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

Mechalibur's page

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 929 posts. 3 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character.


RSS

1 to 50 of 929 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Calthaer wrote:
Ilpalazo wrote:
Not a huge deal either way, I'm not convinced one way or another that Damiel is that broken, but a few vocal folks here are basically saying that he is.
Absolutely. None of these shades of grey; such a thing cannot stand. Characters either have to be ridiculously awesome and the coolest and most powerful and bestest thing I have ever seen, or they are abysmally awful and useless completely.

You say that a lot, but I don't think I've seen anyone state an opinion remotely similar to that :/


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

To directly answer the question: No, there are currently not any situations in S&S where it is advantageous to have the fire trait.

When it was brought up before, Vic hinted that it may be relevant later on (something about ships not liking fire).


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Andrew K wrote:
Plus, any character with a free evade for me is just wasting a power slot for something that I never have done, and never will do.

Seriously? I evade loads of times. Like if I don't have a weapon on hand (it's not her favored card time, so it happens somewhat frequently), I can still explore in relative safety. If I find a disintegrate spell that I have no chance of getting with d6 intelligence, then I'll evade it for Ezren to pick up. All you lose is a turn, which generally isn't a big deal.

I just don't see how it's remotely plausible to never be in a situation where you would want to evade. It's impossible to always have the perfect hand for everything, especially early on.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
JBiggs78 wrote:

I'm not quite getting where Lirianne would ever struggle. She has solid dexterity, excellent ranged combat, access to perception based off the best wisdom die possible and her constitution/fortitude is ok. Her only weakness is her lack of strength and her opening 4 card hand... Strength you can't do much to fix, but I don't think I've been in a position with her where I have had to use strength and with her first power going to a five card hand she's carried her weight for me.

In S&S I value wisdom, battle skills (be them melee, dex or ranged based) and con/fort in that order. It's nice if your dexterity isn't awful as well. Lirianne is fully capable of whatever comes, I think.

Lirianne suffers a similar problem to Valeros: low hand size, and a lack of non-combat utility. Her combat checks aren't even that great, especially since guns tend to be rather weak if you're not using your bury power.

Her wisdom is a great asset though; probably the most useful stat overall, and she's killer with the Pearl of Wisdom. She's also got the advantage of being able to cycle through her limited cards by shuffling them into her deck to help with combat checks. The problem with that, however, is that you don't get to draw back up until the end of your next turn.

Overall she isn't bad, but I'd definitely put her in the bottom half of the characters in terms of usefulness.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:
I would advise people to stay away from Damiel until they get the add on deck. Without it you undercut your options.

I mean, his character card is in the add-on deck... you're not even supposed to play him without it.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I love the idea of loot allies... now all we need are loot blessings :P

The other loot ally Agasta Smythee is also pretty fun :)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

So, when Man's Promise is wrecked, the text states:

Man's Promise wrote:
When commanding this ship: Other characters may not move with this ship.

The rulebook says (page 18):

Rulebook wrote:
If you move while commanding a [wrecked] ship, other characters cannot choose to move with you.

So am I missing something, or does the Man's Promise not change anything when it's wrecked? Technically speaking there aren't any rules contradictions here, but it's weird that its "when wrecked" text states something that's already a rule.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Doesn't solve the boring factor for me, but that's personal preference.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Orbis, I think we have almost identical criteria for judging character effectiveness, except for now I only judge characters based on the sets they come in. Jirelle is pretty awesome in S&S, but holy crap is she terrible in RotRL. I don't hold that against her though, since she wasn't designed for that set. It's the same reason I don't even consider the Toad/Resto silliness with S&S Lini.

There's also the matter of cycling/hand size which influences everything: combat, utility, and exploration. I think it's funny that sometimes when I play Lirianne, I want to misfire her gun so I can shuffle in a card from my hand so that I don't have to discard it at the end of my turn :P In a way, I think she'd be a little better without weapon proficiency.

As an aside, I actually like S&S Lini more than her RotRL version. Definitely less powerful, but I had to give her up in my RotRL game; she just felt really boring and was kind of a turn hog if she gets her restorations :P


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

If you're going to solo as Damiel, make sure to start with a potion of Glibness in your deck. Scenario 2 and 5 of the base set are a lot easier if you can recharge a potion to beat the boss.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Ambush is actually banished. It is in the FAQ.

Oh, so it was ambiguous before. Good to know!


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Andrew K wrote:
I always have good enough cards in my hand that I never try to defeat Ambush, unless there is some outside effect that would happen besides the Ambush effect.

Eh, the check is usually so high that I fail ambush anyway, but I'd rather succeed than fail for two reasons:

1. Succeeding gets you a free explore. That means beating ambush is 2 explorations for the turn, while failing is a net of 1 exploration (you fight a monster, but put ambush back in. [Edit: That is how it works right? I don't have the cards on me right now]

2. It may force you to fight the villain early and close the location off, restricting access to boons that you might want to acquire first.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Hawkmoon's got it right, as always. There's just one thing I'd like to clarify:

amir90 wrote:
1) When can you actually help out your companions? Do you need to be at the same location? Also, what kind of card can you use to help your companions? We are aware that you cannot use the same card type.

You can use the same card type as your friend, actually. For example, you could play a blessing on your combat check, and another friend could add their own blessing, or you can play the Black Spot spell to help a friend making a combat check with their own spell. The rule is any given player can't double up on a card type: they all have to be from different characters. So you can play a blessing and use Black Spot to help someone out, but you can't play 2 blessings or 2 Black Spots.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Awesome. I can smell the freedom from here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I would say...

Base:
Ranger (Roles: Explorer and Sharpshooter)
Barbarian (Destroyer and Warlord)
Witch (Curse Master and Hermit)
Bard (Musician and Warsinger)
Cavalier (Herald and General)
Cleric (Preacher and Lifebringer)
Rogue (Trailblazer and Assassin)

Add-on:
Shaman (Spirit Warden and Seer)
Hunter (Trapper and Animal Aspect)
Druid (Survivalist and Forest Guardian)
Arcanist (Elementalist and Experimenter)

A kingmaker box would be pretty cool. I wonder how the leadership aspect could be incorporated.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I used to have a few groups. Now it's a group of 3 with my roommates (usually one can't make it though), and I also play with my boyfriend over Skype. It's kind of slow that way, but we still manage to have fun.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Mad Jack Deacon wrote:

I'm going to have to take a closer look at Oloch now. I was doing some solo play with him for a couple of the basic scenarios and was a bit non-plussed about him.

Not completely turned off, but starting to wonder if he's got what it takes to play long term...

Well yeah, he's fairly useless in solo play. His main power doesn't work on his own checks. He's a lot better in a small group.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Andrew K wrote:
I definitely don't think Paizo should be doing anything just because some people don't read or remember rules. You're expected to know the rules to play the game, just like every other game ever.

That doesn't mean they shouldn't use the most precise wording possible when it wouldn't result in significantly longer card text. That's why they changed the text of Thieves Tools to specify they only work on your checks.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Orbis Orboros wrote:

I read this thread title and immediately thought: "Like, I wonder why I would ever want any?" XD

It's interesting how some people get excited about how he can't hardly take any damage, thus becoming nigh unkillable, and others (like me) are just like "meh, that slows you down too much. Not worth it."

Well, for me, random damage from monsters and barriers is probably the biggest threat to losing a scenario. I usually lose way more time recovering from a powerful attack then from keeping a single armor in my hand. Usually time isn't an issue for me unless I start taking a lot of damage. When Kyra got the Adamantite Plate Armor, she could walk into practically any encounter without fear, and it helped immensely in the fight against Karzoug.

Of course, there really aren't that many armors with that kind of power. Up until the last two adventures I'll agree that most armors are pretty cruddy. At least they can be cycled.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Andrew K wrote:
I still can't get over recharging all those armors for the "reduce any to 0" powers... So awesome.

"Okay, looks like you failed the dexterity/acrobatics check... that's 5 fire damage."

"Nah, I'll recharge a card"

Depending on how prevalent before encounter damage becomes, Oloch could end up being a late game powerhouse. We'll just have to see.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
philosorapt0r wrote:
*Characters who improve party loot (Transmog Ezren, Radillo) seem a little more exciting outside OP, as the upgrade rules mean that you get less upside from scenarios where you get more good loot than #characters.

On a similar note, Zarlova's ability to gain arcane spellcasting isn't that helpful in organized play since her class deck only has divine spells. It could, however, be extremely useful in S&S or RotRL boxes.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Orbis Orboros wrote:
Sanctuary is auto evade without attack or mental traits.

Sanctuary has the mental trait.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
RedDogMT wrote:
I am not much of a fan of the pirate theme, but it also looks like S&S has been reviewing better than RotR.

For what it's worth, that's probably because people who didn't like RotRL probably didn't pick up S&S.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Orbis Orboros wrote:
nondeskript wrote:
And let's be honest, if you were playing the Summon Monster spell and hoping to actually win a combat check with it, you must be crazy. I thought it was a funny card, but in reality the only combat you'd be likely to win is really easy combat you would win without that spell. It's really just a sorta-kinda-but-not-really-evade card.
For this reason I think it should be a basic spell, not an AP 5 loot.

Wouldn't that be really powerful for a basic spell? Auto-evade without the attack or mental traits (with a small chance to defeat the opponent instead)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Hawkmoon269 wrote:
They were mailed out last Friday, but they couldn't do it with an email to everyone who should get them. See this post.

Awesome.

It's too bad all the customer service posts are titled with the order number. Makes it hard to see if anyone's having the same issue as me... but I figured you'd know what was going on XD


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Skeld wrote:

I've downloaded my PDF if anyone has any questions...

-Skeld

Do you suddenly have the urge to punch puppies after reading it?


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I got the authorization email, but I still haven't gotten any indication of when Mogmurch/Ranzak are being sent out (I picked up my subscription at Gencon). Are those still being mailed out?


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

It seems like another one of those rules that's just sort of a by-product of how the game is designed. The developers *could* make a specific rule separating what qualifies as a card type under which situation (or introduce "sub-type" or something), but why bother if the current system works? Maybe it's a false read, but I get the feeling since this game is somewhat complex already, the designers try not to add additional rules that complicate gameplay if they aren't necessary. Sort of like the caltrops vs skeleton situation: it doesn't make sense that a skeleton would be affected, but forcing every situation to make sense would cause an absolute mess of specific interactions being imposed on cards and in the rules.

Personally, though, I don't think loot should be an equal to weapon/spell/item etc, just because it doesn't describe what type of card it is; all it means is how the card is acquired. If a spell loot card reduces damage, why should it also matter if an armor you're also playing to reduce damage is loot or not?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

This is pretty awesome. I'll have to give it a go once my group has some more free time. One thing though; I noticed you used "ship damage" on the Daunting Narrows. It should be structural damage.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:
Mechalibur wrote:


Sea Witches +2d4 to fortitude and survival seemed good at first, but then I realized that make you end up rolling 3d4 total, or 7.5 average which is kind of lame. Bonuses to constitution or wisdom don't even help - she doesn't have the skill based on an attribute, so she has to stick with a base 1d4. If you have someone like Lem, who can add extra to those checks, I'll admit it's really nice to have.

Feiya is someone like Lem. If your check is to defeat a monster or barrier, she will drop a huge static bonus. But, your general premise still stands. It would be a lot better if she got a Jirelle style skill inquisition.

Pirate Queen for life!

Or if she has a statstone. Replace that unlisted d4 with her Intelligence die, then add 2d4 for 1d12 + 2d4.

Admittedly, still not as great as simply gaining a skill, but still usable. And maybe there will be some spells or items or allies that make it more worth it.

And combine it with difficulty reduction power with a high adventure deck number card to make a 7.5 average all you need.

Does a statstone work if you're doing a skill you don't have though? I actually don't have my cards on me right now, so I forget the exact wording.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:

I am going to disagree and make the case for Sea Witch.

Yes, Hexer gets to increase Feiya's core power from 2+AD# to 3+AD#, but that's just about all it has going for it.

Sea Witch can recharge an animal ally to get a spell from the discard pile. That is FAR better than discarding any ally to get a spell.

The Sea Witch can recharge blessings against aquatic banes. Half the monsters in S&S are aquatic, which makes it far more useful than recharging to get allies (we need more info to make the call on Hshurha vs. Pharasma)

The Hexers ability to reshuffle a non-villain, non-henchman monsters is incredibly situational, and her card draw ability takes multiple feats to even approach usefulness. In contrast, fortitude and survial checks come up all the time, and I can't wait to get that extra 2d4.

I agree with you that its not a clear cut case, but Sea Witch seems the better choice from where I am sitting.

The extra difficulty reduction isn't why I went with Hexer actually. It's the ability to look at the top card of your deck whenever you play a spell, and put it in your hand if that card is a spell. Granted, you need two power feats to do it, but it seems incredibly useful.

Sea Witches +2d4 to fortitude and survival seemed good at first, but then I realized that make you end up rolling 3d4 total, or 7.5 average which is kind of lame. Bonuses to constitution or wisdom don't even help - she doesn't have the skill based on an attribute, so she has to stick with a base 1d4. If you have someone like Lem, who can add extra to those checks, I'll admit it's really nice to have.

On the other hand Sea Witch *can* recharge an animal to get a spell back, which is just fantastic. I'm really not convinced on my position at all to be honest :P


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Orbis Orboros wrote:

Well this thread fell by the wayside while I was on vacation. (Not that I'm saying it's because of that)

I laughed at Seelah being suitably dumb.

Okay, here's a new topic then:

Best role cards for the S&S characters?

Obviously hard to tell without knowing the banes in the adventures coming out, but here's what I think (without any justifications whatsoever!).

Ranzak: Kleptomaniac
Alahazra: Stargazer
Jirelle: Pirate Queen
Lem: Sea Singer (tentative)
Lirianne: Deadeye (anyone notice her Musketeer role mentions she'd be good with swords, even though she'd still be terrible with them?)
Merisiel: Shadow
Seltyiel: Marauder (tentative)
Valeros: Tactician!
Damiel: Chirurgeon (tentative)
Feiya: Hexer (tentative)
Lini: Aquamancer
Oloch: Shield of Gorum

Overall, I think the roles are a lot more balanced this time around. There are still a few that seem to be clear winners, but we'll have to wait until the next parts are out to be sure.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Mike Selinker wrote:
Guys, this thread is not for answering questions; it's about the FAQ itself. Take it outside, please.

This is a direct response to an faq update though. I thought conversations like that were supposed to go in this thread while questions about whether there's an error or not have their own threads?


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Jonah G wrote:

I've been spending a lot on this game as well. The sleeves alone. Jeez. No wonder UltraPRO is including free promotional sleeves in S&S.

Are any of you doing any custom game stuff with your own home made cards or scenarios? I'm really surprised more of this isn't going on.

Oh, I made a scenario for characters that beat RotRL... I should probably get to posting that XD


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Dave Riley wrote:

I think if you were able to read that card without prior knowledge of the more ambiguous wording there wouldn't even be a question. It's tough to divorce yourself from assessing it that way once you know it's wrong. But fewer words are always going to win, right? The card only has so much space. Even if the card is just an imaginary thing you look up online, it might not always be.

I have a group that hasn't seen either wording yet. I'll ask them what they think it means.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

It's sort of a roundabout way to word it. I would just go with "Your handsize is equal to the number of cards in the bane pile, to a maximum of the hand size listed on your character card." or something like that. While the faq wording is unambiguous, I had to do a double take to make sure I was understanding it.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Yeah, Lirianne and Seltyiel are both fairly average characters in my opinion. The best part about Lirianne is probably her d12 wisdom, but if you're playing with Jirelle (d8+3 survival), Lirianne starts to get a bit underwhelming.

Saying Alahzra can't fight is just incorrect though. Even if she doesn't start with any of her attack spells, she can cycle through a ridiculous number of cards per turn, while scouting out potential dangers. With a Fireblade, she gets 1d12+2d4+4, and she can fail the recharge check intentionally so that she can get it back each turn (make sure to have at least one cure though, so you can get your discarded cards back in your deck).


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Calthaer wrote:
Mechalibur wrote:
This is true, but keep in mind most of the characters with significant stat weaknesses are also the ones that have d12's. Specifically, the only characters with multiple d4's also have a d12.
Those clearly aren't the characters I was talking about, but...OK.

Then perhaps you could explain what you mean?


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Calthaer wrote:

Everyone focuses on the fact that d12 characters should get these gems, and while that's one use, they can also serve as a floor for characters who have some significant weaknesses. In Runelords terms, for example, it would help a character with a d4 INT but several d8 stats to have a shot at closing INT / Arcane locations, or to acquire some super-spell, or something else.

There have been several adventures in the group Hawk & I play together where someone has said: "There are no locations that would be good for me to close." I anticipate that there will be similar scenarios in S&S - just like there was in Runelords - where there's a preponderance of checks of one type required (to close locations, defeat henchmen, etc.). The gems significantly alter the situation there for characters weak in that area, evening things out, so it's one possible strategy to pick from to win.

In other words; rather than just making the peaks a lot higher, it can also raise some of the valleys to a minimum level so that they don't get flooded.

This is true, but keep in mind most of the characters with significant stat weaknesses are also the ones that have d12's. Specifically, the only characters with multiple d4's also have a d12.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Wow, he looks like a lot of fun. He also seems like an extremely powerful card if your group has decent healing power (or fire resistant armor!)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Troymk1 wrote:

Mechalibur, I think I failed a scenario 2-3 times in the entire cycle. Sometimes via caution as I was close to losing someone and didn't let them explore aggressively. Sometimes just down to crazy luck.

I commend you on your iron-man approach however!

I just find it weird that it's actually beneficial to lose scenarios so that you can replay them as much as you want. That's why we implemented that rule.

It was a bit sad when my party died in S&S though (if you get a bad start in Press Ganged, it can get really hard to catch up).


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Troymk1 wrote:

I've been playing solitaire mostly, finishing ROTR using 6 characters. I play each scenario to win and don't usually go shopping.

The characters still ended up completely kick-ass.

I think by ensuring you get every boon you're cheapening the experience for yourselves, making an easy game almost trivial

My group played the game so that losing a scenario meant the characters die. It ensured we only went boon fishing if we were absolutely sure we'd have enough time to go through the location deck. I think in that case there was appropriate risk/reward involved.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Orbis Orboros wrote:
And I understand calling Lini super, but Lem? Really? I like him and he's good, but...

Arcane and Divine spells, hand size 6, and able to add 1d4+X to any check with a recharge. You play Lini, you know how powerful that is :P


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I guess we have different experiences then. Dealing with barriers has been the most difficult part of RotRL for me. Probably doesn't help that Blessings of Abadar and Masterwork Tools like to hide from me.

Edit: I just realized I play the game a bit differently though, that probably has a lot to do with it (for example, I usually play so blessings don't stack, and I tend to shy away from the really powerful characters like Lini or Lem who can add bonuses to everything)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Orbis Orboros wrote:
Mechalibur wrote:
allowing you to brute force through even really difficult barriers.

It should probably be noted that we always make sure barriers can be handled. Our characters stock up on Tools (almost unfaillingly scrabbling over every Masterwork we find) and I value Abadar over practically every blessing in the game, including Lamashtu, excepting those who desire specific blessings for power feats of course (like RotR Kyra).

Sometimes we run into a barrier we can't handle at the moment, but it's rare. And we always have a healer nearby and can send someone else to take it out.

Exactly, it's easier to handle when you have more people. It makes you more likely to have the tools or blessings to deal with barriers. With only a few people (and kind of bad luck finding the boons we want), being able to send them to the bottom is extremely useful.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I think scouting is fairly important with a smaller (1-3) group. When you have a lot of players, you can be reasonably sure that you can beat most encounters due to the staggering number of check bonuses you're able to hand out, allowing you to brute force through even really difficult barriers.

My best group of the game was Kyra and Seoni, and Seoni in particular had a good number of scouting spells. We combined this with Augury and Scrying spells to move the extremely difficult barriers to the bottom of the deck (or we'd do this with villains so that we could close the other locations up early/get all the boons in their location deck).

I also have no idea how we would have defeated Karzoug without being able to move him to the bottom of the deck. Encountering him 5+ times would have been awful.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Maybe a separate thread should be made for discussion of Kyra's roles? Seems to be a contentious topic.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
DirkSJ wrote:
Flat the Impaler wrote:
I know... I tried to stay away, but comments about Kyra being useless got me annoyed enough to chime in. ;)
Er...no. Kyra is amazing; she is a powerhouse. It's just Healer spec is useless and her first power is mostly useless (though a good backup).

As someone who encountered literally 0 blessings of Sarenrae, I think Healer was actually the better choice for Kyra. The higher hand size was nice, and I played with her healing power in mind, having the first character burn a lot of cards for extra explores, while she pretty much negated the damage in a single turn.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Calthaer wrote:
Flat the Impaler wrote:
I hate when people judge other peoples' play styles because it differs from their own, as if theirs is the only valid style.
You might have joined the wrong thread, then...it sort of seems like the point of it...

This thread is not intended to say there's only one to play any of the characters. All discussion regarding possible strategies are welcome, including disagreeing about which way is optimal.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Draight wrote:
Which makes me wonder, do you think it would be possible to solo?

The location that summons the combat 30 monster doesn't appear in solo play I think. I think someone like Damiel would have a fair shot at soloing the scenarios released so far (he might have trouble with the early scenarios requiring diplomacy checks, but remember that a potion of glibness is basic!)

1 to 50 of 929 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.