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

Lune's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 3,041 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 10 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 3,041 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:
Most anything range based starts at the corner of your square, not within your square, and linked to the corner of another square. So you are correct. Kinda. Because it's actually a 10 foot throw.

I want to agree with this because that is what makes sense in my head. The ranged weapon shouldn't have to travel through the square it is thrown/shot from. However, I can't find this rule. Without that rule it would be 15'. Justify it however you want, I guess...

I should also note a few things. Graceful Flier is not legal for PFS. We don't know if that is applicable here or not.

You need to be mindful of weight. Your mount can only carry you in flight if it is at a light load. Google "Pathfinder Carrying Capacity Calculator" for a calculator to take a look at. At 7th level (the soonest you can ride your Griffon while mounted) it will have a 20 Str. That makes it's light load at just under 200lbs. I imagine that your character, his gear and your mount's gear and armor is going to be more than that. If you buy him a +2 Str belt that will put him up to a carrying capacity of just under 260lbs. That is still going to be pushing it.

Mithril armor can help. I recommend getting it for both your Cavalier and your Griffon. For your Griffon get a Mithral Chain Shirt and don't waste any feats on armor proficiencies. If all of this doesn't get you close to being a light load for your mount then you may have to forgo a Str belt for your Griffon in favor of getting him Muleback Cords (also PFS legal).

Another suggestion: You need to read over the Fly skill. In depth. Your Griffon's skill is going to be low. That can be a problem. Consider Skill Focus: Fly and/or Sable Company Elite Saddle.

Also, 40ft. isn't exactly "slow". It is 10ft. faster than the average ground speed for most PCs. Flying creatures are able to double move the same way land bound ones can so that is 80ft. of movement. You can double move and charge and Griffons are actually quite good at it. The only real time when having to worry about fly speed is when you are dealing with things that are also flying and have greater speed.

You may wish to read over the Ride skill and take a look at the Spur Mount action. If you need a short burst of movement that can help. Anything that can apply Haste (as the spell) can also applies to all movement speeds. Griffons do not have a foot slot so even outside of PFS it would need special permission to even use anything in that slot.

But honestly? I wouldn't worry about it. Typically when you face things that are flying they want to kill you and your party and aren't going to be interested in running away. And if they do try to run then your best bet isn't to chase them down but rather to let your ranged party members take care of it. Carry a bow that matches your strength and take parting shots. If it is running away then chances are it is fairly low in HP and any little bit you can do to it will help.

And if it isn't running away then why does speed matter?

If you are from Cheliax then you could be anything from popular to worshiped due to the "gifts" bestowed upon you by the great fiends. But then that would give you reason to appreciate your heritage rather than seek to destroy it. You could still play it off as liking Qlippoth-kin but hating Demon, Devils, etc. I guess. Either way it is probably a good idea to establish early in your character background that you have a reason to hunt the things crawling out of the Worldwound. Maybe even have a nickname granted by a small local community if you want to be known for it.

If you are from Cheliax then you could be anything from popular to worshiped due to the "gifts" bestowed upon you by the great fiends. But then that would give you reason to appreciate your heritage rather than seek to destroy it. You could still play it off as liking Qlippoth-kin but hating Demon, Devils, etc. I guess. Either way it is probably a good idea to establish early in your character background that you have a reason to hunt the things crawling out of the Worldwound. Maybe even have a nickname granted by a small local community if you want to be known for it.

Yeah, that was my first idea. But it seems like every Dragon Disciple would worship him so I was thinking of switching it up. But maybe I will go with Apsu.

I have been thinking something of being from the Verduran Forest in Taldor as the Inner Sea World Guide talks about both fey and Halflings being present there. I don't want to do the former slave seeking vengeance thing.

I was thinking about the old 3.x Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil and the similarities it holds to Shelyn. Perhaps my character could have had his magical abilities awakened within him by a Half Gold Dragon Couatl. This creature could have been a First World beast worshiped by the local Fey, themselves defendants of First World Fey. I'm not sure what their motivation for doing so would have been...

For an upcoming home game I am thinking of making a Halfling Paladin that goes into Dragon Disciple. I do not have all of the details on the setting or campaign rules but I believe that it will be based in Golarion. We have been talking about running a system where things have to happen in game to unlock the use of non-core material. It seems like an interesting concept so I’m inclined to support this concept and play in it.

One of the facets of this campaign concept that I suggested was to allow 1 non-core item in the character based on character background. I like to write character backgrounds for each character that I play. The problem is that I do not know a ton of lore about Golarion and to be frank with the amount of content that is out there currently it can get a bit overwhelming. I was hoping for little direction on where to start reading for what lore would best fit my concept.

Let me tell you a bit about my character concept. I would like to make a sword and board style Halfling that goes into Dragon Disciple via mostly Paladin levels with a dip into Gold Draconic Bloodline Sorcerer. The character will focus more on melee early on and fall into the arcane side of things later. My plan is to go for Mithral Agile Breastplate and Light Shield. I’ll be going for a Str based attacker. Even with the racial negatives to Str I make up for it with a size bonus to hit and scaling Str bonuses from Dragon Disciple. I will be trying to work in Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Shield Bash and Power Attack. With Fey Foundling and Greater Mercy the concept is to have a pool of self-healing to the character able to get in and stay in for extended fights. It will actually be refreshing to get back to a character who can benefit from the big six.

So, with that being said the only non-core things that this character would use are:

Fey Foundling
Greater Mercy
Bracers of the Merciful Knight
Oath of Vengeance Paladin

Now, Fey Foundling is obviously what I would need to start with at first level for the concept to work correctly. And with taking a level or two in Sorcerer to get the Gold Draconic Bloodline it muddies his ancestry a bit. I’m fine with that and would actually like to embrace it. I know the typical places that are popular for Halflings to live in but I’m not sure where would be the best place for this character to be from. I’m thinking a deeply forested region where fey are prevalent.

I’m not going for the annoying Halfling trope. I would rather break stereotype there and do something completely different. I would the character to encompass everything you typically picture in a dragon knight. Chivalric, virtuous, calm and collected, insightful and wise. But not drab and boring either. I plan on having the character sport a multi-colored fauxhawk that he will be keeping up with Prestidigitation. He will retain the cheery, adventure loving wanderlust from his Halfling heritage. As for where the Fey part comes in, I’m not sure because I can easily see that leading down the path of “annoying Halfling” so I think I may have to downplay that a bit as far as how he acts but will likely have the character keenly aware of all parts of his heritage and actively trying to dispel negative stereotypes through action.

So what I basically need help with here is firming up how this character’s heritage came to be and where this all went down at. My DM isn’t big on “high fantasy” (a rather subjective term, really given the genre) so I would prefer not to have anything too fantastic. Not sure how I can do that with both Dragon and Fey ancestry but that is my goal here. Maybe something with a Quetzacoatl? They are kinda somewhere between a Fey and Dragon sorta, right?

Anyone have ideas where in Golarion I could fit him into? Any ideas for fitting his ancestry in without getting overly fantastic?

James Risner wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:

James is arguing this:

Extracts aren't liquid, the feat doesn't work with free liquids, extracts are sometimes spells, the feat only works with drinks like beer, and if the liquid is magic at all and not a potion it doesn't work.

You are arguing this:
RAW might allow it but RAI doesn't. You should treat it as if RAW doesn't.

Your argument is valid. Though, not the only valid argument.

Actually I was interpreting that you could read RAW to allow it, but you have precedence from Glutton/Accelerated Drinker to suggest you not that. Instead you should interpret RAW to forbid extracts.

Plus you have a lot of murky things that we all take for granted that simply isn't directly spelled out in PDT books, but are spelled out in companion lines.

Actually, James, you argued that extracts are not liquids. That was your response in the second post in this thread.

Lorewalker was accurate with his statement.

Spare minotaur.

Huh. Been a while since I linked Ashiel's Guide to Adventure. I miss Ashiel.

FYI - Possessed Hand feats do exist.

His credibility and point stands.

Exactly. They didn't do the same thing to Dervish Dance. So saying that you shouldn't play this Feat as RAW because it is just going to get nerfed like Potion Glutton doesn't really add up. They could never touch it in the same way they never touched Dervish Dance but nerfed all the other X Grace feats.

Cavall: Did I say that I think that? It really seemed like people were implying that it would become a normal member of it's species. Is that not what was being implied?

What Darksol the Painbringer said (tempered by what Cantriped said which makes none of what Darksol the Painbringer less true).

So that means that when it loses it's abilities granted by the druid that it then becomes a standard member of it's species? Because that could ADD power to it in many situations. Frankly, I think that interpretation is capable of causing more problems.

Nitro~Nina wrote:
Lune, while your overall point is sound, you don't have to be any sort of Divine Caster or meet the Optional Replacement clause, so long as you meet the actual prerequisites. Those other options just allow you to ignore the prerequisites, as far as I know.

Well, I understand but with the Optional Replacement being +10 BAB it seems likely that you would either want to get into it the traditional way by giving up a major blessing or by rushing to +10 BAB. If taking this fighting style is the basis of your build then you want to get to it as soon as possible, right? If you aren't going Warpriest then you are probably getting there via the +10 BAB which means either Fighter or Swashbuckler here. The fact that you want to use it with Extracts also implies at least one level of Alchemist.

I think my original point stands. I'm not sure what unholy combination someone is using to get there but straight Alchemist doesn't seem like the best option to get there the soonest. In fact, the whole build doesn't seem that great. You would be TWF without Dex to Damage so you are MAD having to have all physical stats high as well as Int at least reasonable as your casting stat. You also don't really want to forgo Wis because you have no real means of shoring up your weak Will save. So that leaves Cha as your only real dump stat. Other than that you are a Swashbuckler that uses TWF which is a fairly weak concept.

lol, read the whole thread. Going to favorite this one so I can reference it as that time that James argued that extracts are not liquids even though you drink them. I've seen some doozies for reasoning on this board before but that one takes the trophy I think.

Anyway, am I missing something here? It is a Divine Fighting Technique. Don't you have to be a "cleric, inquisitor, or warpriest who worships a deity" in order to take it unless you meet the Optional Replacement clause? So aside from all of the other requirements that people are talking about to meet the Advanced Prerequisites you would also have to be a "A chaotic good fighter or swashbuckler of at least 10th level" that worships Cayden Cailean.

So we are talking about what here? Swashbuckler 10 with a splash of Alchemist so he can drink his extracts quickly while fighting? I mean, is there anyone who is honestly arguing a balance issue exists for this? Hell, even to get the Initial Benefits you would have to have at least one level in Cleric, Inquisitor, Warpriest, Swashbuckler or Fighter and worship Cayden. Thats pretty damned niche.

Also, comparing feats like Potion Glutton et al to this is a practice in futility. Paizo has a track record of nerfing Dex to Damage and has done so with the X Grace feats but hasn't touched Dervish Dance yet. This "issue" would fit that situation.

And outside of actual rules based disagreements we are left with "extracts aren't liquid even though you drink them"?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is like... a whole big thing. From someone who has partook in several and started at least one long thread on the issue suffice it to say that the rules are not clear. If it is for PFS expect table variation. If it is for a home game clear it up with the GM first.

But most importantly ponder the fact that both options are good for your party. If you don't provoke an AoO from Stepping Up into their square then that is good for you. If you DO provoke an AoO then it is good for your party. Most Tiny creatures have pretty stellar ACs. And honestly, if they don't then they are doing it wrong. Wasting your enemy's AoOs on a target that they aren't going to hit is a good thing.

Kinda makes sense that there should be given some of the awesome specials.

Walter Sheppard: At the cost of snark there is a feat that is allowed that does the same thing. Diehard. Except it makes you be able to keep fighting while at -HP.

Here is another of mine: Dex built Whip Magus. It can still be done but not with Slashing Grace + Spell Combat. I feel the feat tax for this is high enough to allow Dex to damage. Unfortunately Dex to damage is routinely nerfed. Right now the only real option for it is 3 levels of URogue and that detracts from the build quite a bit.

I would like to build an archer using the Overwatch Style feats from the Weapon Master's Handbook. The character would be an Eldritch Guardian with a Brownie Familiar. As is I have this character built without those feats. But, I think the feats are thematically interesting for such a build while not adding power beyond what a normal archer can do. Well, raw power anyway. It adds options without breaking the system.

I actually am not certain why these feats were banned. It doesn't seem like an overly powerful option. In fact with archery builds being so feat intensive it cuts deeply into available options. The only thing I can think of is that the readied actions might experience table variation on how they are handled. I'm not sure why that would be as it is fairly simple rules but it is the only thing I could think of.

I want to play a Spherewalker. It is in a Paizo book that was published prior to the start of Pathfinder (Pathfinder 2: The Skinsaw Murders). It never got reprinted. Since it's creation there has been some support for Desna worshipers but nothing that matches what the Spherewalker does or represents. I doubt there ever will be. Its too bad as it is so very rich in concept. More than that, it set the ground work for the kind of world that Golarion was going to grow into being. The PrC defines form following function and is rich in both mechanics that help to build a concept and world building flavor.

I also would like to play a White Mage but I feel like they should have had the cure spells added to their spell list for the purpose of using wands. As is they can only drop spell from their spell list for cure spells and are barely able to fill the role of a pinch hitter healer.

The White Mage is from ACG. While it is allowed in PFS play I feel that without this change that it is a severe nerf for a roleplay gain that is not worth it. In a home game it could be house ruled that they get the spells on their spell list for the purpose of activating items. For PFS it just doesn't work.

I actually played with someone playing a White Mage recently. They were unaware that they couldn't use wands of Cure Light Wounds without using UMD. I informed them after the game as the GM wasn't either and I didn't want to ruin someone's build concept mid-game. He was sad but just decided to try upping his UMD check to compensate.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

For my part I'll post a few concepts I have.

I would like to play a character who uses the Bladed Brush feat the way I feel it was intended. The feat is banned. The entire Path of the Righteous book is banned (save for a few choice options). Even if it weren't, unfortunately the feat leaves some ambiguities that I wouldn't want to deal with in organized play.

I feel that it is flavorful. In fact, I feel that everything in that book is so very flavorful to the campaign setting that I'm surprised it got banned. The options that it offers are options that bring life to the concepts of several archetypes that Paizo has created for Golarion.

Nefreet: I'm game. Can I play a worshiper of Cthulhu?

Nohwear: Yes. I suppose it does.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I will be playing in a new home game soon and have been excitedly considering character concepts. This is one of the most entertaining things in my life, by the way. It may seem silly but designing characters at the start of a new game is something I cherish when it happens and always look forward to.

This time is a bit different, though, as it is the first home game I will be playing in after getting involved deeply into PFS. I am finding that most of the concepts that I am considering are ones that will not work in PFS. It isn't due to roleplaying issues or compatibility of the concepts with organized play. They are all mechanical reasons. Either feats or classes that are banned in PFS or they use rules that are ambiguous enough that I would have to deal with table variation to the point of making the concept unplayable.

I'm not here to complain about it though. My thought was that I'm likely not alone with this issue. If I werre a member of campaign leadership I would want to know what areas of organized play my player base (or prospective player base) thinks can be improved. As long as the ideas do not conflict with the setting, disrupt the balance of the organized play environment or are precluded by specific PFS rules they are likely worth at least considering.

This is all supposed to be constructive so lets keep this to a couple of guidelines:

1: Only post concepts that are blocked due to banned materials or ambiguous rules. Things that can be remedied by something being allowed or cleared up.

2: Post the source that the content you would like to work comes from.

3: Post why you want to play it and why it would be good in PFS (or at least not worse than in a home game).

With any luck leadership could use this thread as feedback on what their players would like to see and could use this as a guide to see which resources need attention for being permitted in PFS.

Nope. This is all wrong. Sam is definitely a Spellscar Drifter. You gotta have your mule.

Spell Combat does say it has to be a Magus spell. However, I would like to point out that nowhere in the Magus' Spellstrike does it say that it has to be a Magus spell. Using Magus' Spellstrike is far better than trying to deliver a spell via an Ectoplasmatist's Spell Combat as you don't lose your spell if you miss.

Phantom Blade is likely better. But I also like Ecto more. The problem is that Ecto makes you want to multiclass with URogue to get Dex to damage. That isn't such a good thing for a caster but it really rounds out the build. It also delays the cool things that Ecto gets, though, and those cool things are set for coming in when they are most useful.

Oh. I thought the idea was to be inside the armor when you possessed it. Was that not the idea? Why come up with a different place for your body?

True. I like the idea of the Familiar doing the meching. Do that.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't believe that spells like Enlarge Person would work....since because Construct.

I'll be bitter if I'd like, thank you very much. I guess I'm just a bitter kinda guy. I have asked if we can move on repeatedly to more constructive discussion. The warning was acknowledged and dismissed repeatedly.

Still no one who actually disagrees. Still only warnings that someone may. Still imaginary people.

I know you say you are trying to look out for my best interest but I have already done my do diligence and vetted the concept with local leadership and other GMs I play with. Despite the warnings here of possible dissection and disagreement I have never heard anyone actually say they think it doesn't work.

Can we move on now?

The post was shared further upthread by hushed.

Tyrant Lizard King: Yes, it does mean they are considered the same thing. Bonded Mount is a Mount class feature. Saying otherwise directly disagrees with develope intent per the linked post.

I tire of passive aggressive non-disagreement. Either say you disagree and wouldn't allow it or say you agree and would allow it. Until you point out someone who actually disagrees that it is illegal I call your point moot. Even if you find someone who believes that it isn't allowed it likely isn't someone I play with. If it is I am happy to point them in the direction of my leadership who agrees that it works. If this imaginary person still disagrees then I am happy to dismiss myself from the table of someone who wishes to ignore PFS rules dictating that they follow developer intent when it is posted and ignoring campaign leadership.

Can we move on now?

Hushed: Ah, so you are correct. I am fine with 40ft fly speed. Good points on Bodyguard Archetype ability replacement. I still think I'm better off with an archetypeless Animal Companion. I would love to one day be able to use Animal Growth on it. :)

So what are your suggestions if I start with Toughness, Power Attack, Death From Above?

avr: You have a good point on it taking too big of a hit and us both end up plummeting from the sky. In my experience GMs rarely have enemies target mounts. This might change with a flying mount though. I can't stop that but I can choose to not use In Harms Way if I doubt it will survive. Also, if my character goes down then my mount loses it's healer. If my mount goes down (less likely as it is far more durable) then at least my character is still alive to bring the mount back up. Or more likely just heal it up.

Still, you have a good point.

But why Lunge? It doesn't work outside of my turn so it doesn't work with Combat Reflexes.

I highly doubt that table variation will be an issue. I am fully aware of the SKR post linked above and the fact that it holds water still. Where his post says "those all are intended to work the same way, even though they're not given identical names." my case is even stronger as the class abilities not only says it works like the other class ability it is named the same thing. In other words Monstrous Mount calls out needing "Bonded Mount" and that is the name of the class ability that I have. Like I said, there is no grey area here for there to be table variation on.

I agree that on vague rules that table variation can and does exist in PFS. This is not one of those situations. I dismiss this as a possibility as an issue that I will have to deal with. Further, I don't need to argue about it with people on the internet that I won't nd up playing with and couldn't convince me of their incorrect interpretation anyway. And, on the off chance that I did ever sit at a table with someone with the opinion that it doesn't work I am confident that I could convince them otherwise. If I couldn't I am sure a member of leadership (many of which I have already spoken with on this issue) could. If not then they are not the type of GM I am willing to play under and I have no issue with making it a non-issue by excusing myself from that table.

Hushed: Thank you for your post. The linked page has 3rd party material on it mixed in with Paizo stuff. I have my own sheet that I have built over the years that has similar things. I agree, feat starvation is prevalent in almost all of my builds, even my pure Fighter ones. No exception here, that is for sure.

Perfectionist Shavtoosh is surprisingly PFS legal. It is even an amazing value for what it does. I am opposed to having an feats that require an item to be used, though, as if it doesn't have access to the item it loses the use of feats that use it as a prerequisite. Still... at that value it is worth considering.

Alas, you are also right on the Belt slot taking up Saddles. I think it is going to be a near requirement for me to get that Saddle. Its too bad that it precludes the use of Belts. Ah well. I may still get Extra Item Slot to get it a Corset of the Vishkanya as it is strickly better than Narrow Frame.

While you have interesting horse ideas with the content from the Qadira book, I'm going to take a pass on this build. Besides, Griffons from Monstrous Mount Mastery get a fly speed of 80ft, not 40.

Tyrant Lizard King: As Hushed said, I qualify for Monstrous Mount just peachy. :)

I did think about getting Combat Maneuver feats. There just aren't any that I'd like. However, Dirty Fighting does help to open up Style feats. ...although I can't think of any that are particularly good there either.

I know that Rake attacks can be made as part of a pouce which is why I said "after a charge" in my first post. As in the round after a charge when maintaining a grapple. We are on the same page here.

I will not be getting the Body Guard Animal Companion Archetype for this build. It replaces too many things that are amazing. Share Spells alone is not worth giving up but also losing Evasion? No thanks, hard pass. On a non-full caster I would consider it and definitely on a Cavalier. But not on a full Oracle.

But out of curiosity what are your thoughts on a 3 feat investment to get to In Harm's Way? By that level my character should be rocking a pretty hefty AC. I count around a 30 AC (+7 from Mithril Agile Breastplate, +3 from Mithril Heavy Shield, +6 from Cha, +1 Ring, +3 Barkskin) with reasonable gear and no short term buffs. Getting an extra 2 points from Bodyguard seems a drop in a bucket. In Harm's Way is good though particularly for touch attacks. But I would have invested 3 feats by then.

I'm leaning pretty heavily to the following in priority order:
Power Attack
Death From Above

after this it is a toss up between Extra Item Slot to get a Corset of the Vishkanya for it first or continuing on into the In Harm's Way line.

It isn't a grey area at all.

Benefit: Your animal companion, familiar, or mount gains the celestial template and becomes a magical beast, though you may still treat it as an animal when using Handle Animal, wild empathy, or any other spells or class abilities that specifically affect animals.

It doesn't matter what the critter was before. It gains the celestial template and is treated as an animal for spells and class abilities. Friend of Animals is a class ability. No grey area at all.

Oh, Evolved Companion isn't legal in PFS. I guess I'll have to take that out of my build.

Friends of Animals does work. Read Celestial Servant.

Do you guys still think it needs higher saves even after Friends of Animals giving it my Cha bonus (+5-6) to saves? It will also get Devotion for another +4 to Will and Evasion.

Also, Carry Companion isn't on my spell list. :( I'm considering getting a small sized +1 hostilling tower shield that I can put in a Handy Haversack when not using my Griffon.

Tyrant Lizard King: Dirty Fighting for what follow up feats?

Abraham Z.: Do you think it still needs higher saves even after Friends of Animals giving it my Cha bonus (+5-6) to saves? It will also get Devotion for another +4 to Will and Evasion.

Take the Seeker Archetype. Get Detect Secret Doors as a spell known or carry scrolls of it.

Aw... nuthin?

1 to 50 of 3,041 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, 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.