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

Gauss's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Society Member. 7,156 posts (7,164 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 7,156 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Jeraa is correct, only one magic shield would be functional since you have only 1 magic shield slot (CRB p459).

4 people marked this as a favorite.

First, not a rules question. Flagging to be moved.

Second, watching that video there are several things to note.
1) We do not see a comparison between how they do those same actions in and out of armor so we have no idea how much the armor is actually hindering them.

2) Several of those actions (such as the jumping up and kicking feet together) appear quite ungainly in armor.
Assuming that the person performing the maneuvers was proficient in the maneuver it appears to have been much more difficult in armor.

3) We have no idea how much people have practiced in that armor to do those things.
That could be akin to the fighter's class ability Armor Training, the trait Armor Expert, and/or having Masterwork armor.
Alternately, it could be akin to having many ranks in the skill.

4) We did not see them try to scale a wall without a ladder using either a rope or freeclimb (climb skill), walk a thin ledge (acrobatics skill), or swim in a lake/river (swim skill).

So, that video can neither support nor contradict a -6 penalty as it provides insufficient evidence but the person performing those maneuvers certainly did appear to be ungainly.

Damanta, the Dire Collar is not a polymorph effect, it is a size changing effect (as per Enlarge Person). Thus, you do not adjust the size to medium.

Breath of Life was originally called (by James Jacobs in development) "Cure Deadly Wounds". Jason Bulmahn renamed it to Breath of Life. Link

Many people houserule it back to Cure Deadly Wounds.

Ipslore the Red wrote:
You cannot craft spell trigger or completion items with metamagic feats.

Do you have citation for this? There is nothing in the rules preventing you from doing metamagicked spell trigger or spell completion items provided they obey the other rules.

The rule you are looking for is on CRB p553 under "Adding New Abilities". You can upgrade a Lesser Rod by paying the difference between the lesser form and the superior form.

Note: PFS has it's own special rules that may prevent this.

ancientdm, here is a FAQ that covers damage increases.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This really falls under common sense more than strict RAW. If you cannot use a feat because you have lost the prerequisite you cannot count as an ally who possesses the feat.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

In which Pathfinder book is the class on makeup (Rouge) published? I must've missed that one. :D

In Pathfinder, being incorporeal has nothing to do with the Ethereal Plane, you may be thinking of how 3.5 ran incorporeal creatures and the ethereal plane.

You can see incorporeal creatures fine without magic (unless a specific incorporeal creature has wording to the contrary).

Mark Hoover,

Correct, you do not need the spell (increase the DC by 5, unless it is spell-trigger, spell-completion or potion) and your Valet familiar effectively decreases the time it takes to craft items. These are in the rules.

The line, "You can assist another character in crafting mundane and magical items. You must both possess the relevant Craft skill or item creation feat, but either one of you can fulfill any other prerequisites for crafting the item." is not necessary as there are already rules allowing you to do all of that.

Anyone can help anyone else craft a magic item and provide the pre-requisites. That is already in the core rules.

CRB p549 wrote:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item’s creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.

You can also use aid another to provide a bonus to a skill check, if you can perform the skill on your own.

CRB p86 Aid Another wrote:

You can help someone achieve success on a skill check by making the same kind of skill check in a cooperative effort. If you roll a 10 or higher on your check, the character you’re helping gets a +2 bonus on his or her check. (You can’t take 10 on a skill check to aid another.) In many cases, a character’s help won’t be beneficial, or only a limited number of characters can help at once.

In cases where the skill restricts who can achieve certain results, such as trying to open a lock using Disable Device, you can’t aid another to grant a bonus to a task that your character couldn’t achieve alone. The GM might impose further restrictions to aiding another on a case-by-case basis as well.

In short, the bonuses provided by the feat Cooperative Crafting are: +2 Circumstance bonus to make an item and you increase the amount you can craft to double per day (instead of 1,000gp per day it is now 2,000gp per day). When you accelerate crafting an item (+5 DC) that means you can and your buddy can effectively quarter the time it takes to make an item.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Get a Ring of Eloquence. It specifically works while polymorphed into forms that cannot speak (and, it is cheaper).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Everything you have stated is correct.

You can also halve the crafting time by increasing the DC by 5.


1) Composite Longbows count as Longbows for feats that require a Longbow.

CRB p147 wrote:
For purposes of Weapon Proficiency and similar feats, a composite longbow is treated as if it were a longbow.

2) Composite Longbows have a strength rating that starts at +0 and goes up. The strength rating allows you to add your strength modifier to damage up to that value. If your strength modifier is below that value you have a -2 penalty to attack. If you have a strength modifier that is negative you also have that as a penalty to damage.

CRB p147 wrote:
All composite bows are made with a particular strength rating (that is, each requires a minimum Strength modifier to use with proficiency). If your Strength bonus is less than the strength rating of the composite bow, you can’t effectively use it, so you take a –2 penalty on attacks with it. The default composite longbow requires a Strength modifier of +0 or higher to use with proficiency. A composite longbow can be made with a high strength rating to take advantage of an above-average Strength score; this feature allows you to add your Strength bonus to damage, up to the maximum bonus indicated for the bow. Each point of Strength bonus granted by the bow adds 100 gp to its cost. If you have a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when you use a composite longbow.

3) A bow's enhancement score (magic bonus) applies to the arrow's attack and damage.

CRB p468 wrote:
Ranged Weapons and Ammunition: The enhancement bonus from a ranged weapon does not stack with the enhancement bonus from ammunition. Only the higher of the two enhancement bonuses applies.

4) Additionally, since the magic of the bow is imparted on the arrow, it effectively has the same enhancement bonus the bow has for purposes of bypassing DR.

CRB p468 wrote:
Ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an enhancement bonus of +1 or higher is treated as a magic weapon for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. Similarly, ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an alignment gains the alignment of that projectile weapon.

You seem to think that number 4 contradicts number 3. It doesn't, it is just spelling it out in great detail so that rules lawyers don't get confused.

In short, you are overthinking it. The arrow has all the same bonuses that the bow has.

Morgause, if this is the same as the Clockwork Servant in the Bestiary 3 then no, you cannot because the net ability has a specific action associated with it (standard).

You may want to copy/paste the relevant ability.

Generic Villain wrote:

As a rule, no*. You can't swing a sword and fire a bow with the same full attack action, and as DM_Blake pointed out, monsters also have to go with one or the other. There are some monsters who have specific special abilities that allow them to use ranged attacks and melee attacks simultaneously, but they are the exception.

And honestly, I'm trying to think of one of those exceptions and can't. They're pretty rare.

*EDIT: Kobold cleaver's example not withstanding.

You misread DM_Blakes statement. He was pointing out that you cannot use the tail as both a melee and and as a ranged weapon in the same round because it is the same limb. But, you could do either in combination with other attacks.

For example you cannot: Claw/Claw/Bite/Tail/Shoot tail spikes
but you can: Claw/Claw/Bite/(Tail OR Shoot Tail Spikes)

Note: this assumes that the ranged attack does not have a specific attack action such as the Manticore's tail spikes.

Do you have a specific example in mind?

Kalindlara answered it.

Here is some context:
Spells and Spell-like abilities provoke regardless of what the Spell or Spell-like ability actually does. However, they may also provoke a second time if they do something, such as a ranged attack, that provokes.

Supernatural abilities do not provoke unless it does something that also provokes, such as a ranged attack.

So, if you cast a ranged attack spell (such as Scorching Ray) you provoke twice. Once for casting and once for the ranged attack.
If you use a supernatural ability that is similar to Scorching Ray (such as Eldritch Blast) you provoke once, for the ranged attack only.

Additionally, there may be special wording in some supernatural abilities that states they provoke. This would be an exception to the normal rule that supernatural abilities do not provoke.

Fighting Defensively is not the same as Casting Defensively. They are two separate things.

Casting Defensively: You avoid an AoO due to spellcasting. Make a concentration check to successfully cast a spell.

Fighting Defensively: Take a -4 attack penalty and gain a +2 dodge bonus to your AC.

If you are using Spell Combat and Casting Defensively and you take a -3attack penalty for casting defensively then you have a -5 attack penalty and a +3 bonus (+5 at level 8) to casting defensively.

If you are also fighting defensively then you take an additional -4 attack penalty and gain a +2 AC bonus.

I think you may be confusing separate things. What you have here is multiple penalties from different sources. Since penalties stack they all apply.

You decide the amount of the penalty to attack (up to your Intelligence bonus) and add the same number to your concentration check.

So, if your intelligence bonus is a +3 you can do -1attack/+1concentration, -2attack/+2concentration, or a -3attack/+3concentration.

At 8th level you get an extra +2 bonus to your concentration check (for no penalty).
At 14th level the bonus you get is doubled (-1attack= +2concentration and so on).

20) Realizing that Golarion is not Earth and that Golarion need not have suffered a cataclysm (meteor) that wiped out the dinosaurs.

kestral287, unless a spell provides a specific exception (such as D-Door providing a result of what happens when you try to teleport inside an object) the general rule stating that you cannot do it is in force.

I second Skeld's statement.

Pathfinder and reality have about as much to do with each other as religion and science. If you look too deeply at the Pathfinder rules and try to compare it to reality then one of them fails. I will let you decide which one fails.

kestral287, what do you mean by 'all of the teleport schools (spells) already call that one out though'?

The quote I provided is the answer to why the OPs scenario does not work.

This is already covered:

CRB p209 wrote:
A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it.

Note: people argue that this does not cover dimension door since that is not 'your location' but the intent of the rule is quite clear. You cannot teleport into another creature.

Surprise Round: 1, 2, and 3 (in that order) get standard actions.
Round 1: 1, 2, and 3 (in that order) get full-round actions.
and so on....

Surprise Round: 1, 2 but not 3 (in that order) get standard actions.
Round 1: 3, 1, and 2 (in that order) get full-round actions.
and so on...

Yes, he is pulling his full-round action from later in round 1 up to a higher initiative. Yes, I (now) agree that is gaming the system.
But, contrary to what you stated, he is most certainly losing a standard action in the course of the battle to do this trick.

bbangerter wrote:
LazarX wrote:

You're losing your action in the surprise round if you delay past the end of it. Bonus: Since you haven't acted, you're still flatfooted until you do.

Not really. You don't lose actions in a round due to delaying unless the init order gets back to you and you still have not acted. (Flat footed is a separate issue, and personally if a person chose to delay I would not leave them flat footed - they could have acted, the idea that because they are intentionally waiting for something else before taking full aggressive action meaning they can't be defensive is silly).

Normal things with no one delaying

Surprise Round
Creature 1 single action
Creature 2 single action
Creature 3 single action

Normal round(s)
Creature 1 full action
Creature 2 full action
Creature 3 full action
Repeat normal round till combat is over

If creature 3 delays:
Surprise Round
Creature 1 single action
Creature 2 single action
Creature 3 delays till start of the normal rounds

Normal round(s)
Creature 3 full action (gaming the system if he gets a full round action)
Creature 1 full action
Creature 2 full action
Repeat normal round till combat is over

In both cases its 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3... repeating.
In the second case if 3 gets a full round action he lost nothing, instead he effectively got a full round action in during the surprise round instead.

Creature 1 has no reason to delay till the normal round, if he does then yes he does lose his surprise round action as it his turn right after 3 is done.
2 could delay till after 3 and then take his surprise round action (in the way I adjudicate this). If he delays till after 1's normal round, then he has lost his surprise round action.

I have to disagree with the results (conclusion) of your example. Creature 3 has absolutely lost an action, a standard action while moving his Full-Round action to the top of the list.

Any way you slice it he loses that standard action when measuring actions over multiple rounds.

Hmmm, good point.

I don't feel that this is gaming the system. You are losing a standard action to act before everyone else.

Without Delay:
You have a standard action (surprise round) and a full-round action (first round) with the full-round action being 'wherever your initiative falls'.

With Delaying until the first round:
You lose your surprise round action. Your full round action now occurs before everyone else's.

You have lost an action (standard) and gained no additional actions.
All you have gained is that your full-round action has occurred before everyone else's but isn't that appropriate since you were active in the surprise round (assumes they were not)?

bbangerter is correct, you can, in the surprise round, delay and then act first in the first round.

Keagun Redcrow,

First, archetypes do not work the way you have described. Archetypes are not separate classes, they are modifications to the base class (in this case, Rogue).

So, what you described is a Rogue 6/Assassin 2 with the Rogue having 2 archetypes.

Second, you can only take archetypes that do not modify/replace the same class ability.
In this case Knife Master replaces Trapfinding and Trap Sense and modifies Sneak Attack while Scout replaces Uncanny Dodge and Improved Uncanndy Dodge.
Because they do not modify or replace the same abilities they are compatible.

Third, the Assassin's Sneak Attack ability specifically states that it stacks with other Sneak Attack abilities. So your total sneak attack at this level is 3d6+1d6 = 4d6.

Summary: Your level 8 character is a Rogue 6 (Knife Master/Scout)/Assassin 2 with a Sneak Attack of 4d6.

Any contested skill might need max ranks.
Examples include Stealth, Perception, Bluff, Sense Motive, Acrobatics, and Ride (if you have Mounted Combat).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Then it needs to be enchanted as a weapon and not as a shield. If it is enchanted as a shield they cannot then use the shield enchantment as a weapon enchantment if they are already doing that with the other shield (due to only one shield slot).

So yes, you can save half the money on one shield but not the other.

A flaw in the entire "2 shields" combat style is that you are only allowed to have one magic shield. You only have one shield slot (CRB p459).

So, if you want to TWF with a magic shield and a non-magic shield, you can. But if you want to TWF with two magic shields, one of them is non-functional.


You are confusing Pathfinder (Companion) with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.
They are not the same thing.

Try reading the inside cover of pre-2009 books (such as the Elves of Golarion) and then compare it to the later books.
They start with being compatible with 3.5 and then moves to being compatible with Pathfinder Roleplaying Game or 3.5.

Prior to 2009 there were no Pathfinder Roleplaying Game publications.
The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game did not happen until WoTC announced that they were shutting down 3.5 in favor of 4e and then announced that the OGL would not make the move.

Elves not sleeping is part of the 3.5 books, not the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game rules.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

And here is your FAQ

FAQ wrote:

Mithral armor: What exactly does it mean when it says mithral armor is counted as one category lighter for “other limitations?”

This means that mithral armor allows its wearer to use it when her own class features or special abilities demand her to wear lighter armor; in other words, the character wearing the armor is less limited. For example, a bard can cast spells in mithral breastplate without arcane spell failure, a barbarian can use her fast movement in mithral fullplate, a ranger can use his combat style in mithral fullplate, brawlers, swashbucklers, and gunslingers can keep their nimble bonus in mithral breastplate, rogues keep evasion in mithral breastplate, a brawler can flurry in mithral breastplate, characters without Endurance can sleep in mithral breastplate without becoming fatigued, and so on. It does not change the armor’s actual category, which means that you can still store a creature one size category larger in a hosteling mithral fullplate, and you can’t enhance a mithral breastplate with special abilities that require it to be light armor, like brawling (though you could enhance it with special abilities that require it to be medium armor), and so on.

Short answer, yes. Mithral Breastplate is Light Armor for the purpose of Nimble.

Chaylafaysky, you are wrong.

Golarion was written for 3.5 rules prior to 2009 and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game rules beginning in 2009.

There were no Pathfinder Roleplaying Game publications prior to 2009. The Paizo transition from 3.5 publications to Pathfinder Roleplaying Game publications occurred during 2009.

Elves of Golarion was published in 2008. It is written for 3.5, not the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.

Check the dates.

Balgin wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
This of course only applies to oracle revelations that create physical armor. Not all armor revelations do, as you so note, just like it wouldn't apply to the mage armor spell.

I would never claim that Magic Vestment could target Spirit Shield. However, since Mage Armour can target non magical garments that do not need to be a suit of armour it's quite understandable that (at the gm's discretion), Magic Vestment can target the garments worn while Spirit Shield is active. Since Spirit Shield if an Armour bonus and Magic Vestment is an Enhancement bonus to the Armour bonus ..... you can see how it could go either way.

Magic Vestment

An outfit of regular clothing counts as armour that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell.

Actually that seems pretty cut and dried to me. One is an armour bonus being provided to the character. Another is an enhancement bonus to the character's armour bonus. These two are different bonus types. You can argue about bonus types and item slots all you like as every group is likely to come to their own consensus. It's not about whether the bonus types can stack. it's about if the magic vestment spell can be applied at all in the first place. Perhaps the question should not be whether the magic vestment spell can be applied but what it would be applied to.

If the oracle's armour revelation clearly creates physical protection of a more tangible nature then it's another matter entirely.

Perhaps you missed my quote earlier, but the rules clearly state something different from your above statement (that I have bolded).

Here it is again:
CRB p179 wrote:
Enhancement Bonuses: Enhancement bonuses apply to your armor to increase the armor bonus it provides.

If you cast Magic Vestment on your clothes you get an enhancement bonus that increases the clothing's AC bonus. It increases the clothing's AC bonus from +0 to +1 through +5 (depending on the level of the caster).

Magic Vestment does not give the character an enhancement to his armor bonus.
It increases the AC provided by the characters armor and because of this you cannot cast Magic Vestment on your clothes and then have any other source of armor bonus and expect them both to work.
Due to the stacking rules only one armor bonus to AC, the highest, will work. The armor bonus to AC includes any enhancement bonuses to Armor such as from Magic Vestment.


CRB p179 wrote:
Enhancement Bonuses: Enhancement bonuses apply to your armor to increase the armor bonus it provides.

Byakko, Cleave is similarly worded regarding who you can attack.

The Cleave FAQ states you cannot take a 5' step and recheck who you can attack.

Based on that you should not also be able to re-check who you can threaten after you start your whirlwind attack. It is checked once, at the beginning.

CRB p119 Cleave wrote:
As a standard action, you can make a single attack at your full base attack bonus against a foe within reach.
CRB p137 Whirlwind Attack wrote:
When you use the full-attack action, you can give up your regular attacks and instead make one melee attack at your highest base attack bonus against each opponent within reach.

You are thinking length rather than height. Difficult terrain can have a height too. For example, terrain made difficult by bushes, some bushes are taller than a man.

Again, "Yes" means a flat yes which doesn't even bother to check conditions where "maybe" is means "yes, depending on if....".

Even if you can jump a 20foot difficult terrain feature or obstacle you are no longer traveling in a straight line.

Cevah, then why didn't you respond to someone else's "No" or my revised "Maybe"?
In any case, it is 'Maybe' even in the 3.5 FAQ since what you are trying to bypass is situational.

A "yes" would mean that jumping could bypass any obstacle/difficult terrain which jumping cannot.

It doesn't matter if he is in the Howdah or not he leaves himself open on one side still.
And with EFS being immobile, good luck with that while trying to fly.


I think you misunderstood what I was saying was out of the rules.

How winged creatures grab enemies, fly and drop them is that they are not trying to target a creature/spot on the ground.
To do it:
1) Grapple check to grapple target creature.
2) target creature has chance to escape or reverse the grapple or whatever.
3) next turn, the grappling creature makes a grapple check to maintain the grapple and, as it's option, chooses the move action (instead of damage or whatever).
4) Now the grappling creature can release the grapple as a free action.
The sequence above has nothing to do with that you are trying to do.

You can certainly carry your snake.
You can certainly drop your snake.
But there are no rules covering you dropping your snake into a howdah. The closest rules are the Dropping an Object rules and that requires that you make a ranged touch attack.
There are also no provisions in the rules for doing a grapple check while falling.
So, you have to land the snake in the howdah and thus we are back to doing a ranged touch attack to drop it where you want it to hit.

As for his abilities, without knowing yours I don't have anything to offer, but as TOZ said, it seems like his action economy is an issue. You guys should be able to wear him down.

Regarding his abilities:
Channeling to heal is a way to prolong a battle, not really save you.
Emergency Force Sphere is only partially effective for a flying creature, it creates a dome, not a sphere as the name states and it is immobile.
Misfortune is annoying, but ultimately it means that he is probably not attacking
Chain of Perdition isn't hurting you.
How is his Roc using Snap Leaf?
Weird Words is nasty, but it precludes him healing himself and make sure you use the FAQ that rewrote it.
Friend to the Animals is defintely a nasty bump to the Roc's saves. But it should not be insurmountable.

Was this a fellow PC or a BBEG?

Lets just look at it from a balance point.

You want to make armor of bones with +17 AC, no move speed penalty, Max Dex of infinite, no ACP, and no weight vs +14 AC, speed reduction, +1 Max Dex, -5ACP, and 50lbs??

I would :)

While there is no official word if Magic Vestment were allowed to work on armor effects like this one it would open the door to a lot of abuse.

Where I draw the line is, does the ability create actual, listed suit of armor where you can reference the stats of the armor in the armor list?
If yes, I generally do not see a problem with Magic Vestment working on it.
If no, then I do see a problem with Magic Vestment working on it as it is not a "suit of armor" or clothing.

So if I understand correctly:
1) you flew up
2) you dropped the snake into a Howdah on a Roc
3) you dismissed the reduce animal spell (not really relevant since the Howdah can continue to carry your large snake)

#2 is pretty well outside of the rules.
However, the best guidance is the Dropping an Object rules (CRB p443) which would have required a ranged touch attack roll (not a free action).

I would have also run it that the snake could be thrown via a CMB check. It doesn't result in the snake being prone when it hits the ground but it still can remove the snake.

Out of curiosity, why was the Bard/Oracle untouchable?


Cevah wrote:
Gauss wrote:

1. No, because you do not have a clear straight line path.

CRB p198 wrote:
You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge. If any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can’t charge.

So when flying over difficult terrain, you are slowed?

Does not work that way.

If you jump past difficult terrain, it is no longer difficult terrain preventing the charge. Ditto obstacles. Occupied or blocked squares, however, remain occupied or blocked and prevent a charge.

Jumping over a river of lava, an open pit, and the like will not slow you down, and will not prevent a charge. Jumping up in the air will not slow you down either.


Cevah, it is so nice when you read an entire thread (especially one this short) before responding to an early post.

Perhaps you should read the post immediately preceding your own where I changed my stance to a maybe.

The quote you provided states attack, damage, free action. At best it is attack, damage and free action (simultaneous).

Either way, the immediate action is resolved before applying the resolution of the attack. That is how immediate actions work.

1 to 50 of 7,156 << 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.