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

Golden-Esque's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStar Venture-Agent. 767 posts (5,817 including aliases). 39 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 16 Pathfinder Society characters. 4 aliases.


1 to 50 of 1,219 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Matrix Dragon wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:

Rysky,

So what no other spells listed?

There's a few more, and Apsu themed one, a Dahak themed one, one that gives you a tail, and one that makes touch attacks resolves against your normal AC.
That Touch Attacks vs normal AC spell is single handedly going to save dragons from firearm related extinction. All of my dragons are going to mysteriously have that on their spell list now, lol.

Which is exactly why I wrote it.

Also, your dragons might not need to "know" the spell, because no one has talked about just what the draconic spell descriptor does.... ;-)

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think that Drogan brings up a good point that the terminology could benefit from being split.

I also agree with TOZ that people will likely whine if the rules are adjusted to give GMs better rewards then them. I also think that those types of players are the ones who want to feel justified in their sloth, and so even if they will make a fuss we shouldn't let them decide how much we as a community show our appreciation to our GMs.

I personally feel that Crane Wing shows us that they need us more than we need them. ;-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I bought all of Jade Regent last week. In print, even!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It is certainly not a bad sign that the Creative Director popped into this thread.

It's also not a telling sign, but hey! At least you know that James Jacobs' all-seeing eye has focused upon this thread for even the briefest of moments. ;-)


9 people marked this as a favorite.

This whole thing makes me REALLY want a Draconic Corruption.

"I hung around a dragon too much and now I'm slowly turning into one!"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lanitril wrote:

Sooooo. Any chance of a stealth Cleric re-write? Similar to what has happened with the Fighter lately. Mainly for a way for Clerics to get Life Link, but also to bring some variety outside of spells. I'm not sure if they'd give up spells per day or domain spells or whatever, but just a nice list of options available to them. Perhaps ways for other healers to use them as well.

It's doubtful this would get in unless you already had something like this planned, but just throwing it out there.

As the guy who did the "Stealth Fighter" rewrites in both the Armor Master's Handbook and the Weapon Master's Handbook, I personally don't think the cleric can benefit much from any sort of new subsystems. They just don't have enough class features to get up or move around, and they're not a weak enough class to warrant power boosts.

What clerics (and potentially druids) need is a slight dial back in order to justify giving them more class features, and I don't think that you'll see that happen anywhere but in a "spiritual sequel" to Pathfinder Unchained. I don't think that's in the cards, so if you want more "updates" for old classes, the best thing you can do is convince all of the PF players you know to buy physical copies of Pathfinder Unchained.

But hey? What do I know about anything? I'm just a guy on the internet.

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
rknop wrote:
Tell ya what. When you have three stars, come back and make the case again. See if your opinion has changed.
That's a little unfair. While I appreciate that time and further experience can change views of the campaign, GM stars are not required to advocate for changes in the campaign. Arguments should be addressed, not those putting forth the arguments.

This is *the* most important post in the past few pages of this thread. There are *tons* of 4 and 5 Star GMs across the forums who think that they can use their number of games run to shut down ideas and opinions on this thread. That's the absolute worse way to wield those "bragging rights." (Its even worse if you're a VO and you're doing that.)

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dave Baker wrote:

We've already given GMs the following benefits as people cried out that we needed to incentivize GMing:

- GM Stars boon sheet
- GM Stars & bonus to re-rolls
- Full chronicle, regardless of what the PCs earned
- GM boons at Cons and other events

How much more do we need? Unlimited GM credit, as previously posted, may alleviate a short-term GM issue, but will create long-term GM issues.

I respect your point of view on the topic. Please take a moment to consider this counterargument.

The problem is that *all* of the rewards you've listed incentify the person who GMs a lot. It doesn't incentify people who haven't GMed to try GMing.

Let's go over your list:
Full Chronicles: This will likely be controversial, but I consider Chronicles to be payment for services rendered rather than a reward. As a GM sitting around the table, you're not doing anything that any of the players that showed up to play isn't doing. In fact, you're doing more, because you had to read the scenario, take notes, reference stat blocks, buy markers and one or more game mats, acquire proxies for monsters on the battle map (which may require spending more money), and so on. This is in contrast to the player, who only needs to show up to the table and keep track of her character. Any benefit you get from choosing your rewards on the chronicle sheet pales in comparison to the amount of extra work that you, as GM, did to make the table happen. And remember, we are not looking at this reward system from the prospect of rewarding Jenny AlwaysGM, who is an extroverted butterfly with no social anxieties and no need for motivation to try GMing. We're looking at this from the perspective of Rihanna Neverun, who is an awesome player and totally knows the rules, but needs something extra to motivate her to try GMing.

GM Stars & Reroll Bonus: GM stars actually aren't listed in the GM Rewards section of the PFS Roleplaying Guide Guide to Organized Play; they've got their own section and the very first section describes them as "bragging rights." You or I might know differently, but to the average player, their status as rewards isn't transparent. Furthermore, they're rewards for continued service, not a "Thanks for running," reward. The time between stars is designed around being prestigious, not Pavlovian. We need positive reinforcement for new players to try GMing, and GM Stars don't cut because of the huge time investments.

GM Stars Boon Sheet: This is a perfect example of a reward that isn't referenced anywhere. Its not in the GM Rewards section, and no one ever talks about it. Furthermore, the file doesn't even talk about rules regarding its application—I don't know if I can put one boon per character, or one boon once on one character. Not only that, but they're star based so like GM stars they don't offer positive reinforcement for getting someone new to try GMing.

GM Boons at Events: This is a motivator for GMs to travel to Cons. This is not a motivator to get new people to try GMing, and there is a huge difference between those two. To the unordained player, making one's first PFS GMing experience be a convention is a terrifying conjecture. You're in a loud, crowded place with tons of officials running around (maybe even designers and regional coordinators). You are gaming with people you don't know, who will potentially bring characters to the table that aren't fun to game with. You might have to settle disputes between strangers. Most coordinators even pick people with GM experience over those who don't have any. No, this is not a reward for new players.

Now, I agree that this is a strange topic to have in a thread that is essentially about giving MORE rewards to existing GMs. When you get right down to it, making it more desirable for GMs to replay scenarios will not coerce new players into GMing. This is a fact, and it is also a short-term solution for a long-term problem.

So when you get right down to it, a system that incentifies GMing needs to be like Pokemon GO—it needs to offer real, immediate incentifies for someone to perform a behavior that they wouldn't normally do (GMing a game). That's why I've suggested a GM rewards system that empowers VCs, VLs, and VAs with ways to grant race boons and other rewards to GMs for their service. We can totally change people's behaviors and get them to try something new. But first we need to get rid of this stigma that a GM needs be solely altruistic in her decision to run games at her store. That line of thinking has not helped Organized Play grow new GMs, and it will not help Organized Play grow new GMs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Seitz wrote:
*gives Alex a cookie for good work*

Ugh, you have NO idea. Going through every power than DSP ever made, PLUS every power in the Complete Psionics book to see if I liked anything enough to update it....

LOTS of work. This is probably the fourth most work-intensive book I've ever done.

Spoiler:

#1 was the Grimoire of Lost Souls.
#2 was Age of Electrotech.
#3 was Pact Magic Unbound, Vol II

**

3 people marked this as a favorite.

So there seems to be two very basic thought processes in this thread, which have a LOT of good points on both sides of their argument. 1) We need replays to help incentify more GMs to run games. 2) Reruns hurt the game because they encounter GMs to cherry-pick scenarios for boons, which hurts Organized Play by stagnating it.

As many probably know from my freelance work, I enjoy designing solutions to problems, and when you get right down to it there isn't a whole lot of difference between designing rules for a character class and rules for Organized Play because you're ultimately designing rules for how people interact with and in a game. So with that in mind, I pulled the first two paragraphs of text from the "GM Rewards" section in the Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide to Organized Play and rewrote them to try and make a fair middle ground between both points. I'd be interested in hearing what people thing.

Quote:

In Pathfinder Society Organized Play, we reward GMs for volunteering their time to run events. Starting with Version 2.2 of this document (and not retroactive to any previous scenarios that were run), any GM who runs a scenario gets full credit for that scenario applied to one of her own characters. “Full credit” means the GM gets the following: 1 XP for the scenario, 100% of the Max Gold for the subtier most appropriate to the GM’s PC, and 2 PP (or, for a slow advancement track character, 1/2 XP, 1 PP, and 50% of the Max Gold for the subtier most appropriate to the GM’s PC). The GM may select any special boons bestowed by a Chronicle sheet, such as free magical treasure, regional boons, or future bonus die rolls. The GM does not get a Downtime check.

Unlike a player, a GM can run a single scenario multiple times, but she does not gain full credit on subsequent games after the first. Instead, she gains "partial credit," which means the GM gains the following if she has previously run the scenario for credit before: 1 XP for the scenario, 100% of the Max Gold for the subtier most appropriate to the GM's PC, and 2 PP (or, for a slow advancement track character, 1/2 XP, 1 PP, and 50% of the Max Gold for the subtier most appropriate to the GM's PC). ThE GM cannot select the special boons bestowed by the Chronicle sheet, such as free magical treasure, regional boons, or future bonus die roles. The GM does not gain a Downtime check. Additionally, there is limited replay allowed for "full credit" depending upon the number of GM stars earned (see page 20).

The basic idea is that this system A) keeps the existing reward system valid by making stars into the primary way you can put access to boons and cool items on multiple characters while B) partially rewarding GMs who need to run a scenario multiple times. Because I agree with camp "We Need Looser Restrictions on GM Replays." I'm professionally trained as a teacher, and one of the first things they tell you in Educational Psychology 101 is that every time you teach a lesson, you'll be that much better at the lesson the next time you teach it. This is true for actors giving a performance too, and when you get right down to it, that's what you're doing. You use the same general skill sets to run a scenario as teach a lesson or perform a scene. (In my opinion, that's why you see so many teachers playing Pathfinder, as well as why so many of us freelancers and designers had our starts in education.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
also as a horror fan, a Tian Xia horror-themed campaign would be pretty awesome. It's not like the Paizo folks don't have a lot of inspirations to pull from, and it would be a pretty novel idea.

Horror game in Shensen, the Land of Spiders would be pretty great.

**

5 people marked this as a favorite.
John Compton wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

When I started PFS, Dreng was RPed to me as a total stoner. It made perfect sense considering his operating hours, his carefree attire, his untamed hair, and his bleary, squinting eyes.

Just last week I GMed #1-49, one of the famous "wake you up in the middle of the night" scenarios. I RPed him interjecting words like "dude", "totally", that he had the munchies, and everything that epitomizes a Cali pot head.

After the game one of our newer GMs asked me if that's really how he's like. She'd always thought he was just a crotchety old man. I told her that's how I've always thought of him, but feel free to RP him however you feel comfortable.

Seeing as nobody in this thread has mentioned it at all, maybe I'm in the minority.

If we had a short blurb on each of the VCs, including pronunciation and RP, developed into some sort of document, it would probably go a long way to lessen table variation on how VCs are portrayed.

I've seen both Kreighton Shaine and Drandle Dreng presented by GMs as stoners, though that's far from my approach for either. This was only after I had come to understand Shaine as a generally upbeat, inquisitive, and easily distracted fellow with a mind for obscure trivia, and Dreng as an experienced, mildly goofy, avuncular, and somewhat grimly optimistic older man. These characterizations are partly my own interpretations and partly the result of other GMs' presentation, but they're now the filter through which I present the two leaders in publications.

You know, a "personality guide" for GMs tucked into the Guide to Season 8 Organized Play (or some other document) could go a long way towards helping GMs properly portray the Venture Captains.

The last time we had information like that was in the Pathfinder Society Field Guide, and while that CSG is a fantastic book with some of the best collections of rules and flavor in one tome in the game right now, it is five years old and completely out of print at this point, what between having the lore warden archetype, vanities, and more.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Endzeitgeist wrote:
Reviewed first on endzeitgeist.com, then submitted to Nerdtrek and GMS magazine and posted here, on OBS, etc.

Thanks for the review, End! I'm thrilled that you enjoyed it; I wasn't sure how this would be received on account of no other company having a product line like Everyman Iconics.

**

4 people marked this as a favorite.

If Paizo had the resources, short stories that "bridge the gaps" between scenarios that feature the VCs doing cool stuff would be neat too. Like a bridge between Blakros Connection and Abducted in Aether from Shane's point of view as he searched the planes for [REDACTED].

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

At least for me, Kreighton Shane, Drendle Drend, and Shelia Heidmarch are the most memorable of the PCs. Their quirks help to distinguish them from virtually every other VC, who's mostly no-nonsense all-business.

I can't think of his name, but I'm a big fan of the VC from Oparra, the one who runs the Bait and Tackle Shop. Who throws his neck on the line trying to help you out in Dalsine Affair.

I think that's sort of what people are looking for—VCs who appear on-screen doing things for or with the PFS. (Another awesome example is the understandably creepy VC who recently reappeared in Thralls of a Shattered God.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I didn't put Kaiju on my list because I figured that they'd be a claimed topic for JJ.

But there's so much cool, untapped stuff in Tian Xia that I am content to dream....


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I adore Tian Xia and its mythology. I volunteer myself as tribute to write whatever Paizo wants on the subject.

My favorite places are:
Tianjing (Secret qlipploth incursion underneath a celestial nation? Potential to "stop another World Wound?" AWESOME)

Chu Ye (A look at what would happen to Minkai if the PCs failed Jade Regent? The ultimate nation in need of heroes? DOUBLE AWESOME)

Wanshou (KRAKEN LAND!)

The Forest of Spirits (Seriously, there is NO place like this in the Inner Sea. A land completely ruled by nature spirits where humans aren't a majority race? I find the notion to be super interesting.)

The Tengu nation (Hwanggot?)

Everywhere. Seriously, everywhere. I will do the thing, LET ME DO THE THING!!!

Please....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sethvir wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Sethvir wrote:
And Everyman Gaming is now an imprint of Rogue Genius Games.

This is sort of an oversimplification, but it's got a fair bit of truth. I do my own taxes, choose my own titles, hire my own freelancers, and run Everyman Gaming pretty much exactly as I did for the past two years. The only different is that my products are listed under the RGG catalog.

I do agree, however, that I probably should be listed under RGG, if Owen doesn't object.

I didn't figure it was quite that simple. :) Since your stuff is now listed under RGG, I thought it worth pointing out and the only descriptor I could come up with from the publishing world was imprint. Mainly as an outgrowth of other changes in various 3PP catalogs. Abandoned Arts, 4 Winds, etc.

Thanks for chiming in Alex. :)

No problem.

Imprint isn't an inaccurate term, mind you. Its just not a perfectly accurate one either. But alas, is anything in the world of business?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Soooo this FaQ took three paragraphs to say... what exactly?

Not trying to be snarky, just curious what the purpose of this FaQ was.

Turns out positive and negative energy weren't defined. If you were just reading the rules, this changes a lot of things- negative energy effects don't harm constructs, vaguely defined positive energy effects don't let you heal undead, and so on. For folks who got the gist of it, yeah, this doesn't change anything.
The one change I see is the positive energy plane. It seems like it says overhealing no longer kills mortals,but I'm not sure. It definitely says undead/negative energy creatures no longer benefit from the fast healing granted by the positive energy plane. It use to be that the negative plane kills living creatures and heals undead, but the positive plane heals and kills everything if it stays there long enough.

The FAQ specifically mentions how overhealing on the Positive Energy Plane is dangerous. AKA that still happens to living creatures. What the FAQ is clarifying is the fact that the fast healing that you get on the Positive Energy results from an abundance of positive energy, and while undead creatures can normally benefit from fast healing, since common sense dictates that the major positive energy planar trait is associated with positive energy, undead don't benefit from that healing. (That isn't otherwise stated in the GMG, so technically someone who argues RAW over RAI could make the case that undead were healed on the Positive Energy Plane prior to the release of this FAQ.)

A clarified stance on what these energy types do means that in the future, the designers and developers don't have to use as many words reprinting the same rules over and over again. This is an awesome FAQ from a writer's perspective.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Not trying to be snarky, just curious what the purpose of this FaQ was.

Positive Energy and Negative Energy are one of several "inherited rules terms," that have no actual definition in the Core Rulebook. This looks like a compilation of rules from all different sources that defines how positive energy and negative energy works.

It seems like its more for the Pathfinder crowd as opposed to the 3.5 Veterans Club. No 3.5 player that I know would have asked, "Hey, can I use resist energy to protect me from the cleric's channel negative energy?" because we're Bane—we lived through a time when positive energy and negative energy were newly added to the game and have brought that rules understanding (that was made clear in 3.5) with us to Pathfinder.

But Pathfinder is growing, and not all of its fans have that 3.5 background anymore. So clarifying what positive energy and negative energy is from a rules standpoint is important.

Here's hoping we get one for precision damage soon, too!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:

Mark, will you and/or Linda be at GenCon this year?!

If so, please stop by the Paizo Galla and see me. :D

We will both be at GenCon. I don't know what the "Paizo Galla" is, though.

I misspelled the word "gala," and I don't think my use of "Paizo" as opposed to the specific location "PFS" was very clear; let me try that again.

"If so, please stop stop by the PFS Gala and see me. :D"


3 people marked this as a favorite.

To protect the world from Pokeinfestation,
And place monsters in our banks from every nation.
To shower our prisoners with friendship and love,
From Dugtrio down below to Rayquaza above!

Autumn! Alex!

Team Augunas captures critters at the speed of light!
Snatching up every Pokemon in sight!

Adam, that's right!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mark, will you and/or Linda be at GenCon this year?!

If so, please stop by the Paizo Galla and see me. :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Share your stories! Post your adventures!

================================

After a day of trying to get it to work, I turned on Pokemon Go on a whim and I got in. Yay! I picked my appearance, caught my starter, and life was good.

Until a wild Pokemon appeared.

In my room.

At night.

I battled and caught a venomoth. It stared at me with its large, judgmental eyes. I'm pretty sure it didn't like what I was wearing to bed tonight. To date I don't know how it snuck in here. My windows are shut. My doors are locked. Maybe it was always here.....

I can't sleep in here anymore. Not if my room is filled with unseen venomoths....

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So when I played We Be Goblins Free, I got captivated by the singing enemy in that mod, and was one round away from being coup de graced. I needed a 19 or higher to save myself. My GM required us to sing the goblin songs to use our rerolls, and so I sang my heart out poorly, just as a goblin should.

I rolled a natural 20 on the reroll.

Always sing the goblin song. ALWAYS.

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.
John Compton wrote:
Just as there are many adventures that heavily emphasize combat, there are some stories that are going to be combat-lite. I know from working on this campaign that a substantial number of players and GMs alike look forward to the rare social/skill-heavy scenario (I aim to have about one per season). I also know that some players don't enjoy these at all, even as we adapt, evolve, and formalize the mechanics (i.e. publication in Ultimate Intrigue). That's a significant reason for not doing social adventures more frequently—they're also pretty tough to write!

If I might chime in, I think its also a fair statement that some players simply aren't used to their combat abilities mattering less in PFS. There are players who scoff at some of the more flavorful skill options and instead invest only in Perception and the skills that can be used in Combat like Intimidate, Knowledge skills, et all. The contrast between a Season 0, 1, or 2 Scenario is pretty stark compared to Season 7.

Personally, I thought that Season 7's spotlighting on non-combat tactics was wonderfully refreshing; I was worried that I was going to hate playing my investigator in PFS because they're more of a skill-oriented class, and was pleasantly surprised by how much I ended up enjoying him in various Season 7 storylines. (I did all of the Faithless and Forgotten series on him, and am about to complete the Blakros Connection/Abducted in Aether chain.) I hope you'll keep bringing out more games like Faithless and Forgotten and Bid for Alabastine. ;-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
While I do find "Ultimate Occult" as name slightly misleading (unless it is supposed to be the Occult version of Ultimate Psionics - does it have the Tactician or the Marksman), I am surprised by the one reviews characterisation of the art. I checked out the quick preview (a whopping 30 pages!?!?) on Drivethrurpg, and thought the art fairly representative of the best of Jacob Blackmon's style. I guess it may not be for everyone. I did wonder whether all the art was Jacob's, as there were a couple of "scene" style pieces with nice backgrounds that didn't immediately strike me as his work -admittedly I'm viewing the Quick Preview via a small window on the browser on my iPad...

I can't remember if I managed to fit the tactician in somewhere, but one of the psychic warrior paths is a direct nod to the marksman class. Furthermore, the psychic warrior has a dread archetype while the psion has a vitalist and wilder archetype. I didn't convert any class that doesn't use psionic manifesting because I rather like the soulknife that DSP made and saw no reason that the aegis needed an update.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
cartmanbeck wrote:

Oh I mean, I understand that people like those characters and want to play them, but I just think we already have SOOO many characters available as pregen options. It's already overwhelming for new players when they want to sit down at a table and you hand them a binder full of options.

As far as the ACG ones go, I normally don't even offer them to newbies as options... they're too complex for that. So those are the pregens that I choose if I sit down at a pregen-only scenario or if I happen to not have a character in the right level range (doesn't happen often since I have over 30 characters...).

Actually, I've had new players come in and ask to play a witch and an alchemist respectively because they liked the name and wanted to try the class out. The look of defeat on their faces when I told them that they didn't exist was, well, troubling.

I think that some of the above language regarding their absence was harsh, but I do think that a pregen for each class really should exist. Especially because over half of the classes currently in the game have pregens.

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Fun, but these cards are WAY too tame for Cards Against Humanity. Allow me....

BLACK CARDS
— "What is guaranteed to make John Compton cry at the gaming table?"
— "Man, f*** this s***. I just spent four hours playing the new Thurston Hillman scenario and there wasn't a single instance of _______."
— "Pathfinder Society is ruined forever. They just announced that they'll be adding ________ to the Guide to Organized Play."
— "What did I socket into my wayfinder?"
— "What is the motto of the Pathfinder Society? (PICK 3)"
— "Why are we going to the Blakros Museum this time?"

WHITE CARDS
— A forum suggestion that's actually racism.
— The sexual appetites of Zarta Draelin.
— Kreigton Shane, dancing naked in a library with a crocodile.
— Drendle Dreng, watching you sleep.
— Janira Galvix and that charming way that she won't shut the f*** up.
— A crane style monk wearing a jingasa with the fortunate soldier who does sick back flips and solos scenarios.
— Grandmaster Torch, naked in a bathtub.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ghostwasp wrote:
Has anyone else noticed that advanced armor training can be taken at 7th level and on, but most of the actual abilities seem to start before that and gain additional bonuses at 7th. Should AAT start at 3rd then, or do the abilities need to rewritten to accommodate the level changes?

Its written that way because you can take AAT earlier via the Advanced Armor Training feat.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Hopefully this will be useful for those who wish to rescue dragons from princesses.
What about Linnorms?!!

If a linnorm has taken your princess, she's probably already dead.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Dumb question Mark—do the rules ever say anywhere what happens when someone beats your Disguise check result with an opposed Perception check? I looked through the Core Rulebook and Ultimate Intrigue and couldn't find anything.

Do they know that you're disguised? Do they know what you really are? What if you're magically transformed via polymorph?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
TheAlicornSage wrote:

What do you think of bronies*?

*Bronies are the mostly adult male fans of Friendship is Magic, the latest My Little Pony series (significantly different from earlier series)

I know what bronies are.

I think that they're admirable and brave in embracing their fandom—a fandom that often gets them ridiculed, but they remain fans in the face of that ridicule. And I've yet to see a bronie lash out against My Little Pony in the way that, say, fans of Game of Thrones lash out at George R. R. Martin, or fans of Star Wars lash out at the idea of a female lead in a movie, or fans of Pathfinder lashing out at us fixing a broken rule. Maybe it's because I'm not that deeply involved in My Little Pony—maybe there ARE bronies who are toxic to their own fandom—but that's not my perception.

Anyway. My Little Pony isn't my thing, but more power to the bronies for finding something they love. We should all be so lucky, and we should all be so willing to be ourselves. Same goes for ANY fandom or religion or culture or society. It's a hard ideal to live up to—being accepting of all sorts of different interests, and its certainly something even that we here at Paizo need to keep working on. We're getting there, though, thankfully!

That's a really inspiring way to look at the group. I'm not part of their fandom either, but I found your commentary to be refreshing amidst a culture that seems to embrace the idea of, "If its not for me, it must be bad and the people who like it must be weirdos that I should ridicule."

+1 for James Jacobs!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
zergtitan wrote:
Does anybody know when this product page will be updated?

When Pharasma wills it.

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chris Lambertz wrote:
Kicked it once again, that should have corrected that problem :)

All hail Chris Lambertz, fixer of all that is borked! :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.

We got our first stretch goal last night! Next one is at $4,850, which is just $330 away!

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Had some players play the new We Be Goblins game today. It doesn't appear to have been added to the event reporting page, so I'm unable to report their game at this time.

Any idea when it will be added?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Luthorne wrote:
shadowhntr7 wrote:
So, I wanted to ask people's understanding of the Agathiel ability: it says he gains "unusual traits that set him apart from ordinary animals". The way it's worded, I can see it either giving one additional ability ('unusual traits') beyond what the animal would normally give with beast shape 1, or just 1 ability the animal would have and nothing else. Thoughts?
I think it's pretty clear that they initially get only one of the abilities the animal would have and nothing else beyond the usual things you get from a polymorph spell (such as natural attacks, base land speed, etc.); the unusual traits are probably the absence of these extra abilities. Of course, as they level up, they get access to more.

"Unusual traits that set him apart from ordinary animals," is cosmetic. Like having green fur.

Teen titans was my favorite animated cartoon....


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Eric Hinkle wrote:
Luthorne wrote:
jedi8187 wrote:

Is the Agathiel archetype basically a specialization (Like Warlock and Zealot) or is can it still pick avenger/stalker specialization? What does it trade, and what does it gain?

I really like the idea of this archetype

The agathiel alters dual identity and trades out the 2nd, 4th, 8th, 12th, and 16th level vigilante talents. Specialization is not affected.

It gains a restriction as to alignment, Aspect of the Beast as a bonus feat while in vigilante form, and the ability to imitate an animal that later turns in the ability to transform into one indefinitely, though they don't gain ability bonuses and only a limited number of abilities, though these increase as they level up.

I have to say, it seems like the agathiel archetype loses an awful lot of its talents.

Yeah, at-will indefinite-duration shapeshifting tends to do that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Barachiel Shina wrote:
*Sigh* We're never going to get generalized prestige classes like we did in Advanced Player's Guide, again, are we?

Buy ALL the copies of this product. The more support you show products with Prestige Classes in them, the more likely you are to see more products with more Prestige Classes in them.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kurald Galain wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:


Arguments that are flat-out wrong shouldn't be factored into discussions of whether an ability is OP or not.
But we're not discussing whether it's OP; there's different forums for that. We're discussing whether it should be allowed in PFS. Since it (1) causes arguments, (2) encourages cookie-cutter characters, and (3) is a straight power boost at zero cost, I believe the ban was well justified.

Saying its a power increase at zero cost isn't exactly true. The cost is either a bloodline feat or your 3rd-level bloodline power.

As for encouraging cookie-cutter characters, I don't know if that's necessarily true either. I can only speak for my area, but unless someone's playing a kitsune enchanter, there are almost no routinely-played sorcerers in my lodge. (That was part of my pitch for the bloodline mutation mechanic originally, in fact.)

I think it could help to foster an identity for the sorcerer as, "the blastiest caster who ever blasted," but I don't know if that's necessarily true either. I would love to see some evidence that proves me otherwise, however. (I.e. don't just talk it—show it.)

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


Tengu drew me in to PFS play.

I'm sure others with nagajii, kitsune, wayang, or aasimar/tiefling races could say the same thing.

Excluding 'game-breaking' races (or putting them in 'boon' status) keeps the proportions decent enough.

I agree.

Ryan Costello famously got me to try PFS by giving me two of his vulpine-blooded boons from several previous GenCons that he had GMed at. About a month later (after I used my first boon on my first character) the addition of kitsune, Nagaji, and wayangs happened.

I was struggling with learning the differences between organized play and home games, and was feeling pretty frustrated with the difference. The race change was a large factor in my decision to keep playing PFS, and now it's the primary way I play Pathfinder.

In the long run, I think telling people that, "Yes, you can do the thing," is more attractive to new players then, "You need to play a while and have been around when they were giving this out." I know that Blizzard's constant need to make things exclusive for their raiding elite in World of Warcraft has been a similar source of frustration for men in that game.

Quote:
'Choice-shock' is not as much of a thing as one might expect after a scenario or two, and having a requirement of needing the source material does provide an incentive to acquire said source material as well as put a bit of a damper on too much of a given race.

I agree here too. I think choice shock mostly happens to people who understand the nuances of all those choices. New players are going to choose the concept that sounds coolest to them (or looks coolest, in the case of Pregens.)


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
Can I get a summary of Scribe's Binding?
** spoiler omitted **
... I now have awesome ideas for Character backstories.

My original pitch to Owen for that spell was, "Imagine evil wizards who keep entire libraries of trapped people to access their knowledge whenever they want."

It can basically turn any library into the more secure prison ever built.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
Is there anything that made anyone say "wow," or a one sentence pitch why I should buy this book?

I was particularly proud of the vigilante social talents I wrote for this one, personally. From an option that lets you use nearly any mental skill to make money (no Perception or Sense Motive—that's it) to an option that lets you take an intrigue-themed feat instead of a social talent, the number of non-noble social vigilante character concepts you can now realize is staggering.

Also, I think the scribe's binding spell is one of my most favorite things I've ever written ever.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I'm against other players and GMs trying to make calls that could affect what other people at the table can and cannot play. Its more fun to have choice then to not have choice, and if you don't like a character that someone brings to the table, don't play or run with them.

But just because you don't like that character for its race / class / whatever doesn't mean that it'll ever be time for that race / class / whatever to be removed if it isn't actively breaking the game. So I pretty much agree with the OP on all fronts.

From an in-game roleplaying perspective, it doesn't look particularly good for the society if interest in membership constantly cycles around. It would be a good example of a campaign mechanic that removes choice from players without a good in-world reason and without actually being fun.

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.
DM Beckett wrote:

I'd actually rather see the races swapped out, or at least the Kitsune which just really irk me for whatever reason. But, one thing thats bugged me is the idea that the Kitsune, Nagaji, and Wayang where introduced as player options was because the fit well with being introduced into the setting lore and Pathfinder Society.

I know where the Nagaji and Wayang Scenarios "introduce" the two races, but seems a stretch to say they rushed to join the ranks of the Society, or that there was some sort of story reason involved. The Kitsune, though, I have no idea? Its possible I missed something though in regards to all three.

However, I do know that both the Ratfolk and the Grippli have had multiparty arcs that do make for so much better story reason for them to join the Pathfinder Society, and it really doesn't follow that, barring a few squeaky wheels complaining, that either Aasimar or Tieflings would simply stop being interested after the events relating to the Worldwound. Heck, you would think they would become even more common, and it makes even more sense.

Did I miss something?

It has nothing to do with Red Harvest or Haunting of Hinojai and everything to do with the Lantern Lodge.

At the end of Season 4, the Lantern Lodge faction completed its primary faction objective, which was to establish a pervasive Pathfinder Society Presence in Tian Xia. The addition of kitsune, nagaji, and wayangs into the society at large are a result of the Lantern Lodge's continued efforts to promote the Society in Tian Xia.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Luthorne wrote:
You masquerade as one of your social identities (in short, probably your non-vigilante self) as some chosen corporeal undead, like a vampire, a ghoul, or even a zombie. Which is up to you. As for usefulness, that depends on your game. You could pose as a zombie to try and close in on a necromancer not expecting to be attacked by a mindless undead Assassin's Creed style, or if you had chosen a vampire, you could potentially go undercover, using Linguistics and Bluff to perhaps pose as foreign vampire nobility or somesuch if there was a vampire aristocracy to infiltrate, and so on and so forth.

When I wrote guise of undeath, I had human vigilantes working in Geb in mind.

The idea for guise of life was "vampire vigilantes in Ustalav."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Lore Warden Fighter with two selections of the adaptable training Advanced Weapon Training ability.

Now you have 4 + Int skill ranks from your class, plus four skills that you count as having a number of ranks in equal to your BAB. You are basically a rogue. Enjoy!

1 to 50 of 1,219 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.