Training, officially speaking.

It's kind of a re-work of an already existing character that is Str based and I'm trying to change his focus without changing the character as much as possible. He is also locked into an Adamantine Folding Plate so his Dex doesn't affect his AC really.

Weapon Master Fighters do not choose a weapon group. Their weapon training simply applies to their chosen weapon.


1d4+1 is comparable to a dagger. Does getting stabbed with a dagger "tickle?"


Thread Title wrote:
A Simple Question

You must be new here.


So I was making a Mad-Bomber style Alchemist when I noticed something. Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot don't have a Dex requirement. So I was thinking, since bombs are touch attacks, how viable would a low Dex character (I'm talking a Dex of 10, so really a middling Dex, not a low Dex) be?

I was thinking of four levels of Fighter (Weapon Master) for extra feats and Weapon Training (Bombs). That combined with weapon focus, weapon specialization, and Gloves of Dueling would give you +4 att/+5 dmg at the cost of 2d6 bomb dmg and 2 discoveries.

Eight levels of Alchemist (Grenadier), with Explosive Bombs and Strafe Bombs (plus Force Bombs for anything that doesn't burn).

This would give a BAB of +10, a +4 from Fighter (mentioned above), +1 from Throw Anything and another +1 from PBS when applicable. Is a +15/+16 good enough for a touch attack at level twelve?

Would Fast Bombs be worth a feat if I didn't have Rapid Shot or Two-Weapon Fighting? I would still have two attacks from BAB. I was thinking without Fast Bombs I wouldn't have to worry as much about running out of bombs but I do like the idea of firing two 40 ft lines of fire!

Any ideas or suggestions greatly appreciated, even if just to tell me I'm crazy!


Also, with the summoner is the life link ability. The summoner may want a larger pool of hit points to transfer to the eidolon.


FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:
Let's not continue to derail this thread?

Yes let's please get back to "are thrown daggers ranged weapons." I say teach the contraversy!


Just to be perfectly clear, the Bomb ability says you can create and throw a bomb as a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity.

I understand that to mean you can create and throw a bomb as a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
You appear to be arguing that you create the bomb as a standard action that provokes and then throw the bomb (I guess as a free action) that also provokes. While I can understand your reasoning and the comparison to spell casting, I believe the Bomb ability is the "specific" that trumps the general.
I'm curious. If a player had Point Blank Master or Close Quarters Thrower, would you still have them provoke for creating the bomb?
Do spell casters provoke three times if they cast a range attack spell with a material component (drawing components, casting, attacking)?


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

@ SiouL

The FAQ says otherwise:

Power Attack FAQ wrote:

Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (such as a lance while mounted), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?

Yes.

This FAQ says that if you are using a two-handed weapon with a single hand, you still calculate the Power Attack benefits.

Also, take a look at the Power Attack feat more closely...

Power Attack wrote:
This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls.

It even spells it out. As long as the attack is being made with a two-handed weapon (or even a one-handed weapon being used in two hands), that 150% damage is calculated, no questions asked. There is no handiness amount involved (except in the case of one-handed weapons, but that is its own separate topic).

In the case of a Lance, since it's a two-handed weapon that only requires one hand to use while mounted, the Power Attack +50% increase still applies, since using the Lance in one hand does not turn it into or tell you to treat it as a one-handed weapon.

But, again, for the lance only. Or more specifically, using a two-handed weapon in one hand by means of an ability that does not say "as a one-handed weapon" which to my knowledge only applies to the lance while mounted.


Diego Rossi wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
The bomb ability use one action, like casting and firing the scorching ray. The spell give you a free attack. But you provoke 2 times as mixing the bomb and throwing it are separate events.
Not according to the Rules, As Written in the Advanced Player's Guide.
You are using the same argument of the people that was saying that scorching ray would provoke only once and failing for the same reasons.

Except I don't believe it is written anywhere that you can cast a spell and attack with it as a standard action that provokes AN attack of opportunity. The Bomb ability is explicitly called out as provoking AN attack of opportunity.


Auxmaulous wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Quirel wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:


I think it falls under " not all republicans are racist but all racists are probably republican" line of thinking. It was mentioned but if you want a "right" most people would find repugnant then it is easier to advocate for all "rights."
Which is fallacious in itself, because I've met plenty of racist Democrats.

How does that work, exactly?

"I believe that the govenrment has a responsibility to protect the welfare of its citizens. Except the blacks and the Jews!"

Doesn't quite make sense to me.

Actually it goes more like:

"I don't think people of color are smart enough to manage their lives so we should help them. If they vote for us and we'll take care of them."

And to your quote - it did apply to National Socialist:
"I believe that the Government and State has a responsibility to protect the welfare of its German citizens!"

So republicans are racist and democrats are nazis? You'd think they would get along better.


Quirel wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:


I think it falls under " not all republicans are racist but all racists are probably republican" line of thinking. It was mentioned but if you want a "right" most people would find repugnant then it is easier to advocate for all "rights."
Which is fallacious in itself, because I've met plenty of racist Democrats.

How does that work, exactly?

"I believe that the govenrment has a responsibility to protect the welfare of its citizens. Except the blacks and the Jews!"

Doesn't quite make sense to me.


KaiserDM wrote:
But regardless, the comment that preceded said all Republicans are racist.

Actually I explicitly said not all republicans are racist. But I guess if you can't convince people just lie to them...


Craig1234 wrote:

That definitely helps, just want to clarify a two things a bit more.

1) for the short bow, my calculation for the damage actually included the BAB and not DEX. I had initially thought the BAB was included in the damage for both, and when I corrected that, I forgot to remove the +2 on the bow. Either way, I understand why its just the 1d4 now.

2) A question on the way you specify the size bonus to hit, does that mean that the +1 size bonus is not incorporated into the BAB? I figured as it always is used it would count as +1 to BAB.

Finally, could you shed some light on the use of the spell resistance box?

Thanks

Size bonus does not figure into base attack bonus. That's based off your class/level and determines the number of attacks you can get (extra attack at +6, etc) and certain feat requirements (Weapon Focus requires +1 BAB).


fretgod99 wrote:
Gauss wrote:
fretgod99, thank you. :)
Mostly I just want to be Doc Holliday. But, you know, without all the tuberculosis.

You just want to twirl teacups?


N N 959 wrote:
PrinceWD wrote:


When I first read this ability I was going to agree with you that an adamantine weapon would by-pass the need to deal damage. Then I realized your attack still needs to deal more damage than the hardness of the floor. Period. No free pass by having an adamantine weapon.

There's ambiguity here that you're not seeing. If the floor has a Hardness of 10, does that mean you have to do 11 points of damage or you have to 21 points of damage? In order words, are the rules requiring that you do at least one point of actual damage, or are the rules requiring that you subtract the floor's hardness from the damage before determining whether you've exceeded the floor's Hardness,

If it's the former, then the Ad weapon automatically succeeds providing the Hardness is 20 or less. If its the later, then It seems the benefit of using an Ad weapon is that you get to ignore up to 20 points of hardness from being subtracted from your attack.

The ability is "if you do more damage than the floor's hardness" so if it has hardness 10, then you have to deal 11 points of damage regardless. If it is a normal weapon, then you deal one point of damage and trigger the ability. If your weapon is adamantine then you deal 11 points of damage and trigger the ability.


I think Bombs are their supercharged items. More damage, higher DCs, variable energy damage, debuffs, etc... Plus they can use many of the normal items better than other people. Allowing them to build stronger base items would essentially give them unlimited resources or allow other classes to buy their enhanced items.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
KaiserDM wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:


Is it? See Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes: Lower Cognitive Ability Predicts Greater Prejudice Through Right-Wing Ideology and Low Intergroup Contact (Psychological Science February 2012 vol. 23 no. 2 187-195)
Hey look! I can google random articles too!

Yep, I never doubted that you could. The difference, of course, is that I didn't Google random articles, but provided instead peer-reviewed articles from highly respected scientific journals. (Psychological Science, in particular, is in the top 25 psychology journals by impact factor.)

It's basically the difference between getting your medical information from the Journal of the American Medical Association or a puff piece in Seventeen magazine.

There are a lot of people who seem to think that if you can find examples of X on both sides, then X is evenly distributed. The real world doesn't work like that. That's why social scientists provide correlations and $p$-values.

But everybody knows science has a liberal bias...


Why does this keep coming up?

You do not get the extra castings from a high ability score unto you can cast a spell of that level.


ErrantPursuit wrote:
EvilPaladin wrote:
I think it is GM call whether or not you can use Enforcer on AoO's. On the one hand, it is a Free Action, and those can typically only work on your turn. The exceptions are stuff like talking that you can do at any time. On the other hand, it would make perfect sense for an AoO to scare as much as a normal attack, so it might get "handwaved". So ask GM.
I don't see the ambiguity. Enforcer specifically says "Whenever" non-lethal damage is dealt by a melee weapon. The feat does say this is a free action. The GM may place a limit on free actions available, but it would be disingenuous to deny use of this feat otherwise.

I think free actions used to limited to during your turn but according to this it's whenever you take an action. So unless AoOs are a "not-an-action" it should work.


KaiserDM wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
KaiserDM wrote:

Stuff

Yet it's being used to defend those who wish to white-wash the actions of people who committed genocide.

Please feel free to enlighten me why defrauding a patient is worse than concealing a genocide. Seriously, that's what the argument boils down to. You aren't allowed to steal, but if you want to lie and cover up the murder of Jews, that's okay.

-Again, individuals using talking points from a philosophy and using it to further their own views, doesn't necessarily mean Libertarianism as a world-view supports holocaust denial.

-Defrauding a patient is not worse than concealing genocide. If I had a cosmic scale, I would say covering a genocide is worse. Not seeing how anyone is making that claim. I certainly wasn't.

You bolded "right to one's life" in my post regarding what Libertarians hold sacred. If someone (socialist, libertarian, whatever) claims someone's statements or actions are acceptable in contradiction with that point, then they're not acting Libertarian I would suppose.

I think it falls under " not all republicans are racist but all racists are probably republican" line of thinking. It was mentioned but if you want a "right" most people would find repugnant then it is easier to advocate for all "rights."


Rerednaw wrote:

@CK18

Ah, sorry.

I think you are limited to 1/swift. 2 weapons could be on cords. that would 1/swift and 2 move actions to recover 3 weapons in 1 round?

Weapon cords are move actions now.


Ring of Jumping gives you a +5 to acrobatics when making a jump. That's whether it's a big jump or not.


Tesoe wrote:
Lord Phrofet wrote:
Tesoe wrote:
Due to the question specifically asking about feats and abilities.

No. It is because it asks specifically about "to treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one handed weapon" instead of simply wielding a two-handed weapon in one hand.

[Bolded emphasis is my own]

***Ninjaed!

So yes, because the question was narrowly phrased we are suppose to ignore the broadness of the answer.

In a word, yes.

The lance FAQ is open ended because new abilities and rules are frequently added to the game. Again, to my knowledge, only the lance and only while mounted falls under the two handed weapon wielded in one hand as a two handed weapon. However they might add a new weapon or archtype or feat that allows other weapons to be wielded in that way. So, to accommodate an ever expanding game system, they address it in broad terms even though it currently only applies to the one situation.


The FAQs address two different things; wielding a two-handed weapon in one hand as a two handed weapon and wielding a two handed weapon in one hand as a one handed weapon. To my knowledge, the only two handed weapon that you can use in one hand as a two handed weapon is the lance and only when mounted.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Doug's Workshop wrote:
thejeff wrote:

The rich do have different rights to political speech than the poor. The poor can't give thousands of dollars to politicians, because they're poor!

Arguing that limiting the rich to only giving far more than the poor will ever be able to give instead of overwhelmingly more is giving the poor more power than the rich is utter nonsense.

Well, I'm white, male and straight. I'm not likely to oppressed for any of that in this country, despite the complaints of some, so I'm not too concerned. I do work for a living and don't have piles of money laying around to give to politicians, so I'd say I'm already being oppressed by the rich's easy access to influence. Like 99% of us.

So a basic, fundamental right, enshrined in the Bill of Rights, should apply differently to different people, depending on which group they belong to?

Guess that whole "equal in the eyes of the law thing" really does have an Animal Farm quality to it.

"All animals are equal
But some animals are more equal than others."

Except it's not applied differently. The poor would be limited to the same amount as the rich.


You do not get the bonus spells until you can cast spells of that level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:
The bomb ability use one action, like casting and firing the scorching ray. The spell give you a free attack. But you provoke 2 times as mixing the bomb and throwing it are separate events.

Not according to the Rules, As Written in the Advanced Player's Guide.


My vital striking half-Orc alchemist called his keen falchion Bifurcatior.


With the Klar I would say you have a choice. You can make a masterwork "shield" version for the lower ACP, and then enchant it as a shield or weapon or both as it is masterwork. You could make a masterwork "weapon" version for a +1 to attack and again enchant it as either a shield, or weapon, or both. Or make both parts masterwork for both benefits. Although really there would never be the need to make the "weapon" masterwork as you lose the benefit as soon as you enchant it. May not be RAW per se but it makes sense to me.

1 to 50 of 1,529 << 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.