|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I find a high initiative most useful for characters that buff and those that use sneak attack. I know some people think that its the bees knees to have double digit initiative modifiers. When the majority of the baddies in scenarios have less than a +5 modifier, it then becomes trying to act before other party members and not just the baddies.
Most of my characters have a +3-6 initiative modifier. I do have one that is +14, but that was unintentional when the character was built (dex based Ifrit Inquisitor).
If I GM 5 games with a character (before playing said character at all), then decide to build something, can I assign a new faction card to said character and immediately check off all the boxes for GMing games, even though I didn't decide on a faction until after those games?
Guide to Organized Play pg 38 wrote:
youdo not need to build the character until you actually play it
So long as the character is only GM credit it shouldn't matter if you have five different ideas and what factions they were, it just matters what faction you are when you actually set down to play the character. Just make sure you have the proper card when you play.
How do these cards interact with 1st level rebuilds? If I change factions as part of my rebuild, do I lose all credit on the existing card (i.e. if I had, say 1 GM box checked, and I switch factions, can I move that GM box to the new card)? What if I change back? (i.e. start as Dark archives, check one box (doesn't matter which). Decide I don't like that idea, switch to Grand Lodge. Decide to completely rebuild character, now it fits in dark archives again. New card, or use old card?)
That is actually a really good question. I'm inclined to say no, because of the "no retroactive credit" and the "if you switch to a different faction you lose all credit on the current card" rules. However, I really don't think it should be that way, at least not to GM credit.
Personally, when I was told these were going to be created last Gencon I was so incredibly excited. I was told there they should be released sometime in oct/nov. So I patiently wanted. I checked the website around that time to see when the release date was, it was pushed backed to Jan. Since then the release date has been moved back to March and now May. That is 4 different releases. I am so incredibly disappointed by all of this. I understand that it is just face cards, but this has been the only new release I have been excited about in the 2014-2015 product line.
I have had a player take a talking, shrunken head from Skykeep, because he felt bad for it since it just looked at a wall all day. He then proceeded to go adventuring with it. When the character seekered out, it was passed on as an heirloom to his daughter (different # character). She now adventures with it.
I would say no, because each card says once per scenario. That is of course unless the goal says that it doesn't prevent you from checking another box (i.e. Grand Lodge adventuring in other nations goal)and neither of those goals allow that.
Please don't make the faction cards part of Core Campaign. Simplicity is the reason I'm so excited about the Core Campaign.
The faction cards are just something extra that each person can have their PC do if they want their character more involved with their faction. Since that is a the primary problem that people had when the faction missions were dissolved 1 1/2 years ago. With this in mind faction cards should be an option for CORE.
i do wonder why they dont update the venture captain list on the pdf as soon as things change instead of waiting for the full update
Because that list is updated very frequently. It changes pretty close to a weekly basis.
Right now, IT has it setup tp automatically update the organizer page whenever the settings are changed when someone is promoted or resigns as an officer. The list in the back of the guide is something that would have to be updated manually and there are things of higher priority that Paizo makes sure gets done before that.
Stefan Hill wrote:
If I was writing a PFS adventure what resources would I be allowed to use. Obviously PFS adventures aren't born, they are written and written under some assumptions. Those assumptions would form our groups limits on developing our non-PFS games, again, because we like the idea of PF CORE.
The authors were able to use any resources available that were not 3rd party. It is my understanding that the authors were not supposed to use information from more than 5 different books. However, that might change, because as of recent (past 2-3 months) the new scenarios have an appendix in the back of the scenario with all of the stat blocks of creatures not printed in the scenario.
Of course the older scenarios, season 0 and 1, are almost all core only, cause the other books were not published yet.
I would like to say this isn't going to happen, but this hasn't been the first time I have seen something like this. Someone asked which scenarios had wizards with pit spells on the Pathfinder Society Facebook Page.
I was not being dismissive of his lack of stars. I sometimes forget that there is other roleplaying other than PFS. He very well could GM for a home group and just play PFS. I have known many people who do that. However, he is talking about making the GMs at GenCon cry over how his character breaks the scenario. That greatly offends me. I have however GMd at GenCon the past 2 years. GMs get the specials and new scenarios (the events that are always filled) the weekend before the event. Giving 4-5 days for them to prepare. That is a huge time crunch for anyone, not including jobs.
Roleplaying should be fun for everyone invovled, not revolved around whether the character is broken enough that it makes it unenjoyable for the person running the game.
The OP is just a troll that hasn't GMd a single game of PFS. He doesn't care about the time and effort that GMs put into making any experience good, regardless as to whether it's at GenCon or not. All he cares about is "winning". So he can just have his fun and be proud trying to accumulate this list all by himself.
Michael Brock, Global Organized Play Coordinator wrote:
This is the evidence pertaining to Paths We Choose
Mike Brock wrote:
Mystic Lemur wrote:
And those aren't the same thing because...?
When people say dedicated charger they typically refer to a spirited charger with a lance. Beast Totem barbarian could 3 base attacks, 1 attack with haste, and any natural attacks (bite). So you are looking a 4+ attacks. So that's a bunch of extra dmg for 11,665gp.
Guide to Organized Play pg 33 wrote:
Season 0 scenarios were written under the 3.5 rules set of the world’s oldest roleplaying game, before the release of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. If a creature in the scenario also appears in the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary,Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 2, or Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 3 and maintains the same CR between both rules sets, you may use the Pathfinder RPG stats in place of the 3.5 stats. This is the only substitution allowed in these scenarios.
This particular scenario is written with 3.5 rules. Posions don't have a CR and since the DC and the effects are the same, it is just fine to use the updated version where the wording is a little clearer.
Blue Whinnis is a poison with initial and secondary effects. The initial (1 con dmg) happens when the the 1st fortitude save is failed. The secondary (unconscious 1d3 hrs) happens when the 2nd fortitude save is failed.
The PC will only ever take con dmg once.
After, the result of the first save is revealed and there is a request of course you know what to expect if the result is failed. Players will still give hesitation on whether they want to use the rolls if the save is close (low 20s). Typically, if something is casting the save-or-suck or save-or-die spells they have more then one. So if the save is close they still might want to save it.
This kinda situation happened to me just the other day. I dropped a 5 (for a 15) on a will save. My character made the spellcraft check to determine baleful polymorph had just been cast. Of course I used my reroll. My GM didn't need to ask. Of course the 15 failed and when I rerolled it was a 30. So this is pretty darn similar to the scenario the OP posted. I had a 10 will save I would not have elected to roll the way he suggested, I would have just banked on the +10 that the character had and failed and would have been turned into a rabbit.
I too have played under Chris Mortika and even till this day, his table of Haunting of Hinojai that I played 2 1/2 years ago was the best PFS experience I ever played or GMd. I try to make all of my tables that amazing. Every single of us was sitting in the edge of our chairs in suspense they entire time. Why, because we're in a haunted house and he's a great story teller. A lot of scenarios do not have to type of suspense. So I at least try to incorporate it in rerolls.
Cooperation, is the sole reason I play roleplaying games. I am not a fan of competitive games. So I do everything I possibly can to make the scenarios I run not be GM vs players. I know I do not like that as a player.
Disk Elemental wrote:
^that is stated no where. However, the guide does say this.
page 33 wrote:
As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and responsibility to make whatever judgements, within the rules, that you feel are necessary at your table to ensure everyone has a fair and fun experience.
I make my tables fun. Do I find it enjoyable if someone rerolls an already succeeded save and now they fail, yes. Does that make me a horrible GM, no. Players enjoy me as a GM. I do my upmost best to make sure players have a good time. I try to make scenarios I don't particularly like, the best ones ever written.
I, as a GM, take a different approach to low tier scenarios (softball)than I do high tier scenarios (Big Leagues). Why, because characters can afforded to be raised. Does this make me a bad GM, no. It me being realistic.
I already stated my wording was very poor. I whole heartedly agree that my initial post sounds very devious. Yes, I get players to use their rerolls. Sometimes they are necessary sometimes they are not. But isn't the whole purpose of the shirts and folios using them. More often then not they are just used on day jobs.
In this specific scenario, after you roll the will save and before the result of the save (fail or succeed) is determined, I would ask if you are happy with your roll. If I see hesitation, I will ask again.
Warhorn is also our go-to for signups. We try to have our main groups schedule (Saturdays) out a month in advance due to setting 8-10 tables in a day. The weekly schedule is usually only put out a week or two in advance. This seems to work well enough for weekdays since a lot of people just plan their weekday events at the beginning of the week.
Also, all of the organizers in our region have access to the spreadsheet that we keep track of everyone's play/GM records, to make it easier to plan. We try to make sure that there is at least one scenario for everyone to play.
Enforcing Warhorn has been our biggest hurdle, even though we have been doing it this way for 3 years. We seat new players first, then signups, then GMs, and finally walkups. Yes, some people have been turned away, although it doesn't happen very often. We had hoped once players get turned away, they would listen to us and sign up on Warhorn. Some people got the hint, others just refuse. Most of our GMs pack an extra low level scenario just in case.
The issue here is that you are deliberately trying to trick the players into wasting their precious reroll. I really don't know any players that enjoy being punked by the GM.
I do not go deliberately out of the way to get people to waste their rolls. I do not ask a player everytime the roll their d20 if they want to reroll it. I do ask them if it is a very obviously low roll or if they just barely met the DC if the would like to reroll. I even, jokingly, ask players if the want to reroll if the very obviously (30+) make a DC. The players know they made the made the check without a doubt and they'll joking say "oh, I don't know I think I'll have to stay". .
Either way, I try to make my tables fun. Yes, there have been deaths at my tables, but I can guarantee 100% deaths have not occurred from previous 'wasted' rerolls. I try to keep my players on their toes and they seem to enjoy my reroll tactic, because when it comes to tense times, reroll a phantasmal killer, they can't read my poker face.
Absolutely, my wording was poor there and I meant nothing malicious by it.
Example: when a player goes off book and I have to make a NPC up on the fly and the want to talk to them. The information I would give them wouldn't be anything they didn't already know, but just worded differently. If they get at 10 on a diplo check I would ask them if they are happy with that roll. Sometimes people reroll, sometimes they don't.
Another thing is I try to bring up some of the faction missions (items), just for flavor. I have never had someone use a reroll on this, but I could see it happening. I don't include faction missions unless I think it adds to the story.