|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
And, to be honest, for most non-primary longbow users, Adaptive is much the better enhancement to get. If you aren't running your non-Str-based archer, the odds are fairly high that Str is what you are most likely to be adding those level and item enhancements to. Also great for a Barbarian, since the longbow is perfectly suited for you whether you are Raging or not.
As I understand it, the bow in question is a +1 keen longbow, correct? If that is the case then adaptive is not an option, as adaptive says "This ability can only be placed on composite bows."
Ya know, PFS is kind of a grassroots thing. If you want a group and there isn't one you can form your own. :) Just set up a date and time and put it out there on meetup, facebook, the event page here on paizo.com, etc. and see who shows up.
It looks like an investigator cannot legally take brew potion. That seems like an oversight. I'm not suggesting the class get it for free the same as an alchemist, but I think that they should be able to take it as a feat at 3rd.
IMO simply taking the feat is better since it better reflects what your character is actually doing - s/he is really a cleric that wants heavy armor, not a cleric that has significant martial training.
Kezzie Redlioness wrote:
"You play your character and I'll play mine" is the right response I think.
The antimagic field wouldn't necessarily stop his summons from being effective. He can just summon creatures with ranged attacks throughout the sanctum. As the party chases him around they will wink out in the antimagic field, but reappear as soon as the wizard continues the chase and they move out of the field. Then the summons continue their assault from range. That 10' radius is not big enough to protect the full party even from melee attacks unless everyone is taking readied actions to follow the wizard when he moves.
Things that the GM isn't likely to already have are best IMO. If it were possible, some flip-mats that are no longer in print. Or things like those horse mounts, invisible characters, and such. Gamicon does raffles for prints of Pathfinder art - those are pretty cool. Knowing that the local GMs didn't have them I got combat pads for the GMs at our most recent con - that seems to be one of those useful items that many people don't pick up when they could get the latest book instead.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
I was saying: "I think it goes against the spirit of PFS to turn people away from a table. Unless, of course, that person is a jerk."
Simple misunderstanding. :)
Perhaps I'm just extending my own preferences to a general approach, but as a player I would rather the organizer tell me "sorry, we're all full up this slot" then have a less-than-stellar experience. That could be either someone stepping up to GM that isn't fully prepared or being the one-too-many player at the table (whether that's the seventh or fifth). There will always be more game days and conventions after all.
I think the key is to explain the reasoning to the player, so that they know you're not just being a curmudgeon but rather are trying to maintain the highest quality of gaming you can.
I disagree that GMs should be expected to take on more players than they are comfortable with. The GM should be able to have a good time too and they shouldn't feel pressured to run for 7 players if 5 is the most they can handle. I believe that almost every 7 player table I have run would have been noticeably better if I had limited it to 6 players.
There may be a cost to telling someone to come back next time rather than cram them into a table, but there's also a cost to putting too many people at one table. I firmly believe that every player needs to take the initiative to be responsible for themselves. If there are options to sign up ahead of time and the player chooses to just show up then that is their own fault - not the GM's and not the organizer's.
I feel it's especially inappropriate to label a GM a jerk because they honestly believe it's in everyone's best interests to turn a player away rather than go beyond what they can handle.
It goes against the spirit of PFS to create a miserable experience in the name of inclusiveness.
I disagree with this. The exact same spell shouldn't be better just because the GM is using it. Plus it's unclear anyway since the only direction I can find is from James Jacobs who contradicts himself. link1 link2
Personally, I feel that Pathfinder Society probably allows even more (in sum) than most home games even should. There's a huge breadth of material that Paizo has published and much of that won't be appropriate, flavor-wise, to any given campaign.
The hard-cover books plus any books on topics directly related to the campaign you are running should present plenty of choices for characters while reducing the overwhelming amount of stuff out there. There are also certain things that PFS disallows that a home game need not, such as item crafting since you can directly monitor how it affects the game.
The atheist abjurations feat from Faiths and Philosophies also gets you "a +2 bonus to your caster level whenever you use an abjuration spell to dispel or counter a divine spell, or send an extraplanar outsider summoned or called by a divine caster back to its home plane."
Mystic Lemur wrote:
"Such as" simply means "for example." It is not limiting.
From align weapon: "You can’t cast this spell on a natural weapon, such as an unarmed strike." This doesn't mean you can use it on a claw attack just because they didn't list out every natural weapon.
From baleful polymorph: "If the new form would prove fatal to the creature, such as an aquatic creature not in water, the subject gets a +4 bonus on the save." A fish gets a bonus to its save when you try to turn it into a squirrel (while it's in water).
From bless weapon: "Individual arrows or bolts can be transmuted, but affected projectile weapons (such as bows) don’t confer the benefit to the projectiles they shoot." Bless weapon on a crossbow doesn't confer the effect to the ammunition.
From calm emotions: "This spell automatically suppresses (but does not dispel) any morale bonuses granted by spells such as bless, good hope, and rage, and also negates a bard’s ability to inspire courage or a barbarian’s rage ability." All morale bonuses from spells are negated, not just those from bless, good hope, and rage.
From dispel magic: "You can also use a targeted dispel to specifically end one spell affecting the target or one spell affecting an area (such as a wall of fire)." You can use dispel magic to perform a targeted dispel of any spell, not just wall of fire.
Search the core rulebook for "such as" and you will quickly come to realize it is used to provide examples, not to provide all encompassing lists.
So, going back to the above quote:
Second, the subject immediately receives another saving throw (if one was allowed to begin with) against any spells or effects that possess or exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment [charm] effects and enchantment [compulsion] effects, such as charm person, command, and dominate person.
Protection from evil is not limited to only stopping charm person, command, and dominate person.
Note, I'm not trying to jump down your throat, but I've seen this notion before, and not just with the "because PFS" reasoning. I just want the idea to die. Determining how multiple effects overlap is one of those reasons why the game has a GM. All we can ask is for GMs to make a good faith effort to adjudicate the rules fairly and without malice.
Michael Brock wrote:
So what it sounds like just from this thread is there is little play happening at levels 7+ And we should focus on lower level play options because we need to allow enough options for veteran players to play with the new player that comes in off the street. Interesting. Perhaps we need to reevaluate any plans we had for a new seeker arc and refocus those on tier 1-5. Thoughts?
I would really love to see a new seeker arc, but I believe that focusing those efforts on more tier 1-5 scenarios would benefit the community much more.
The thing is that the responses here make it seem more ambiguous than I believe it really is. Many people are responding with "it should be this" as opposed to what the rules actually allow.
The season's faction goals are in the Guide to Organized Play that everyone is expected to read.
Infusions are great - they are force multipliers that you don't have to use your own in-combat actions for. Some good lower level formulas for infusions include:
For a bomber alchemist: if you have the Adventurer's Armory book, then take the Splash Weapon Mastery feat.
Players wanted some additional options after the Advanced Race Guide came out. Tengu were selected along with Aasimar and Tieflings to be available without a boon. Tengu had already been depicted as being found in various places within the inner sea region, so it made sense for them to be more numerous within the Pathfinder Society compared to many other "exotic" races.
You can empower horrid wilting three times, plus still widen a cloudkill or black tentacles and have one charge leftover for whatever. I think maximized, widened cloudkill on top of a widened black tentacles is particularly nasty myself. x4 movement, possible grappling, and con damage every round. Wall them in and it's game over.
On the note for this boon, does it let you make 1 of the new character or can you make as many of the new characters as you want?
When building a new character for Pathfinder Society Organized Play, you may make use of the Thassilonian magic rules on page 17 of Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Inner Sea Magic.
For those who like communal resist energy, may I suggest a riffle scroll of communal resist energy. This bumps the minimum caster level up to 7, which means resistance of 20 instead of 10, plus it lasts longer and requires no verbal components.
Chris Mortika wrote:
The guide says:
Death is a part of any RPG, and unfortunately it can happen in Pathfinder Society Organized Play just like in a regular Pathfinder RPG game session. The basic rule for Pathfinder Society is that if a PC dies during the course of a scenario, he can be raised by a PC of appropriate class and level seated at his table (paying all expected costs), he can be raised by an NPC in an appropriately sized settlement (see “Purchasing Spellcasting Services”), or he can be raised by his faction if he has sufficient Prestige Points.
A direct reading indicates that paying in gold means you need to be in an appropriately sized settlement, but paying in prestige bypasses that requirement. So if you die out in the middle of the Mwangi expanse for example and it takes 15 days for the party to drag your body back to a settlement, then you can either pay the normal prestige cost or pay an above-minimum gold cost to get the necessary caster level for however long you have been dead.
Personally, several of my characters keep an unguent of timelessness on them for just such occasions.
How exactly does Empowered Cloudkill work? ... So does this just mean that all that happens is that the con damage is (1d4)*1.5?
Finally (for now), I know that the common rule tends to be that you can "run" from a scenario at any time that you're not in combat.
There was a special rule for the Bonekeep scenarios that handwaived the means of escape outside of combat; but this is not generally true. The party has to deal with the situation they put themselves in. At the bottom of a pit? Hope you brought a potion of fly or spider climb.
IMO if the party doesn't ask, then one of the people at the briefing should remind them that it is a one-way trip before they leave, and that their means of returning is a problem for the party to solve themselves. They could then ask for the additional info the VCs have. This is more of a social grace to ensure the players (out of character) understand that the risk of failure is very much present in this scenario.
If they don't bother to inspect the bowl or the portal and the fight with Krune goes poorly, well that would suck. This is a high level, challenging scenario. The party needs to show they are the capable Pathfinders that they should be by this point.
Patrick Harris @ MU wrote:
I wasn't accusing you of lacking common sense. That was directed to the notion of having to ask how to calculate the out of subtier gold at all for scenarios with more than two subtiers.
If there are two ways to interpret a rule and one contradicts common sense, then choose the other interpretation. "Does it make sense to get more gold playing a level 3 character at subtier 1-2 compared to playing the same character at subtier 3-4?" No, so don't do that. Many people may not realize that common sense is actually explicitly part of the campaign principles outlined in the Guide - so I quoted it. You don't have to justify using common sense when interpreting a rule, and there shouldn't need to be clarification if common sense can answer the question.
At the table I think that 99% of the time a question like this comes up people do what makes sense without every bringing it up outside the game. There is a much higher tendency on these message boards than I think almost ever exists at the table to focus so heavily on the little details of how rules are worded to the exclusion of common sense. It can give the impression then that one should slavishly follow RAW even when it makes no sense. GMs don't want to be accused of not running by the Rules As Written, but GMs and players alike need to keep common sense in mind. NPC combat tactics are the perfect example of this. If the listed tactics make no sense given the situation, then the GM shouldn't follow them just to "run by RAW."
Good tactics wins over preparation.
Even a completely unoptimized character played really well can be very effective. Know your strengths, know your weaknesses, don't be afraid to try ideas that might seem nutty.
I am looking toward running Eyes of Ten for our higher level regular players later this year. I am worried what a 6 man table will do and if I can offer a good experience.
I would recommend limiting Eyes of the Ten to just 4 or 5 players if possible, especially if they are optimized. That will also give them each more game time to be in the spotlight.
On elven arrows...
Though elven alchemists created these formulas, any alchemist can use them, either on arrows or crossbow bolts.
Are these purchasable for anyone or are they only available as items crafted by an alchemist PC?
If they are purchasable by anyone, then is the purchase price simply the listed cost times two?
On environmental effects, most GMs ignore lighting. Sure, the party may have ioun stones and such, but that won't help in the first round when they are shooting arrows at the enemy who has concealment. Paying attention to the little details like this can make easy encounters more challenging.
Many tables don't run the climbing rules strictly for another example. Normal climbing is 1/4 the person's base speed and they must have two hands free.
Very few follow the rules for flying exactly.
Heck, simply enforcing the actions required to draw and stow items can make a big difference in action economy. Put your weapon and shield away to climb up out of the pit? That's not too quick. Want to draw and drink a potion? Okay, that's both a move and a standard action that each provoke. Draw a potion and give it to a downed ally? That will take one move action and a full-round action - so this can't be done in one round.
GMs can sign their own sheets.
The secondary objectives will not generally be faction based, but rather will be tied to the main mission.
That's a very nice amulet of mighty fists you have there. Just saying.
The new tier 1 scenario is not available yet. If you have generics there is a good likelihood that you can be fit into a level 1-5 scenario. Especially if you aren't too picky about which one. Speaking for myself as a Gen Con GM, I will have a low level scenario with me and ready to go for anytime my higher level scenarios don't run. Other GMs may be doing the same.