KaeYoss's page

KaeYoss wrote:

cranewings wrote:

It depends on the maturity of the group. If I think there are players that will have hurt feelings getting less, then I do group XP.

So you pretend that doing individual XP is more mature?

Yeah. I think it takes maturity to get graded on individual merit. Some people don't like losing. Group XP glosses over the idea that some people have better ideas or try harder.

So the guy who has optimised better will get more XP? And the more damage you deal/enemies you fell, the more XP you get?

And that lady said "let them eat cake".

Bunch of liars, the bunch of them!

I'm sure others will probably take up the challenge and will likely do far more of a professional job, but for now I have slapped together: www.pathfinderminis.com

Not bad!

Some ideas: First, the title says "index" for every page. I *demand* (and by "demand", I mean "request") some more telling titles.

Second, in the lists, the "Unknown Rarity" could be put in italics, maybe with brackets around them, to show more that we don't have the information yet. And/or have each rarity with its own style to let it jump out at people? Common is normal, Uncommon is bold, rare is bold & red. Or something.

Third, that chimera pic is old - it's the one without wings. Go and doodle some wings on, for Pete's sake ;-P

And maybe put in information about what sort of picture we're seeing, i.e. digital preview, master, etc. And maybe have all pics in case we have more than one kind of pic (like with the starter set heroes).

Oh, and: More cowbell!

Oh, by all means, sell him permanent cat's grace. Along with a bag of magic beans and the deeds to the Irespan.

Thanks for the help, mate. You may just have single handedly opened up the wizard class for me. I've always sworn off of them for the headache making a spellbook was. Cheers!

The spellbook is only as much headache as you allow it to be. For example, the number of pages in a book, and when you need the next physical book for the collection that is usually referred to as "the spellbook" never came up in our games. And sure, it is one of those papery things that aren't too fond of water and fire, but we just assume that the wizard takes some precautions - just like we assume that the fighter will sharpen and oil his blade and polish his armour. This stuff is just too boring to bring up in regular RPG conversation, so we keep it out.

Plus, all that is not very expensive, so why not just handwave it?

The only thing you need to know beyond that you get all 0-level spells, 3+int 1st-level spells on 1st wizard level, and then 2 extra spells of any level you can cast on each further wizard level is that it takes spelllevel² * 10gp and spellevel * 1 hour to add to those freebies.

Given the history of the game, a new edition doesn't necessarily mean incompatibility. oD&D, basic D&D, and both editions of AD&D are all pretty compatible with one another. 3rd and 4th edition are the two outliers in that area, but I don't think it's a given that a new edition of Pathfinder would want to go that way and rebuild the system from the ground up. Sure, certain items would have to change dramatically (such as the Stealth rules, which are already being tweaked), but the system as it stands now is solid. There are areas where options can be added and clunky rules can be streamlined, of course, but no areas that I see that scream out a desperate need for an overhaul.

I don't think they'll rebuild everything from scratch. It won't be a whole new system. However, I think that some of the subsystems will get a significant overhaul.

For example, for a lot of people, the way 3e/PF handles magic items is unsatisfactory. Personally, I don't mind it too much, but I would also welcome a change to make magic items mostly unnecessary, if and when a new edition comes around. I wouldn't be surprised at all if PF2e changes things in a way that many basic kinds of magic items are neither present nor required. That means you might get a sword that does fire damage rather than physical, flying carpets, and the like, there won't be belts of strength, +X weapons, cloaks of resistance and the like, and the system will be adjusted so the CR assumptions will reflect this.

I'd consider this quite an overhaul, requiring a retooling of many numbers (and thus probably making old monsters and encounters unusable without some work), but it won't be a new game.

Other changes I wouldn't be surprised about include:
A system that better incorporates multiclassing so multiclassed characters are neither too powerful nor too weak. Maybe something that separates class abilities advancement and basic abilities (i.e. HD, BAB, saves, skill points) advancement so you have, say, 10 HD but the class abilities of both 8th-level fighter and 8th-level wizard. Or something.

Tying into the multiclassing part, a more unified magic part. Maybe one of the "basic abilities" will be caster level" so even though your spellcasting abilities are those of an 8th-level wizard and 8th-level cleric, your caster level will be 10.

Can it be taken on a Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate check....

Gut feeling says no unlike Perception ("don't see it...don't see it...ah its under that rock")

Leaving out Gather Information, neither of these things will really be eligible for Take 20 because Take 20 basically means failing 19 times (the first attempts badly) before succeeding, and all three skills tend to have consequences for failure.

You basically make 20 attempts, in order: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Imagine Bluff. The teacher asks you if you did your homework (which you did not) and, in case you didn't (which is the case), why that is.

Has everyone done his homework?

1: NO! Uh, I mean, yes, of course (sweats profusely, falling out of chair out of nervousness)
2. Yes. But... ALIENS stole it. I swear it's true. They walked in and took them, saying they need it to defeat Emperor of Space Slarg. I swear if even one word I said is true I may be struck down by god. (the lamp falls from the cealing and hits you in the face)
And so on. Around 6 or so is "my dog ate it".
At 20, you indeed give an excuse that would have swayed the teacher (something about your grandmother falling down and breaking several bones right in front of you, which forced you, of course, to get help, but you don't have a phone and your parents weren't home, so it took time for you to get an ambulance, and of course it was really harrowing all around, so naturally you were in no state to make homework).

I said "would have", because after sitting through 19 lies - many of them way beyond ridiculous, he is not inclined to start believing you, since you obviously kept trying excuses until one worked - otherwise you would have told him about your grandmother at once.

Intimidate is similar, while you might eventually come up with the idea to insinuate that by the time the guard has been called, his blood would already have run out and his sweet little daughter would have been misused in more ways than her young mind could ever recover from (or something similarly intimidating that will convince the guy that you're not to be trifled with), you started with "do what I want or I run away crying and complain to my mother about you!" (We're not talking about children intimidating one another here, but about, say, a racketeer gathering protection money for the Outfit or whatever.) And he laughed you out of the store before calling the guard on you, the thought that you could be dangerous never once crossing his mind.

With diplomacy, observe that failure has a penalty, too: Failing an attempt to improve one's attitude towards you by too much and you actually make matters worse. So you want to woo the subject of all your desires. Take 20 doesn't work. The 20 might eventually constitute saying exactly the right thing in the right tone to make her fall in love with you, you start with something like "You're not too ugly, I think I could stick it to you without having to fight back the vomit too much, so get naked and let's get it over with, you pig in heat" In other words, she'll go from politely ignoring you to tasing some of the more tender bits of your anatomy while calling the police.

So even if you took the 20 days it takes to make 20 attempts to change someone's attitude (only one per day), it won't work.

Requests cannot be repeated at all (though I'd say you could always up the odds by offering better compensation. That would probably be a different request, though).

Gather Information can work, but note that this will take 20d4 hours.

IMC Svetlana is a widow and doesn't even know it yet. Oleg was murdered by a Skinstealer, an agent of Nyrissa, to infiltrate the PC's kingdom and be in a position of power from which to cause problems for them (Oleg is the Kingdom treasurer). Thus far he has not been discovered, as he is being cautious, but down the road he'll grow to become more bold and the margin for his discovery will widen.

Let me guess: And Svetlana has been a skinstealer since shortly after their marriage. One day soon one of the "couple" will kill the other, the victim will revert to its true shape, and the murderer will feel a right fool for killing a fellow shapeshifter!

Kor - Orc Scrollkeeper wrote:

Lizard Champion???

This looks like a half donkey - half sahuagin mini!

Unfortunately you'll have to wait until the upcoming Low Tide Love Children set for the half-donkey/half-sahuagin.

The Burro and the Brinesmaid?

Yeah, at first glance it doesn´t seem to make sense,

´inheriting the arcane power of orcs´ doesn´t really work.
I see it more as ´Arcane Bloodline: Orc Specialization´,
inheriting the power of Orcish Spellcasters, who (apparently)
focused on evocation, enlarge person, STR boosts, that type of thing.
Probably Orcish Sorcerory would be better, but that probably would sound redundant as well
(Sorceror Bloodline: Orcish Sorcery)

I'm not even hung up about it being a bloodline. I tend use a broader definition of the "sorcerer specialisations" that happen to be called "bloodlines". Sometimes it's in the blood (ancestral) but sometimes it's about some circumstance of your life, birth, or evens leading up to your birth. A fey sorcerer, for example, might have a dryad grandmother. Or he might have been taken along to one of the legendary fairy revels where you stumble out of the woods afterwards to find out that while you remember only one night, a hundred years have passed in the real world. Or he was born/conceived in an enchanted wood (or his mother spent most of her pregnancy in one).

Even considering all that, an orc bloodline doesn't make sense. There are no bloodlines for the more common races like humans or elves, after all. Why not?

If you say that these races aren't generally "magical" enough to have a bloodline, why do orcs get one? They're probably less magical than any of the seven basic races, including dwarves. Gnomes and then elves should have gotten bloodlines first, since they are magical races - gnomes having their own flavour of fairy influence (what with talking to animals and being really good at illusions), and elves being generally good at magic (with elven magic and their immunities).

Sure, you could say that fey works for gnomes and arcane works for elves, but why do they get a general treatment and orcs get a special one?

In fact, it would have been a lot more useful if we had a "brute" bloodline. Then the "power of giants" ability would have made more sense (How do orc sorcs get the power of giants? Just what kind of depraved and disgusting orgy were their parents involved in?)

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

KaeYoss wrote:

No one makes fun of Artifact-in-sword-form-that-searches-for-the-true-path

Nor of Dagger-shaped-bearer-of-fire-that-burns-like-ice.

You two get stacks of Langosh and a bottle each of K'aaven for your references. And I promise to not use "remover-of-aspects-of-deity" on you when the revolting Teckla rise. ;)

You pretend that you promise? This statement meets with my great approval. Among my reasons for levity following your statements include your promise of great wine and the savings I make for not having to hire Mario to put a shine on you just in case. (If it puts you at ease: It would have been a warning shine. I'm not one to carry grudges)

Do you have/are you an industry source, or is this simply standard procedure?

Paizo CEO Lisa Stevens herself said so. Follow this LINK.

Unless the design goals change, I imagine that any new edition of Pathfinder would have backwards compatibility as one of the goals of the system.

I think that design goal will change.

PFRPG (1e) is basically a revision. It's 3eRR, or 3.75, if you want. It's not quite where new editions of D&D went. It was not meant to, because the current edition's time was not yet up (by current edition, I mean 3e). All it needed was fine-tuning, which Pathfinder delivered.

I think that when PFRPG 2e comes along, it will be like a new edition:

The old rules will probably not be compatible (at least not without non-trivial work). However, it will not be a new game either, i.e. the spirit of the rules will be kept.

The reason for the latter part ("spirit compatibility") is that many feel that 4e has failed at it and went to Paizo and their game because Paizo succeeded at it. They won't be eager to annoy their fans by going the same route.

I imagine playing 1st edition rules with these theoretical second edition modules would be about as easy as playing 3.5 rules with current modules - some conversion issues, but overall pretty easy to handle.

I don't think they'll do another "revision"-type edition that only does fine-tuning. I'd say that if they go and make a new edition, they'll go the whole nine yards and make the fixes they think the game needs, even if the rules aren't compatible any more.

I agree, the orc bloodline doesn't make a lot of sense. Orcs aren't very magical creatures - they're humanoids who tend to like brute force a lot better. It's a humanoid race with a mostly martial bend. There should have been bloodlines for other humanoid races first - especially elves and gnomes.

The end of the adventure, imo, is too long to wait if you are using the XP system. An adventure can span weeks to months real-time.

It depends on what one considers to be an adventure. How long is an adventure? When does it end?

If it's adventure as in "one Pathfinder Adventure Path book", it certainly is too long - not only because of the lack of progress in character development, but also because not levelling up will simply kill you. A written adventure assumes you level up during the adventure. Try to play one of those while staying on the same level the whole time. You start on level 1, stay on level 1, and then face a level 6 enemy who would have been quite a challenge for the level 3 party but will simply eradicate you.

Not that your chances of getting that far are that high....

And in general, I also prefer a new level after, say, 3 sessions at the most. Especially when we're talking about average levelling speed, as things tend to slow down the higher you get.

KaeYoss wrote:

By the way, two esses at the start of a name are always a dead giveaway. :D

Unless it's a yuan-ti/ophidian/snake-person.

No, because they actually use it all the time. They think that makes them clever, the snaky bastards.

They really need to make a 1d6 bomb discovery so vivisects can get in on the fun too. It wont do the raw damage that an alchemist that studies bombs would, but it would open up the ability to use later discoveries like smoke bombs and such that directly aid sneak attacking.

Cake. Have it or eat it.

KaeYoss wrote:

It's like listening to someone from Airbus ranting about "The Ambassador" and then pointing out he could have meant a representative to a foreign country, a ship from Star Trek or one of the cars of that name.

[sniper voice] Or that bloody overpowered revolver that coward of a Spy uses, what a wanka. [/sniper voice]

Doktor!

Hm... I think I'll pass the time until MMHVI arrives with a bit of TF2.

KaeYoss wrote:

Ssendam? Really? That is protected?

What about his friends? You know, Cinam Tib A, Yzarc Tiuq, Enasni Yllatot and, of course, their supreme ruler, Tihstab Yletelpmoc?

...

I know you weren't serious, but thank you. I only just now saw how they got Ssendam as a name. Though considering several of the other names used in the older editions, it should of been obvious.

At your service. Teaching things by making fun of them since 19-something ;-)

By the way, two esses at the start of a name are always a dead giveaway. :D

And seeing how often it is used, I almost made it a habit to check whether things that sound the least bit suspicious aren't just backwards. I'm looking at you, Alucard.

I greatly annoyed a GM when I quickly caught on to his major NPC "Natas Ino" (though that one was so easy the whole group saw through it at once. GM suddenly felt a lot less smart and innovative :D)

Kor - Orc Scrollkeeper wrote:

Any plans to release previews of the individual minis?

They've been doing that each Friday on the blog. Or were you hoping for something different? I'm not familiar with what WotC did.

They showed pictures and talked about the skirmish stats and rarity.

Since there are no skirmish stats for the PFB figures, Paizo can't talk about them.

Dragnmoon wrote:

It is called Pathfinder Battles Heroes & Monsters.

That was a comment on Wizards of the Coast originally leaving gnomes out of the players guide and including them as monsters with lairs in 4e.

Well, that's the difference between wizards and Paizo, perfectly illustrated by the gnome situation: wizards made them monsters, Paizo made them interesting. ;-P

What will be the relative frequency of the various rarities? Are 'sealed cases' intended to have a more even distribution than random? Is it reasonable to expect 3 of each common, 2 of each uncommon, and one of each rare (all +/- 1)in a case, for example? Could we even expect a consisted distribution of each rarity, or would it be unsound to make any predictions about a sample as small as a case?

Yes. The cases will be seeded, so that you get as even a distribution of miniatures as possible - at least, that is the plan, and their intention is to have all cases be this way. The problem is that the seeding and packing is done by humans, and those bastards aren't perfect and will make errors no matter how hard you hit them ;-).

In the first set (Heroes and Monsters), one case should give you a complete set (barring the occasional human error where they, I don't know, accidentally leave out a kobold and instead put in a huge black dragon, they look so alike).

With later sets, it's likely that one case won't give you a full set (which means that statistics being the b@#!* they are, no amount of cases will ever guarantee you a full set)

I could handle a reboot as long as the reboot was very similar to PF. But the DnD 4e reboot was very different from 3.5 and who knows how similar a 5e reboot will be? Which in itself is okay I suppose. But the problem with a reboot to a very different ruleset is that none of the creative stuff we imagined under the old ruleset is applicable under the new ruleset.

I won't repeat the "PF will be around for 10 years before there will be a new edition" reassurances that Paizo themselves have given.

Damn, I just did.

Anyway, I want to address the part I quoted. 4e did indeed change in a more extreme way than any other edition. Other editions invalidated rules. 4e invalidated stories (they even had to butcher their Flagship campaign setting to make it fit the new rules).

I highly doubt Pathfinder will ever do this. Look at how it transitioned from 3.5 to PF without doing it. PF2e will probably come one day, and might even be more than a bit different from PF1e - but it will remain similar enough that you can still tell all the old stories.

Overheard in the "Monster Catcher's Diner and Bar"
"My steak is rather smaller than usual."
"I'm terribly sorry, but this week the adventuring group lost."

Joana wrote:

Gary Teter wrote:

I too would like a cite for this. The only relevant posts I can find are you retelling this tale. Not saying it didn't happen, but it sounds really unlikely to me.

Link

Cheers. I guess it's harder to find someone more "from Paizo" than James Jacobs. :)

I'm still surprised, but I missed all the context. When I read his comment I wonder if he meant 'it wasnt a jab', rather than 'it wasnt subtle'.

I'm quite sure James meant that it wasn't subtle in any way. It was an allusion to 4e, but it was all meant in good fun.

Gary Teter wrote:

I too would like a cite for this. The only relevant posts I can find are you retelling this tale. Not saying it didn't happen, but it sounds really unlikely to me.

Link

Thanks for that, I probably wouldn't have found it.

It depends on the maturity of the group. If I think there are players that will have hurt feelings getting less, then I do group XP.

So you pretend that doing individual XP is more mature?

Ssendam? Really? That is protected?

What about his friends? You know, Cinam Tib A, Yzarc Tiuq, Enasni Yllatot and, of course, their supreme ruler, Tihstab Yletelpmoc?

Just be glad that TSR didn't copyright the class names "fighter," "cleric", and "mage".

I hear they once tried to do that with "dragon". Apparently, they had a particularly dislikeable boss once.

Shadowborn wrote:

Let me adjust the question in your title a bit:

Why shouldn't all forms of government be a meritocracy in the real world?

Because Chuck Norris would be Supreme Ruler of the Universe?

You pretend he isn't?

Will we/ could we get a video of the unveiling of the large and standard boosters when the figures are ready? Much like the beginner box. Just wondering...

Bah. I demand a video of the unveiling of a whole case! ;-P

Ringtail wrote:

Wizard dipping 1 level of sorcerer?

Why would a wizard deign to sully himself with polluted blood like that? Perhaps a sorcerer with a 19 level dip into wizard as a attempt to overcome the handicaps of his birth.

You arcanists, and spellcasters in general, amuse me. Squabbling over what external source their power comes from when it doesn't matter. True power comes from within! Ψ on!

The painted version of the orcs will be interesting to see.

Those hussies!

Slow and steady should not cost a thing - but neither should you get extra points for it.

And the current implementation is very weird: It only works if you're medium. Yes, being large a and slow really sucks now!

I guess it will be changed again - you can either have normal for 0, slow for -1 or fast for 1. And then, there is a "...and steady" trait that you can add that costs 1 point.

Gotta cook'em all?

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

KaeYoss wrote:

No one makes fun of Artifact-in-sword-form-that-searches-for-the-true-path

Nor of Dagger-shaped-bearer-of-fire-that-burns-like-ice.

OT: I always wanted a Magical-Wand-That-Creates-Death-in-the-Form-of-a-Black-Sword. :-)

It seems that to get this item, you must be prophesied to get it one day, and also be naive about what your actual species is.

Because "Pathfinder" can only mean "Paizo"? What about: Pathfinder or Pathfinder

There are thousands of other "Pathfinders" out there. There's people stumbling through woods, certain weapon systems, Great Weapons (well, one).

However, making the link from one RPG to another rather than to a car or a missile isn't that far fetched...

It's like listening to someone from Airbus ranting about "The Ambassador" and then pointing out he could have meant a representative to a foreign country, a ship from Star Trek or one of the cars of that name. Someone saying that he's talking about Airspeed isn't that far-fetched.

Lordofkhybr wrote:

In Mordenkainen's Magnificent Emporium there is a passage about a Pathfinder story item and it throws in a bunch of stuff like "torturous passages, bleak, empty expanses" and things like that.

Isn't it enough that we have to read the edition wars online? Now we have to put up with them in our splatbooks!

Didn't read the whole thread. I find it unlikely there was any jab, as the people at the companies get along quite well. It's the players who insist on fanning up this whole edition war thingy, when really we should all be focused on good games and having fun.

I said it before and I'll say it again - probably the next time this comes up: The fact that they are on such good terms would not necessarily be a deterrent. They could poke fun at each other all in good fun, something they wouldn't do if they weren't best buddies.

And it has definitely happened before: In Shadow in the Sky, there is a jab at 4e, one which Paizo even admitted to. In that module, there is a hell-themed casino event, with waitresses dressed as succubi. The module goes on to say that (the casino owner) knows succubi aren't devils, but he's only interested in more money.

Someone from Paizo admitted that it was a jab at 4e (and how succubi were suddenly devils in there), and since Paizo and many of the developers over at wotc are friends, it can't be anything other than a friendly jab.

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

KaeYoss wrote:

No one makes fun of Artifact-in-sword-form-that-searches-for-the-true-path

Nor of Dagger-shaped-bearer-of-fire-that-burns-like-ice.

I first read that as bottle-shaped-bearer-of-fire-that-burns-like-ice and thought "Mmmm, peppermint schnapps."

Serioli Liquor - It's soul-shattering good!

It's just payback because Paizo released an adventure that featured an evil wizard who lived near the beach. Paizo had it coming.

Bah, that was coincidence.

Though I think the 30-page supplementary article about torture methods especially suited for wizards and using said wizard as narrative example might have been a bit over the top... ;-P

To quote Charlie Sheen: "Winning!"

To quote the world: "Go snort some more coke, Carlos! Your father would be spinning in his grave, were he dead."

With newer game systems, people tend to earn the same amount of XP, or very close to it

What systems do you mean, exactly? I get the impression you're talking about 3e and Pathfinder especially.

I admit that I don't know or play too many systems, but most systems move away, or have moved away, from classes and levels. There, you only get a handful of XP and use them to directly increase your abilities. In those systems, you can't help to get (nearly) the same XP ;-P.

, but back in the days of each character class leveling up at a different amount of XP and the old 10% bonus XP with a high enough primary stat, it was rare for characters to have the same amount of XP.

Now I'm all but sure you speak of AD&D 2e. I'd say that system was a mess, but that would be an understatement. It's a whole herd of messes all rolled into one.

Also, note that in that system, being several levels apart wasn't as bad as it is now.

Unfortunately, many GMs running 3e or PF are still locked in that mindset, not realising that here, it can and will lead to problems.

KaeYoss wrote:

Even when I still had XP, I had everyone on equal footing when it came to XP. I didn't do "roleplaying XP" or anything else to reward certain kinds of behaviour - you do this to have fun, so you do what is fun to you. If you don't like immersing yourself in a character, don't do it. I'm not giving out treats to dogs I'm training here.

Who's a good boy?

Can I have their treats?

I'll roll over and let you tickle my tummy.

I don't have any more treats - my players ate them all - and if you want someone to "tickle your tummy", or anything else, you're at the wrong place with me. I tell you the same thing as I told the guy who seemed to go exploring the Stolen Lands with the intention of revelling in debauchery: You need religious succour. Go to a temple of Calistria and tell them I sent you.

The art of Svetlana makes her look so soft and cute, and there are sooo few women in the first adventure if you don't add in your own, it is almost like the module is daring a PC to seduce a married woman. :)

Any adventurer who takes on a job exploring empty wilderness and expects the hot chicks will stand in line to be seduced by him needs to get his head examined. It seems that an orcish warsword has been lodged in it for some time. :P

For the record, the closest it came in my game is that the party alchemist, Kalen, who gets a crush on virtually every female character, and some of the male ones, predictably crushed on Svetlana, too.

He seems in serious need of religious succour. Tell him to seek the nearest temple of Calistria and tell'em I sent him.

I'm not talking about Gasault or however you spell it

I spell it Gestalt. So do most other people, if they do spell it. Some don't. Spell it, that is.

Why would a tome have a lot of cursed items? Or any at all?

No one makes fun of Artifact-in-sword-form-that-searches-for-the-true-path

"I have always been here"

As for when to hand out: I used to hand it out right after the encounter. If you levelled up, you got new stuff right away, except new spell slots, which weren't filled yet/already expended.

Nowadays I hand-wave it and call the level-ups - I play APs and they have "advancement tracks" which are originally to tell you whether you're on the right track, but incidentally are great if you want to do away with XP.

Even when I still had XP, I had everyone on equal footing when it came to XP. I didn't do "roleplaying XP" or anything else to reward certain kinds of behaviour - you do this to have fun, so you do what is fun to you. If you don't like immersing yourself in a character, don't do it. I'm not giving out treats to dogs I'm training here.

Who's a good boy?

I think theirs is a marriage of convenience. It does seem she followed him into the wild.

And she tasks the explorers with finding special radishes for his favourite meal and will pay them royally, just to lighten him up.

So with that in mind, I'd say it would be at least a 20, maybe higher, and probably more than one roll to get her to to cheat on her husband. And if the roll fails by too much, Svetlana - and probably Oleg - will not be too fond of them.

And it doesn't matter that he barbarian without diplomacy has little to no chance to succeed. If he wants to be the great seducer, he need charm. If charming/charismatic isn't what his character is like, he's simply not cut out for this.

The halfling wizard doesn't whine about how he can't arm-wrestle the Tarrasque.

I mean, if everything is tailored to the characters' abilities, why have abilities at all? Just let them roll a regular die, and when they roll 4 or better they succeed.

KaeYoss wrote:

Vic Wertz wrote:

However, note that if you had subscribed to the AP while Second Darkness was being released, you'd have paid $83.94 for those six volumes, plus (with your Pathfinder Advantage discount) another $8.49 for the Player Companion... *but* you'd have also received free PDFs of the AP volumes—another $83.94 in value—while the bundle didn't include any PDFs.

Wasn't the Pathfinder Companion (not yet a Player Companion) for Second Darkness a freebie for AP subscribers at the time?

You know, you're right, it was! So subscribers got *everything* in the bundle for $.06 less than people who bought it in the sale, plus they got the PDFs for free.

The world is a mollusc of our choice!

Plus, we got it considerably sooner than those bulky guys.