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

Maezer's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 1,005 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 8 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,005 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My first gut reaction to the original post. Is that D&D 3.0 & 3.5 was just as convoluted and complex. Its the fact that he changed players from a more old school GM centric anything goes to make the story work to players the want to be hold tighter to rules. And that's probably what happened.

I peaked in on the WotC character optimization boards and they certainly did pull liberally from each and every source possible. And from Living Greyhawk/(not coming up with the Eberron campaign name) experience, I saw plenty of character with half a dozen classes each from a half dozen source book. With that in mind, Paizo's Pathfinder has done an awful lot to make it easier and occur earlier.

First and foremost, Pathfinder is far more open with content. With the minor exception of setting based rules, all of Paizo rule base content is open access. This wasn't true for WotC, as the vast majority of their content outside the core 3 books was not open. So it was more difficult to find and use. This has lead to far more adoption of rules from outside the core rules set in Pathfinder.

Second, the rules come in much earlier. In Pathfinder you are making racial substitutions, archetype substitutions, trait selections, and feat selection all at character creation. In 3.x with the exception of feats, all great deal of customization came from prestige classes. Which generally required more time and effort to gain entry into. That said I can't say how much more I prefer Pathfinders archetypes and substitutions producing different characters from the start and not being tied to being quite as front loaded as the 'good' 3.x prestige classes were.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The biggest difference between Regeneration and Fast Healing is how they function once the character is below -Con HP.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If that thread met your definition of both sides presenting their case... well it looks really one-sided to me. I have little doubt I can find lots of requests to allow it. That's not side that the underrepresented side.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nefreet wrote:


THIS is the 375 post thread where each side presented their case, and where Mike Brock reversed the ban.

Did you actually read that thread. Michael Brock specifically asked for only arguments leading to its unbanning. Only about 50 posts occur between his request, and his conclusion of unbanning it. Most of those posts are about snowball. Virtually no one argues for Magical Knack being overpowered in that thread.

You're going to be hard pressed to find arguments for banning magical knack, because it was banned at the same time traits were added to pathfinder society.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nefreet wrote:

The -4 isn't because you're trying to avoid your allies, either. It's because combat is dynamic and people are moving around, making it more difficult to pinpoint where to fire.

Its exactly because you are trying to avoid hitting any ally. That's why the rules state:

"Shooting or Throwing into a Melee: If you shoot or
throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with
a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack
roll."


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Arbane the Terrible wrote:

So... you're saying most feats and traits are too weak?

That is certainly the other option you could look at. Generally its easier to correct one thing, than fix all other things. But lets try that perspective.

We can fairly easily establish that fate's favored is worth a little more than a luckstone + dusty rose ioun stone. So about 25k in magic items.

Why not bring all traits up closer to 25k value?

All the traits that give static bonuses to saves, should be +5 to all saves based on cloak of resistance.

All the traits that give bonuses to AC, should be at least a +3 based on ring of protection.

Traits that give +2 to Init, should be more than a +4 based on Banner of Ancient Kings.

Traits that give bonus to hit or damage, should be at least a +2 to both, based on Gloves of Dueling.

Traits that give bonus to caster level, should probably a permanent +1 irregardless of HD, based on Orange Prism (Ioun Stone).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Philo Pharynx wrote:

Fate's favored is not a scaling bonus. It stays the same from level 1 to level 20.

When I look at some of the other things that get nerfed, they are things that truly warp the game. A +1 to all saves constantly? It's not game breaking.

It does scale. At level 1 it probably does nothing unless you are a halforc. At level 20, if you put effort into leveraging it, its giving you +1 to ac, to hit, to damage, to saves, to all skills. The equivelent of several feats.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

By RAW you can't. In fact without the strike back feat you can't even attack a limb or weapon with reach unless you move to a position where you threaten the squares the creature occupies.

But in my opinion as a GM I'd probably allow it. Particularly if there is some effect preventing the fighter from closing with the base of the creature. The fighter could ready an action (to either strike back or grapple). And if the fighter succeeds on the grapple it would pull the creature to an adjacent position.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I just want to state in the updated Ultimate combat pdf: That Lamellar, stone armor was not placed under Lamellar, Iron as stated in the errata sheet. Rather its under Lamellar, Steel and in the medium armor section.

I think it would make for a nice addition to medium armor, and an interesting alternative to the breastplate for Clerics/Druids etc. but I don't think it was intended.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

From the pc end, its you use it all the time, or you almost never use it. I have definately see trip, grapple, and dirty trick builds, but they require a significant resource investment to be successful it.

And as you level up the game turns into rocket tag. I get a full attack, then you are dead. Or the wizard hits the target with a save or suck spell and its not doing anything effective anyhow so your extra disabling is meaningless.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The cost is calculated as follows:

(Cost * Spell Level * Caster Level / Charge Cost)

400 * 4 * 8 / 3 = 4267
300 * 4 * 8 / 3 = 3200
200 * 3 * 8 / 2 = 2400
200 * 1 * 8 / 1 = 1600
200 * 1 * 8 / 1 = 1600

4267 + 3200 + 2400 + 1600 + 1600 = 13067

So 13067gp to create. The book rounds to 13,075 but that's reasonable close.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

There are no penalties for using primary natural attacks. Not that they are immune to penalties from other sources, just none inherent to making attacks with primary natural weapons.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

That's the text as its printed in 3.0 Ultimate Equipment pdf.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

There are more than 2 sentences to crane wing. It still deflects when using the full defense action. Its current benefit section reads:

Quote:

When fighting defensively with at least one hand

free, you gain a +4 dodge bonus to AC against melee attacks.
If a melee attack misses you by 4 or less, you lose this dodge
bonus until the beginning of your next turn. If you are using
the total defense action instead, you can deflect one melee
attack that would normally hit you. An attack so deflected
deals no damage and has no other effect (instead treat it as a
miss). You do not expend an action when using this feat, but
you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:


However, a lot of people were stacking the Shield Spikes and Bashing property together to get 1D8 and 2D6 damage dice, because they assumed that the Shield Spikes benefit was a more 'inherent' benefit (since it was increased through mundane means, and not magical), and therefore should be grounds for stacking.

Too be fair. A lot of people came from 3.x and its identical rules text in this situation, with an faq that explicitly stated that spiked shield and the bashing property did stack. Since Pathfinder got around to actually making a ruling on it, you'll find fewer people are making that claim.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ahpook The Destroyer wrote:

When do you apply the stench? Is it on the PC's turn? The monster's turn? Any time the stench is entered? Etc?

Thanks in advance!
AtD

I believe you make the save when its entered.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Just in case your not aware there is an FAQ about Wild Arcana:

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1gl#v5748eaic9r83

With wild arcana being a standard action, the answer is No to all your questions.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A scroll or a staff... probably not what you meant but the obvious answer.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Brain in a Jar wrote:
Saying its abusive to use the rage powers as intended is like saying its abusive to cast spells, combo invisbility with sneak attack, or use class features.

I wouldn't hesitate to call other rules legal things abusive. I'd called two weapon fighting with double shot pistols abusive (but legal). If I believe you are far exceeding what I believe the author intended when he wrote a rule set, then I believe you're abusing them.

Rules legal or not.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Brain in a Jar wrote:
Then you look at the Rage Powers. Why would anyone make them 1/Rage knowing full well that in Pathfinder you can enter/end Rage multiple times in the same encounter.

....Funny that's the exact same question I'd ask you. But I'll answer first.

I would limit something to 1/rage if I expected it to be used once or twice per fight. Maybe a few more times if an encounter was of epic scope and length. But, much like a breath weapon there would be a recharge time between each use.

If I expected it to be used or available on every single attack, as is done via rage cycling, I'd realize that writing 1/rage is pointless and in fact misleading text. I'd write something like 'when raging you can (unlimited/optional) apply X modifier to an attack.'

Why do you think author's wrote 1/rage into rage powers?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Brain in a Jar wrote:


How is rage cycling abusive?

Its literally word for word built into the class.

Different authors expect different things. Tireless rage was a barbarian class ability in 3.x long before barbarian rage powers existed. I highly doubt whoever wrote it initially had the expectation of abilities functionally limited to 1/combat would become 1/attack.

Even if you look just at Pathfinder, its quite easy for me to believe the designers saw tireless rage as a way for barbarians to re-enter rage if they were unexpected forced out of it (calm emotions, falling unconscious, etc) once or twice per fight; and not making the connection that barbarians to be entering/exiting rage 5+ times a round to use 1/rage powers on every attack.

After the fact and it became obvious that barbarians were rage cycling. The core rule book has this special place in role playing games. The Pathfinder empire is built on top of the core rules, and making significant changes after the fact is something any publisher wants to avoid. So the horse left the barn, the problem exists and if people want to game the system they will no matter how precisely the rules are written they can and will. Despite not being their original intentions, they left it alone because they didn't want to shift everything built on top of it.

Because I believe the above. Even though I fully believe rage cycling to be rule legal, I believe its not how they were intended and thus consider it as rules abuse. If you think its what the authors expected and/or wanted that's fine too, I doubt there will be much convincing either way as the issue is many years old by this point.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
forger42 wrote:


The rage cycling of the cabochon ioun stone and the rage power Internal Fortitude, seems to me to not work (at least not more than once).
When you drop your rage, you become fatigued, but the ioun stone turns that into sickened, but that's fine, that doesn't stop you from raging, so up it goes again and you are no longer sickened. Next round you drop rage again, but now, being already sickened, you instead become nauseated, which will only allow you to make a single move action, no standard, no free, no nothing else, so you are unable to get rage back up until the two rounds for the one round of rage have passed.

While I've certainly heard that argument. Nothing described actually would render the character exhausted so he doesn't become nauseated. Being sickened twice increase the effect into nausea. Sickened does not have a natural stacking clause like fear or fatigue. Its probably a reasonable house rule, particularly if your goal is the ban/reduce rage cycling, I don't think its the default rules.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Roleplaying Guild Guide?

Whose bright idea was it to leave the 'Pathfinder Society' part of the title off Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide in the 'my downloads' section of the web site.

I was just trying to update myself to whatever rule changes there had been in PFS, and lets just say after spending a few minutes going through my downloads searching for 'Society' and 'Organized' I am frustrated enough to make a post about it.

What was wrong with Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play anyhow. At least when I saw the title I knew what it was. 'Roleplaying Guild Guide' sounds like a $.99 thrid party pdf I random bought on the spur of the moment.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You're only look at one possible source of invisibility which is stupid. Your rules would make it impossible for a pack of hellcats or invisible stalkers to ever flank unless their foes could see them.

The bonus to hit for being invisible and the bonus for flanking are untyped bonus from different sources stack. They don't overlap as you seem to imply.

You don't trigger flanking for an ally, because flanking specifies the creatures on the opposite side of the target must also be an enemy (though not necessarily you're ally).

In your treachery scenario. Whether someone is 'not your enemy' needs to be agreed upon from both parts. If either the fighter or the cleric considers the other an enemy he should be treated as such. The cleric is not require to make an 'attack' action to change sides. If he cast summon monster 5 (which wouldn't break invisibility as an attack) and the summons attacking the fighter because of their compulsion to go after the clerics enemies I don't think you see any debate that the cleric himself has become the fighter's enemy as well despite not having attacked him.

The reason the terminology changes from square to creature is because creatures can occupy more than one square. If you only had to threaten the square you could flank large or bigger creatures by being on two adjacent sides and you flanking line would pass through opposite corners of the square but not the target. And/Or you could not normal flank huge creatures as you would not be threatening the same square, but would be on opposite sides of the same creature.

Nothing in flanking implies that the opposite threatening character must have made an attack. The example doesn't state 'Both Valeros and Kyra receive a +2 bonus on attack rolls made against the ogre after the other PC has attempted an attack . You get the bonus based on position alone.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You know your GM better than the rest of us. And its a roleplaying game, so do what you want.

But mechanically an armored coat is generally considered (significantly) worse than a chain shirt. Unless that 50gp is really worth 10' of movement and 5 lbs of encumbrance.

Generally most people decide on light (after magical modification) or heavy as medium armor is mathematically sub optimal in most ways.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
_Ozy_ wrote:


A more to the point question would be, does a rogue have to activate his sneak attack, or does it occur automatically even if the rogue doesn't know he is flanking someone.

What would this do beyond force the rogue player to say I activate my sneak attack before every single attack for the rest of his life.

No you don't have to activate passive abilities. In fact its probably beholden to the GM to tell you, you get sneak attack, if the target is flat footed or otherwise subject to sneak attack and the player doesn't know it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A module gives you access to a greater hat of disguise (which is at will alter self.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Its after. And its no cheaper than getting a race with an attribute modifier. That said, If you really want to be a rules guy though, starting age is defined as well, and you will likely find it difficult to start at middle age or later.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am not sure the hedgehog is very optimal for that role, as it has 0 reach by default. Thus has to be in the enemy square to be in position to make a melee attack as required by aid another.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't see any obvious changes from the errata that are going to change which archetypes are compatible. Was there some combination in particular you were looking at?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/other-rules/siege-engines

The firedrake or firewyrm siege engines are probably suitable for your needs. Both can produces cones of fire 6d6 cones of fire (30'/60') that would crush massed troops. Just adjust the costs down.

Though in truth you are probably better of creating your own custom item that does what you want. Probably costed around a (crafted) scroll of fireball of the given magnitude per shot. (187.5gp for a 5d6, reflex 14dc, 20' radius, 480' range). That can be use once per X rounds.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

In truth I think its pretty weak. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you mean by charge increment. For the effect to only work in a 10' range, (for the 30' movement creature, it would mean charging from 65' or 70' away) is just really narrow.

I'd probably simplify it. It should work on all charges (still pretty narrow) and give a free bull rush check on hit with a bonus (maybe a flat +5 or 2 * enchancement bonus). Opponents who cannot move back due to a wall or other surface are knocked prone after moving the maximum possible distance.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
Mass bull's strength might be competitive for summon-focused characters.

Any summon-focused character without augment summoning probably isn't all that summon-focused.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic#TOC-Combining-Magic-Effects

I feel pretty confident in calling Aura of Menace a supernatural (thus magical effect).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think in general you want to assume it take an act of will to move something to or from an extra dimensional space. No one wants to be measuring air pressure to determine if an extra-dimensional space is overloaded.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Could you point out the page/paragraph where you read the hero's handbook says you get 2? Also, this is probably more of a beginner Box question and should probably be in that subsection.

As I read it you get to select a (singular) type of magic from the following: Universalist, Evocation, or Illusion.

As so far as I can tell in both both core and the begginer's box you get one school. Though there are more than 3 options for the core wizard.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It probably could have been worded better, Or differently. And in practice, most people I see dealing with persistent metamagic do just roll twice and take the lower. It would be simplier, cleaner, and more in line with other similiar effects. And would generate very similiar results. But I believe my interpretation is More representitive of how it Works, for better or worse, as actually written.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Technically you don't roll twice on the reroll. Step by step its something like this:

1: Make saving throw.
2: Before knowing the results (Comparing the die roll + save bonus to the spell DC) you must decide if you wish to reroll.
3: Then compare results to spell DC.
If you fail you suffer the effect of the spell.
If you succeed you must repeat the saving throw process one addition time.
If you expended your 1/day use of Improved Lightning Reflexs its gone and cannot be used again on the second saving throw.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

No you don't apply it to your arrows.

Reflexive shot doesn't effect your threat range (Threat range is the range of natural numbers on your attack roll that threaten a critical). Reflexive shot allows you to make AoOs with your bow, you still only threaten squares in which you can make a melee attack into. Generally a medium sized monk wielding a bow that is all squares within 5' which he can hit with his unarmed strike.

Unarmed damage for a medium sized 13th level monk is 2d6.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:


That's how SKR said it was supposed to work (which was done when he was no longer an employee of Paizo), and the way that was portrayed made it an unofficial statement, since the claim was to a 3rd party publisher on an e-mail not associated with Paizo directly. Paizo themselves have said that unless a FAQ or Errata is released, the developer statements are unofficial, so while SKR may have said something to them, that claim held no water.

It was only errata'd recently to how it works now. In fact, that's the sole reason it was errata'd; the even funnier part is that SKR's message of intention didn't 100% match up to the current errata, as it had a logical inconsistency.

I question your timeline. I am pretty sure the e-mail was in 2013 and he left Paizo in 2014. As he was involved at the time of its Ultimate Equipment's publishing he seems to be a viable source for determining original intent.

I hardly believe it was the sole reason it was FAQ'd and exists currently as a proposed errata. I'd like to see your source for that bit of information. You can certainly find debates about the property long before his e-mail to herolabs finding people who felt it was overpowered or not written as intended.

As for his reply not being identical to the eventual proposed errata. You can find that, on any Dev post that years later bares resemblance to an FAQ or errata. Things change after years and a different person was the final author. And it taking years to go from board post to official FAQ/errata is actually pretty standard for Paizo.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

They still act like the caster is their friend and probably try to justify or defend the casters actions offering up whatever random excuses or explanations he can come up with.

Just dispel it, or wait it out. Convincing the target that he was charmed doesn't diminish its effects.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

1. Expect table variation. You can find many thread on this, but there is often debate about weather or not a creature can fly with a greater than light load (look for threads about familiars/animal companions as flying mounts). There is the treat medium/heavy encumbrance as armor medium/heavy armor respectively. And armor for animals is often called barding. And barding states that creatures can't fly in a medium/heavy barding. Expect variation/consult your GM.

2. Damage from falling objects is table 13-11. I'd probably classify the rock as small and dense so 2d6 (halved for <30' drop or doubled for >150' drop). With a DC 15 reflex to halve damage.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If you are looking at a rules strict setting (ie PFS) the halfling favored class bonus would not apply. Its a different ability despite being vaguely similar.

These aren't just 'name changes.' If they were just name changes without mechanical changes then they probably would be 100% backwards compatible. But they deliberately changed the name to break the links with previously printed content because the mechanics changes and thus the previous content should be re-evaluated before being allowed. In a rules strict setting, as no one has done this re-evaluation expect nothing with a name change to be backward compatible.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

On bite and grab, you technically can bite the second target and potentially grapple him as well with the same bite. Yes visually its pretty awkward and I'd expect funny looks but if RAW is your only concern you'd be fine. If you feel biting another target while grappling with a target is too awkward, just don't use the grab on the first foe.

4 Claws attacks is not one weapon. Its 4 limbs with 1 (natural) weapon on each. So you get just one claw attack on a standard attack action. And 1 additional attack if you hit with a cleave.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Globetrotter wrote:


That should give him total cover, right?

By RAW. A prone character and a standing character occupy the exact same space(s) and have identical amounts cover. He would of course get the bonus/penalty to AC against ranged/melee attacks for being prone.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If the mount is significantly bigger than the rider and you feel the rules aren't representing it well, you probably should reclassify the mount as a vehicle and work with the vehicle rules.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Because master of many styles bonus feat section states: " The master of many styles does not need to meet any other prerequisite of the feat in the style’s feat path. "


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
rlfhog3 wrote:


Can someone help me locate this rule or help me understand why, if not actually listed anywhere, it is interpreted in this way.

You can find that ruling on page 468 of the core rulebook if you have the first or second (maybe 3rd) printing. It was errata'd several years after release to be replaced with the hardness and hit points increase stated above.

I believe the same change was made in 3.0 when it went to 3.5, but never propagated the change to the srd, thus paizo copied it over.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Amaurot wrote:

So, the effect still lasts while I am sleeping?

Does that mean I can cast all the prolonged Buffs on myself, take a rest with renewed spell slots AND a bunch of Buffs with me?

All spells casts within the last 8 hours still count against your new daily allotment. But if the duration is greater than that you can have your cake and eat it too.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TorresGlitch wrote:


I can't believe they ruled it that way. It makes no sense whatsoever that it gets easier to strike with a weapon because it now has some electricity as a rider effect.

Because they aren't treating it as an 'electricity' rider effect. Rather just the effect of the spell. No other spell with the electricity descriptor has this built in +3 to hit. Monsters that deal electric damage with each attack don't get this +3 to hit metal. Its not something generally associated with the 'electric' descriptor. Rather this singular spell grants a bonus if attacking a certain type of type of opponent and the effect is independent of its descriptor.

1 to 50 of 1,005 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.