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

Gambit's page

Goblin Squad Member. 824 posts (914 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 824 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1. Curse of the Crimson Throne - With the possible exception of book 4, this is pretty much perfection personified.
2. Rise of the Runelords - Classic, awesome, all around great.
3. Carrion Crown - This is probably as high as it is for me because we had a Ravenloft pro run it for us, top notch.
4. Kingmaker - Lots of fun, everyone loves making their own kingdom.
5. Skull and Shackles - I generally prefer more heroic style campaigns myself, but this was some solid fun.

My Self wrote:
Gambit wrote:
Under this rule, for the most part, the maximum number of PrCs any single character can possibly have will be 2.
Agreed, although it is possible to squeeze 4 as a LG Halfling Cleric 5/Balanced Scale of Abadar 5/Hafling Opportunist 5/Chevalier 3/Whatever 2

And I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with a character like that as long as it was all properly roleplayed out and fit in game. But that is also a very niche corner case unlikely to see much actual play.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have a Ranger/Cleric/Skyseeker character in a Giantslayer campaign, my first character in 7 years of playing Pathfinder to take a prestige class.

James Jacobs wrote:
Prestige classes, to me, are prestigious. They're "rewards" that you earn for devoting yourself to a specific path. Seeking to join/pursue multiple prestigious paths doesn't make sense to me, really, since that's kind of the opposite of focusing to be good at one thing. So, for me at least, the fact that it was tough to qualify for multiple prestige classes was/is a good thing.

I think things would have been/be much better in this regard if the official rule stated that to take another prestige class one must completely finish out the first prestige class they have obtained, thus showing their devotion to the specific prestigious path they have selected. No dipping 2 levels in this, then 1 level in that, then 3 levels over got ridiculous back in the day. Under this rule, for the most part, the maximum number of PrCs any single character can possibly have will be 2.

carmachu wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:

I guarantee you that even if - and that's a big if - they do another Anniversary Edition, it won't be any of these. The only one that even has a shot is Legacy of Fire, and it's in line behind Curse of the Crimson Throne and Second Darkness (and possibly Kingmaker) for updating. That's in addition to JonGarrett's point up above.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news in this regard, I suppose. ^_^

I'd argue that the only other one likely to be done is Kingmaker, as it was the second most popular one after RotR.

The other 3 really arent really in the running.

If you think Curse of the Crimson Throne isn't in the running (should they do another one), you haven't really been paying attention to these threads when they pop up.

Cole Deschain wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
A "box set" is a term for a much more complex and expensive item, though - one which involves multiple books, maps, and other accoutrements. I've never bought one myself, unless you count a couple late-2e equivalents of the Beginner Box.

Having bought a couple in my time (good lord,I've gotten old!), I'm always surprised that they aren't better sellers/profit engines.

A good box set is a treasure trove for the buyer- L5R'sSecond City box set four or five years ago is the most recent specimen I've encountered, and it was worth every single penny.

The new Horror on the Orient Express box set is one of the most impressive RPG products I have ever seen. I would love to see Pathfinder do something of that nature one day.

Gnolls instead of Tauren?

DM_Kumo Gekkou wrote:

Warlord is acceptable. Neat ideas, seems decently balanced. Reminds me of Book of 9 swords.

Slight concern it could overshadow other classes, but as long as it is well built and not cheesed I would give it fair consideration.

How about if a solid number of my maneuvers come from the Golden Lion (and possibly Silver Crane) discipline, which tend to be party aiding in nature?

Also would an Aasimar be ok? I'm thinking I want to play a member of the Empyreal Guardians to gain access to the aforementioned Silver Crane discipline and it would fit pretty well flavor wise.




Would you allow a Warlord?

I'm thinking a CG Human or Aasimar Warder from Andoran (potentially a member of the Eagle Knights) in town to promote freedom and gently foment rebellion against the evil oppressive regime known as Thrune.

He can play a Wizard with the Exploiter archetype, or an Arcanist with the Occultist archetype. He cannot play a Wizard with an Arcanist archetype.

So basically as everyone else has said, this isn't even a loophole, it just flat out doesn't work.

"Traits: Any dwarf racial trait or the adopted social trait"

Something I've been wondering for RAW on these guys, by "racial trait" does this mean the racial traits any character gets simply by playing a member of said race (i.e. Stonecunning), or does this mean a race trait as in the 2 traits you get to choose when making a new character?

This is very similar to a build of mine, except I follow Cayden (for story reasons, not mechanical ones), and use an earthbreaker.

Hitdice wrote:
I just hope this where the Mystic class makes its appearance.

Ravenloft isn't really known for psionics, much the opposite really as traditionally it tends to be pretty low magic across the board. Dark Sun is much more likely to be where psionics makes its reappearance.

Belulzebub wrote:
thecursor wrote:
Scythia wrote:
I can't disagree with your assessment of Labyrinth,I appreciated different things in that movie at different ages. :P
I know, right? Jennifer Connelly is like weaponized pretty.
Watch Requiem for a Dream. The only thing Connelly will ever arouse in you ever again is severe existential dread.

Interesting, I've seen exactly one scene from this movie and I don't seem to have this problem.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well Crimson Throne is my vote, but I think everyone is indeed correct that it, SD, and KM are at the top of that list. If it happens it remains to be seen which one will be chosen.

Steve....a box set....*drools*

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Duiker wrote:
In addition, in Reign of Winter, one of the books takes place entirely on Triaxis.

Not to mention that other little planet you happen to visit in Reign of Winter. ;)

If I were a betting man, I'd put money on a 2017 release of the Curse of the Crimson Throne Anniversary Edition hardback. It will be the 15 year anniversary of Paizo as a company, the 10 year anniversary of the Pathfinder AP line, and a full 5 years since they updated Runelords. Logically it makes sense.

I am surprised this hasn't been posted here by now, it was put up on Enworld the other day that the new 5E adventure book will be the Curse of Strahd. Here is link and the info blurb.

Unravel the mysteries of Ravenloft® in this dread adventure for the world’s greatest roleplaying game

Under raging storm clouds, the vampire Count Strahd von Zarovich stands silhouetted against the ancient walls of Castle Ravenloft. Rumbling thunder pounds the castle spires. The wind’s howling increases as he turns his gaze down toward the village of Barovia. Far below, yet not beyond his keen eyesight, a party of adventurers has just entered his domain. Strahd’s face forms the barest hint of a smile as his dark plan unfolds. He knew they were coming, and he knows why they came — all according to his plan. A lightning flash rips through the darkness, but Strahd is gone. Only the howling of the wind fills the midnight air. The master of Castle Ravenloft is having guests for dinner. And you are invited.

No confirmation one way or another whether this will be set on the actual Demiplane of Dread or if they intend to plop Barovia down somewhere in Faerun. I know I for one will be extremely disappointed if they go with the latter. Probably wont happen, but I would absolutely love for a Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft sourcebook in the vein of the SCAG to go along with this.

Weirdo wrote:
NG. Altruism without the baggage or biases of law or chaos.

This. I am most NG in real life, so it's super easy for me to play in game.

I also enjoy CG and TN characters.

For evil I actually find LE the most compelling, they usually make for the best villains in fiction/media (Vader, Magneto, Tywin, Doom, Bane, Thrawn, Lex, Dalamar, etc).

I actually miss old school "tendencies", I played a TN mage with Good tendencies back in the day and it felt perfect for how I envisioned the character.

We don't allow evil alignments unless its one of the rare times we are playing a specifically tailored evil campaign.

In standard campaigns the only available alignments are LG, NG, CG, LN, TN, CN. Then again most of us prefer heroic games/characters, so its basically a non-issue.

Xerres wrote:

Well, one of my friends that I play with regularly and I used to argue this point all the time. I liked Wuxia and Anime-Magic-Sword-Fight'in, he was in love with Conan.

When I got Tome of Battle he complained about it all the time to me, that it made Fighters seem useless, to which I'd just laugh and say "Good." because the Fighter NEVER did what I wanted it to do. Or the Monk. This was back in 3.5 so the Paladin, my favorite character archtype (I love you Superman, marry me), also really blew. So seeing these new classes that could do, I dunno, any damn interesting thing at all, blew my mind.

My friend though, as I said he loved Conan. He loved the idea of the guy who only has a sword and courage, but still has to struggle against great odds and terrifying opponents. The fact that he couldn't do anything like these Wizards and Dragons could do, but he could still win was the peak of his enjoyment of the game. And credit where credit is due, he'd really put his money where his mouth was. He played a Fighter from level 1 to 20. In 3.5. No Prestige Class, Complete Warrior wasn't even out yet, and he was Sword-and-Board. And he loved it.

I, on the other hand, never really got that. Casters in the group constantly made me feel worthless with Polymorphs and spells that blew up the room or just resolved the encounter. His DM tailored the game to make his 'Conan' feel awesome and defeat these Dragons and Wizards like I never got to.

That leads to a different point though, in that he loved the Fighter, because it worked for him. And when Tome of Battle came around, it completely replaced any need for the Fighter, his favorite class. So obviously that bothered him, and probably lots of other people who didn't have my negative experience with it.

So I think it came down to different expectations, and different ways of approaching the game. He came from the approach that he was weaker, but he was going to win anyway. I wanted to come from "I'm awesome, and I'm going to prove I'm awesome by doing awesome...

This was a very interesting story, I quite enjoyed it.

Have either you or your friend ever play old school D&D? Because I think he would love some 2E AD&D, a system where while warriors are technically still "mundane", they actually have a lot of special features and really good things going for them (weapon specialization, exceptional strength, best saving throws/armor/hit points, only ones who get multiple attacks, etc). Tell him to check it out if he hasn't. Plus AD&D multiclassing is super fun, he can play a multiclassed fighter/thief and pretty much actually play Conan.

James Jacobs wrote:
HangarFlying wrote:
Did you enjoy your viewing of the new Star Wars?

In fact, I did. And now that I've had a few weeks to think it over... I think it's my favorite Star Wars movie yet.

** spoiler omitted **

Man...more than Empire? That seems almost blasphemous!

My personal order is 5, 4/6, 7, 3, 1, 2

Although I'm still pretty bummed about the now forever lack of Mara Jade, who will never officially exist. (Not to mention Thrawn, one of the best villains of all time)

Forgive me if this has been asked before, but do you guys ever run/play other games also, people around the office and/or in their personal games deciding to rock out some 2E AD&D, or Call of Cthulhu, or Vampire: the Masquerade, etc, or does everyone pretty much just stick to Pathfinder?

Orannis wrote:

I only have the core book, and the droid options are a bit... sparse... to say the least, like not all of the droid equipment presented in stat blocks actually being detailed anywhere in the book. And especially when it comes to taking a prestige class (which is something the game essentially expects you to do, given the huge defense boosts a PrC gives you).

As the game is long-defunct, is there perhaps a wiki or some other sort of free source for content? I would assume there was a book that expanded on droid options.

Droids can take pretty much any non-force using prestige class. They also 2 that are specific to them. The Droid Commander from the Clone Wars Campaign Guide, which would probably be awesome for an all droid party, but if there are only 1 or 2 in the party its probably not worth it. And there's the Independent Droid from The Force Unleashed Campaign Guide, which is a class that gives you features focusing on autonomy and free will. The Independent Droid also has one other interesting feature, unlike nearly all other prestige classes, you can enter it after level 3 rather than level 7. And as Kalus previously mentioned, Scavengers Guide to Droids also adds several options for droid characters.

GM Kip wrote:
I think I'll cut expressions of interest off here. Give everyone a chance to work on their characters.

I didn't notice this before, well darn, everyone who is selected enjoy the campaign!

Rolling is fun :)

4d6 ⇒ (5, 1, 2, 1) = 9 8
4d6 ⇒ (6, 1, 3, 5) = 15 14
4d6 ⇒ (2, 5, 5, 5) = 17 15
4d6 ⇒ (5, 6, 2, 6) = 19 17
4d6 ⇒ (6, 1, 5, 6) = 18 17
4d6 ⇒ (5, 4, 6, 1) = 16 15

Lol, uh yeah, those will do. :P

With the 2 droid characters already in the hat, I kinda want to go all out and make a Shard Iron Knight in the body of a IG-100 Magnaguard.

Either that or I've always sorta wanted to play a Codru-Ji.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Milo v3 wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

Calling the way other people play RPGs lame and stupid. Do you think that's going to help?

Different people like different things. It doesn't make your preferences any less important just because someone else happens to have different ones.

He wasn't talking about the way other people play. He was talking about how having less options doesn't magically make 5e allow for better backstories or magically have you think of backstory first before mechanics and that PF magically has everyone make their characters mechanics then backstory.

Of coarse not, personally characters I make nowadays are always concept first, mechanics second, even in Pathfinder. But are you denying that the culture surrounding Pathfinder is mechanics heavy?

And just so I'm being fully transparent here, I am currently playing in both a Pathfinder and 5E game. And there are things I definitely love about 5E, I love its rules-mediumness, I love its flavor, I love the way they did races, backgrounds, feats, and multiple attacks. But Pathfinder is still my preferred system overall, as I really dislike the changes to spellcasting, the general swingyness of everything (skill has much less impact than pure luck), that BAB is rolled into proficiency and the same for everyone, and the way resting/healing works.

Oh, and Gebby, quit trolling, no one needs that nonsense here.

I've done it both ways over the years, and I can say that I get more personal fulfillment from characters who have their background and personality developed before their mechanics.

I specifically remember a Pathfinder game I was in several years ago where I was the last person in the group to join the game and create their character, so I picked a vacant role in the party and then proceeded to precisely optimize my character based on mechanical abilities and features I wanted him to have, then going in afterwards and trying to attach the "character" to this "build" I had created. And I later realized that I never fully enjoyed playing the character because of it. I had created this mechanical box and then tried to stuff myself into it rather than creating the persona and then shaping the box around it.

That was the turning point for me when it came to characters and optimization.

VargrBoartusk wrote:

As to the OP the more I think about it the more I'm willing to try a game with 7-9th level spells gone and full casters just getting a bunch of meta magic pumped slots, and *maybe* summons.. If my current playgroup weren't so casual that they wouldn't even notice if I had made that change I'd probably bang out a campaign for it tonight.

This brings up another point. Things of this nature are usually only pervasive in the super-delving, tryhard, forum-going crowd. The casual/normal players (which logically make up the largest percentage of Pathfinder players) are vastly less impacted by perceived issues such as martial/caster disparity and others of its ilk that forumquesters crusade for/against on the messageboards.

bookrat wrote:

I find that when I build a PF character, I'm more apt to create a build - including race, class, feats, etc - and find a good story for which to place the character in. I try not to do this, but I often find myself doing this.

When I build a 5e character, I build a personality, a back story, a background, etc.. Then I find a class for which to place this character in. Sometimes a specific class or race will drive the character, but more often than not its the personality.

When looking at a rule book, I like to have it arranged according to how one builds a character. For PF, I feel it should be ability scores, race, class, feats & traits, skills, equipment, spells. For 5e, I feel it should be background, race, class, ability scores, equipment, spells.

This is more true than most people want to admit.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would much rather see a system where magic overall is a bit more rare, where some spells are slightly dangerous and/or have a drawback.

But if a time ever comes where Pathfinder just drops full casters completely, that will probably be the time when I move on to a different game.

Is this guy still alive? Like when was the last time you all got an official update? I would like to purchase print versions of WotW which I know cant happen unless this whole situation gets back on track.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Coffee Demon wrote:
People want characters to be roughly equal all the time.

The problem is that to do this it would be a fundamental change to the core nature of what D&D/PF is, and many people are happy with what it is and has been over the years. 4E accomplishes this (for the most part) and was much reviled in doing so. I've heard 13th Age is pretty good on this front too, though I haven't personally played it. But overall to do so will change the nature of the game and many people don't want that (myself included).

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The groups I've played in have always fell squarely into camp #3. It's never been a huge issue for us, although I still contend that the abandoning of the more esoteric "restrictions" of spellcasting from 1E/2E AD&D was a mistake, when spells were more easily interuptable and some were slightly dangerous or had a drawback. Also our group (including our main DM) is really good at spotlighting, which solves a good portion of this potential issue before it even gets out of the gate.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

bookrat, just wanted to say I'm highly impressed with your discussion manner. You are open-minded, level-headed, and willing to examine all sides with a calm demeanor without being condescending, derisive, or overly snarky. It is both refreshing and all too rare to encounter on an internet forum.

GreyWolfLord, I picked up the new Dragon Age Core Rulebook that combined all 3 of the box sets a couple months ago. We haven't delved into a campaign yet, but I am definitely quite intrigued and see potential there. My absolute most favorite thing about the game is the stunt system, its evocative, flavorful, useful, and just flat out awesome. Though just wanted to clarify for others on your point about "backgrounds", in DARPG you pick a background and a class, the background is more akin to picking a race than a 5E style background, and there are like 40 different ones in the core rulebook to choose from. And for the person who asked about a Dragon Age SRD, here is a link to the Quickstart Guide PDF, which includes the basic rules for the game, a short adventure, and some pregen characters.

OP, my advice to you is, try 5E. Pick up the Starter Set for 12 bucks on Amazon, run the the included adventure (which is quite good) and see how the system works for your group. Other options would be the previously mentioned Dragon Age RPG, and also Castles & Crusades, which is like a rules-light hybrid of AD&D and 3E/d20. I am also fond of this.

If this was 1st or 2nd edition AD&D I'd say that stat set would be just fine, but it's a little over the top in Pathfinder. For preset adventures or AP's we go with 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, it works splendidly.

Cole Deschain wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Go back far enough and deities like Cayden Cailean disappear.
You say that like it's a bad thing!(I keed, I keed. Sorta. I'll admit a passing fondness for Iomedae, but neither of the other Ascended even show up in most of the games I'm partial to.)

Cayden Cailean the deity comprises about 20% of my overall enjoyment of the Golarion setting.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Having tried d20/RCR, Saga, and Fantasy Flight, I would say Saga is still my favorite Star Wars RPG.

I tend to prefer games that are more simulationist in nature instead of free form narrative based, so Saga speaks to me far more than FF.

There are only really two changes I would like to see in Saga, one is a change to a Pathfinder style skill system, and the other is to also have saving throws instead of everything going against static defenses.

Also Dawn of Defiance is nothing short of a stellar campaign adventure path.

deinol wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
One should not mistake post count for love. Hate drives many more posts than love.

True, but it certainly shows interest. There are thousands of posts discussing how to fix Wrath. There aren't nearly so many discussing how to fix Second Darkness. If nobody cared, it would just be crickets.

Certainly of the 3.5 APs that could use a facelift, Curse is the most popular.

I wouldn't expect another anniversary hardcover before 2018 though. If it's not already on the schedule, it isn't happening for 2017. Besides, the games 10th anniversary will need something special.

2017 is the 10th anniversary of the Adventure Paths and the 15th anniversary of Paizo as a company. It will also be a full 5 years after the Runelords AE came out in 2012. Thus making it the perfect year for a new anniversary edition hardback.

We are in agreement that it is more about interest than either hate or love though.

TimD wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
TimD wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Hence, I'll skip the "Evil AP". Voting with my wallet is the best way to prevent a second one in the future.

Which goes to show there's really no pleasing everyone.

I started my subscriptions with just an AP, Skull & Shackles, because "yar, pirates!" and the fact that it was looking like it would be a nice grey adventure. I was considering ending all of my subs when I saw the write up for the "evil iconic" and went, man, I can't stop now that Paizo is finally starting to support the other half of the alignment spectrum as the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Gygax intended.


Not sure how 3 alignments out of 9 constitutes "half"... but I get your point. I've wanted us to do an evil AP for quite a while, in fact, but it's one of those (like Jade Regent or Iron Gods) that is very polarizing, so it had to wait its turn.

Toz makes my point even better than I would, so I won't even "Tri" to outdo his explanation :)

I'm hoping this Evil AP goes over well enough you'd consider another in the future (because I'd REALLY like to see a Red Mantis centered AP as they are one of the things I find most intriguing about what you guys have going on in Golarion cannon).


The Red Mantis are also on my list of things I really like about the setting.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I too feel LE conveys the dark knight literary archetype better than CE.

Would definitely be on board with a LE Anti-Paladin archetype in Pathfinder, and I could absolutely see Asmodeus empowering and utilizing them with vile glee to serve in his name.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If I were a betting man, I'd put money on a 2017 release of the Curse of the Crimson Throne Anniversary Edition hardback.

I think you might have better luck on a site more diversified in its gaming preferences, I would suggest taking your question over to the forums or on the rpg reddit. I wish I could help, I have played Green Ronins Dragon Age game, but never GoT. Good luck.

Just to make people aware THIS is going on over at the Dragonlance Nexus, an official unofficial conversion of Dragonlance to Pathfinder. The races are done, as are most of the classes, I believe they are currently working on the prestige classes.

Regarding the name, one of the things I have loved about DSP is it's using of actual real words rather than amalgamation names for the classes. I disliked the over abundance of them in 3E (and 4E with its Shardmind Battlemind). I believe the only one currently used is the Soulknife, and that was just for legacy reasons.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Avena, dude, man, just say WoW clone, much clearer and everyone already knows that term. ;)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
feytharn wrote:

For those thinking about buying the game:

I have been trying the Headstart Access (no campaign yet, limited other recources) and for now I am pretty dissappointed.
- A very limited skill/ability set for characters that includes spells (and not many of them) and seems entirely combat oriented
- It looks far worse on screen than it appeared in the videos, especially animations and lighting.(highest quality level, vsync activated, good overall performance) Still, if the gameplay was good, that would be no problem.
- Controls feel unresponsive and clunky, pathfinding AI is atrocious

For single players this might be outweighted by a good storymode, but as of now, I am not holding my breath. for GM/player multiplayer mode it might work, but at the same time the controls might make it an unpleasent experience, I have not yet tried that.

The single player RPG aspect of this game will be judged against both the old school Infinity engine games and the newer Pillars of Eternity, Divinity: Original Sin, and Shadowrun games, so if it doesn't hold up to those in gameplay and story, I expect it to get thrashed in reviews. We shall see.

I have heard the current day Wizards forums community described as toxic, and someone else on another forum site used the word cesspool. I don't know the validity of these statements since my last post on their forums was probably in 2007, but if true maybe they just want to clean up the riff raff in one fell swoop?

Pendagast wrote:

Suggested rebel party:

Skald as skill monkey, arcanist, healer.

Blood Rager as second arcanist/combat gestalt



There wont be anything left of Cheliax but smouldering ruins by the end of the AP!

AM BARBARIAN would approve.

Although one of those barbarians should go oracle and rage prophet also. ;)

Goblin Squad Member

Sadly we will never know, but I fully believe that this game would have been (more) successful if it had gone full on Star Wars Galaxies style sandbox instead of UO/EVE/Darkfall style sandbox.

1 to 50 of 824 << 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.