MisterSlanky's page

Can I up Doug to run two scenarios during each-time?

MisterSlanky wrote:

Again in my experience, if you are running an event outside of the sanctioned Pafthfinder Society play at a convention...

How do I run a PFS event WITHIN the sactioned PFS play... specifically at PiazoCon?

I'll just point to what Majuba said. Also, be aware that when the call goes out for Hyrum for Pathfinder Society GMs, he will provide not only a list of time slots for the games, but will assign a module to you, rather than let you pick the module yourself. You will get this module provided to you by Paizo ahead of time so you can prepare.

Ryan Bolduan
Venture Captain - Twin Cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul) Pathfinder Society

This is another open call to adventurers for Pathfinder Society on April 17th at Noon. We have three tables running and have seats to spare!

Come join the long-standing Pathfinder Society group based in the Twin Cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul) metro area, the MSP Pathfinders! We are an established group of players getting together for regular Pathfinder Society sponsored games and are steadily growing.

All players, new and veteran, young and old are always welcome.

You can contact me at vcbolduan@gmail.com for details, or you can register at Warhorn.

When
Sunday April 17th at Noon
Where
Fantasy Flight Games Event Center - Roseville Minnesota
What
The Pallid Plague (One Table)
Before the Dawn Part I - The Bloodcove Disguise (Two Tables)

I should note. Due to our growth, we will likely be transitioning out of the Fantasy Flight Games Event center and moving to other locations across the Metro area. Contact me if you would like to know more!

One comment. While I wouldn't take it as far as Dragnmoon, I do understand where he is coming from. That said, it's a lot harder to "hide" your faction than has been described here in some other posts.

GMs may not have enough faction sheets for everybody. GMs may ask for factions before the game. Your two best buddies with different factions might be sitting at your table. Joe Faction next to you may announce his faction, which causes everybody else to announce theirs. In a home-game setting or even a 3-4 table store game setting, it doesn't take long to figure out factions. From an external standpoint alone, hiding your faction is not an easy task.

When I GM at the big conventions I try hard to let players keep factions secret, but I'd say 9/10 of the time so far it's failed simply due to player actions. So while in a perfect world it would be fantastic if we could keep things confidential, in the real-world it just doesn't work. Some players also really want to get all their faction points, and will cajole every player they can find into helping, even if it means doing so on a personal player-to-player level.

In my experience the Falcata is a popular choice for lots of players - most of whom are not of the Taldor faction. Between the Half-Elf ability to take an exotic weapon feat at creation, the human's bonus feat, and the heirloom weapon trait, you'd be surprised how many falcata wielding fighters, rogues, bards, clerics, and even wizards I've seen.

It's an immensely popular weapon.

Another set of questions/requests:

I see that when players submit their official PFS PCs to the website that they type in stats and info about their PCs. For each event, will the GM have much of this info printed out in table form to help speed up the start of play? Is that what is on the "convention tracking sheets"? Otherwise I will have to gather that info at the table.

I have GMed at Gen Con for Paizo and I'm a local Venture Captain for Pathfinder Society. The information that PCs can enter on the website as part of their character registration process has never been provided to GMs in prior events. Since the information is optional, in my experience few, if anybody, has actually completed enough to be of benefit to a GM. The information present on the Pathfinder Society tracking sheets is the same information present on any sheet provided for a Pathfinder Society event (session number, module name, GM name/number, and player names/numbers/factions.

How quickly will the coordinator of my events be updating the website? I assume that I will not have to do this myself at PaizoCon (i.e. that I would not have to be the coordinator of events I GM like I would if I were running a PFS event outside of PaizoCon).

Again in my experience, if you are running an event outside of the sanctioned Pafthfinder Society play at a convention you are responsible for submitting the session sheets such as you would for any game that you are traditionally running outside of Paizo. As an example, the individual coordinating side events for Pathfinder Society in Indianapolis was responsible for his own reporting, even though Pathfinder Society was represented at Gen Con.

Taldans know that it's all Andoran propaganda.

This gnome was a cannibal.

Note, my Gnome has not, nor will ever eat another Gnome, thus he cannot be described as a cannibal. He also never actually ate any human/elf/dwarf/halfling opponents. Also note that he doesn't "eat" his foes, he merely "tastes a little", nor did he ever openly eat a foe.

I am prepping to run this scenario in a home game soon and not being a native english speaker could use some help.

** spoiler omitted **

I'll see what I can do. This thread's been full of spoilers already, so I'm not going to hide it.

Though different now sounds my name, the spelling still remains the same. Once prior leap of might, now becomes bird of white.

The first sentence indicates that you're looking for a word that is spelled the same, but sounds different. In English it is what is known heteronym as a (Wikipedia Link). Another example would be the word bow which could be a stringed instrument (pronounced boh), and the front a ship (pronounced bau). The link has tons of examples.

So now that we know that we're looking for a heteronym, we need to find a word that a) means a big jump, and a white bird. The word (dove) can mean either, as it first can mean jumping from a height into water (traditionally), and the other is a white bird (typically representing peace).

If you have a bunch of other non-English speakers, or not native speakers that is the kind of riddle you're looking for. I personally wouldn't try to translate it, as the whole thing is based on a particular word in the English language.

So should they be played in order? Yes. Do they absolutely have to be played in order? No. The former head of the PFS, Josh, wanted people to try their best to play arcs in the correct order, but never said it must be done that way. And as far as I know, the new heads of the PFS, Mark and Hyrum, have not changed that.

Except in "The Devil You Know" series which stated with absolutely zero issues of interpretation that you were not to play 3 without playing 1 and 2 and you could not play 4 without playing 3.

They fill them based on how friendly you are on the forums. You and I are getting lumps of coal.

That's not so bad.

I figured they'd light them on fire and set 'em on your doorstep.

I can see Vic now, giggling, ringing your doorbell, and hiding in the bushes.

We'll be unveiling the new, less-subjective requirements for earning a 5th star later in the summer.

I know I'm violating my NDA by revealing this, but Mark, people are not going to accept your requirement of animal sacrifice.

Well done and welcome to the ranks! If you're out of Chicago, we might be able to coordinate together on occasion in Wisconsin as well.

If it helps, I had a player light fire to his own faction mission last weekend. (In game of course) Unintentionally

I did that too once, likely in the same module.

Well looks like I missed the party and didn't get to respond.

What the previous 4 said, and welcome to the Pathfinder Society section of the forums.

Perhaps it was the fact I sat at an unlucky table, in that all 1st level PC's, only the Rogue had Knowledge Local. He made the rolls for me (and failed) despite the fact he was Qadira and my character was Andoran faction. Technically, he shouldn't have really been able to roll for me right?

I made level 2 in that module, so I put a rank in knowledge local. But it is not a class skill, and only +2 Int, so only have a +3 in it. Normally, I wouldn't have put anything in Knowledge Local and got some of the class skills higher, but it seems that Knowledge Local is an incredibly valuable skill in PFS. But say I'd done that at character creation, my character would only have a 20% chance of success on DC20, maybe 30% if the out-of-faction rogue could have made a 10 and the GM allowed the out-of-faction rogue to even roll.

I am the VC in question, and although I did not run this table, I ran the same mod at a different table and I have an idea what's going on. First off, while I love Delirium's Tangle it was the module that got my home game started on the "why are PA so hard to get" and if you dig, you'll find my thread on this topic from the wayback machine.

To your point on getting help: in PFS there is no reason why another faction member can't roll for you. The context should be put in roleplay terms ("hey bud, do these look human to you?") and there's always the possibility a hard-nosed PC will refuse to help ("um...I'm not digging through that crap"), but there's no reason another faction member can't be cajoled or persuaded to help. Unfortunately there's no way for gold to change hands, but one can make deals or future pacts when the other player is in need. Sure, as players we're often predisposed to help out others, but maybe players should separate themselves from their character motivations and be honest that they really can't help ("hey Joe, I know you want the PA, but there's no way my Taldan is going to help out a Qadiran").

All that being said, one thing I enjoy is that PFS really encourages a) group play, and b) characters with diverse background and not just maxed out skills. I love the fact that players have to really consider how to use those skill points beyond just maxing out perception and acrobatics all the time. I think the way the "hard" PA is earned really reflects these two design decisions. Do I think they're too hard to get? Quite possibly yes, especially at level 1 when skill points are sparse and you're the only faction member at the table, but I fundamentally do not disagree with the design, just perhaps minor issues with its implementation. Mark's idea is a good one, and one I'll be happy to champion moving forward.

Frankly I don't want to bother digging out an online MM entry or haul around my old MM unless absolutely necessary. My rule of thumb is as follows:

1) If there are stats published in the module I use them as-is with absolutely no modifications. Things like concentration, CMB/CMD, skills, etc. I convert on the fly as-needed.

2) I use the Bestiary creature if it is a reasonable equivalent. The key here is reasonable equivalent, which in my mind means - same or lower CR. I am not going to throw the party up against a CR 5 Dire Critter when the module was designed around a CR 2 Dire Critter.

3) If there is no reasonable equivalent in the Bestiary (or the creature does not exist in Pathfinder) I will then turn to the MM entry and convert on the fly.

My experience with two of those already mentioned has been mixed.

I know Black Waters has been mentioned by some as potentially disturbing but my experience with a table of tweens and early teens and their father was that they loved the module. Of course, a lot of that can be chalked up to relative maturity level, of which that group has in spades (the daughter is perhaps one of the most mature gamers of her age I've ever met). I ran City of Strangers with a 10 year old at the table and it was easily one of the most uncomfortable experiences I've had behind the GM screen. Again the relative maturity level (in this case it was low) had something to do with it.

I think Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible is a good choice (with a good morality option at the end), Tide of Morning is good, and Mists of Mwangi has a really solid "Night at the Museum" vibe which isn't too out there.

For those without cars, what's the best way to get there? Not sure if I can attend yet, but a friend might.

I am thinking a Double Weapon, one end is spear-like, the other end is club-like. Attacks with the spear end do Piercing or Slashing 1d8/x3, attacks with the club end do bludgeoning 1d8/x2, and the weapon cannot be thrown, but can be set against a charge.

Anything you guys can see with the weapon, problems or bugs or loop-holes I can close would be greatly appreciated!

I would let the weapon thematically go at my table, but I'd adjust the stats myself. I can see where you get the spear stats, but the club stats seem to high to me. I'd go 1d6/x2 on that end and allow the 1d8/x3 on the other. Other than that, I'd say go for it.

I'll be right behind you guys (along with quite a few of my three groups) as soon as the new organized play document is updated to include gunslingers. The rules were fine the way they were when we all started; tinkering with them is just frustrating and infuriating the populace.

I apologize. I really do get the frustration over the druid change, and while I agree with the decision, I can at least empathize with players who are upset that their current characters are different than they initially imagined. Changing a feature that already was can be frustrating, but adding a feature that does not yet exist is something that will continuously happen in PFS. I really don't understand this kind of attitude of "I don't like new X so I quit". Paizo is going to have to grow and evolve to survive. New products are going to be put out all the time, some of which will have dissenters (such as the gunslinger). It's not like this was a surprise though; Paizo has acknowledged how firearms exist in their world, and we've known about the Mana Wastes for an awful long time - firearms aren't exactly new ground.

If I threatened to get up and walk every time Paizo put out a new prestige class, or new class option that frustrated me I would have been gone after the first new book and certainly would have left after Heirloom Weapon. I understand that you may not like them much, but you've always known that PFS was an amalgamation of all things Golarion, and I have a hard time understanding this attitude.

I mean no offense and I am not trying to be snarky or insulting, I really honestly want to understand this method of thinking, because I honestly don't understand it at all.

I tend to give new players a little push towards what they should be doing. After a couple games, tho, their on their own.

I tend to do the same. I've run for a lot of kids too (we have 6 that regularly show up for our games and I somehow kept getting them at my tables at Gen Con), and they don't always "get it" or realize some of the more subtle clues. Sometimes, especially for new players (while they wrap their heads around the concept of PA), a little wink and nudge is needed to get them on the right path. Long term though, it's best to wean them off that system and let them do it on their own.

I recently ran a mod for a group that had three kids in it. One could not grasp the concept that he was supposed to perform his faction mission in Spot A and really wanted to do it in unrelated Spot B because it was on the map. Part of it was my fault, as the map was the entire city and he thought he needed to go to the docks, but as they weren't even a part of the adventure, I wound up needing to nudge him in the right direction. Really, it's just a bit of a balancing act that requires use of your best judgement.

I’m really having trouble figuring out why this is such a huge deal. The animal companion is actually a fairly small part of the classes that get them, that curtailing their use doesn’t seem to be that huge. Giving a monkey a sword and a suit of chainmail, to me, seems like trying to get around the max-player thing. A loophole to have one more character at the table.

Also, personally, I really don’t have any sympathy for people who push the boundaries like that. You gotta know you are pushing the boundaries when you put a sword in a monkey’s hand.

As Mark pointed out, the problem being addressed in this thread has absolutely nothing to do with the chainmail wearing, greatsword wielding monkeys, but rather an entirely unrelated issue.

Since ACs can only earn one trick between adventures, Druids can get pretty hard with an animal death. No other class has this kind of class penalty. That's what the focus is. Monkey hating is over in the other thread. ;-)

Mark Garringer wrote:

JP Chapleau wrote:

Half-Azlanti okay?

Only if the other half is Charau-ka.

You have to take the Monkey Grip feat though.

You heard it here. 3.5 feats are now allowed. ;-)

At my table, the innate ability of an animal with a 3 or 4 INT to handle "high-level tactics" would depend on the animal. Wolves, for example, are naturally good at flanking, because that's how they take down prey. Rhinocereses, not so much.

Unfortunately, as much as I would like to, I do not have the capacity to channel Wild Kingdom at my table, so I couldn't make such calls if I wanted to, and I would suspect many GMs are in the same boat.

To start this off, let's take the definition from the book.

A confused creature is mentally befuddled and cannot act normally. A confused creature cannot tell the difference between ally and foe, treating all creatures as enemies. Allies wishing to cast a beneficial spell that requires a touch on a confused creature must succeed on a melee touch attack. If a confused creature is attacked, it attacks the creature that last attacked it until that creature is dead or out of sight.

Roll on the following table at the beginning of each confused subject's turn each round to see what the subject does in that round.

d% Behavior
01–25 Act normally.
26–50 Do nothing but babble incoherently.
51–75 Deal 1d8 points of damage + Str modifier to self with item in hand.
76–100 Attack nearest creature (for this purpose, a familiar counts as part of the subject's self).

A confused creature who can't carry out the indicated action does nothing but babble incoherently. Attackers are not at any special advantage when attacking a confused creature. Any confused creature who is attacked automatically attacks its attackers on its next turn, as long as it is still confused when its turn comes. Note that a confused creature will not make attacks of opportunity against anything that it is not already devoted to attacking (either because of its most recent action or because it has just been attacked).

I highlighted the various points which have caused our group's confusion (no pun intended). We have three phrases which cause the interpretation problems.

1) The first the section states that an attackee will attack an attacker until that attacker is dead.

2) The second sentence states that every round you get to roll (which produces options other than attacking your attacker).

3) Finally, the third sentence states that anybody who is attacked will attack their attacker on the next turn, but only if it is still confused.

There are several methods of interpreting these options. Does #1 trump #2, or vice versa? Point #3 implies could be interpreted to mean that if your % roll is low enough you're not confused, but does it force you to make an automatic attack anyway? The phrasing is a little self-contradictory and I'm looking to see what other GMs have done.

Ryan Bolduan wrote:

You could go the other way and cast reduce person on yourself.

NOBODY SHRINKS A DWARF!

IT WAS COLD OUT!

Technically, all the PFS-specific rules should be in the manual.

Possibly it should - in the perfect world - but unfortunately, Mark/Hyrum have been trying to get caught up on lots of work and have stated that they don't have time to get the guide out as quickly as they would like. They've asked us to use the forums until that point. Is it ideal? No, but it's what we have to deal with.

I don't think anybody is going to throw the book at you for not following a specific minor rules announcement embedded in a forum post somewhere, but I do know that the replay rule has been stated over extensively and I'd suggest that if you're in violation of that rule, you really should switch over. As has been stated, you are bound by that decision, and it's a pretty major impact to the way PFS works.

Out of interest, would it be possible to allow characters affected by a rules change to be re-specced? I am not sure that would make much of a difference in this particular instance but I assume that if an Animal Companion can suddenly not take Weapon Proficies then those feats can be re-chosen - can that be taken further?

Mark clarified that animal companions that have weapon or armor proficiency can have those feats, and only those feats, retrained. You may also sell back the animal companion's weapon for full price rather than 1/2 price.

Edit: Here is the link to Mark's Post

There are a couple of realizations you need to make when dealing with chronicle loot.

1) Loot is set to a gold total per sub-tier. This is done in order to maintain long-term balance. We are not ever allowed to adjust this number upwards for any reason.

2) Items gained are also set to be appropriate for each sub-tier. We may find something that can be used during the adventure that is not on that sheet. Basically hand-wave this as "it was sold for gold and has already been added to the gold earned" as above.

So to answer your questions.

No, the group does not get the spear, it is not on the chronicle sheet. (Edit: Doug Ninjaed me for the reason why).

The spear was sold for coin and was already added to the gold total, so you don't need to do anything about it.

You may never sell any item you find during an adventure for 1/2 gold ever (you may sell items you yourself have bought on previous adventures though for 1/2 gold).

Hope that helps.

To make the bear companion large, you can use Enlarge Person thanks to Share Spells. Later in life, you can make it large with Righteous Might.

You could also just go straight Druid and focus on being a melee fighter type character with a Bear. Take a look at Bear Totem Druid. This way you still get access to Animal Growth (by far the best way to make your animal big).

You could go the other way and cast reduce person on yourself.

I love Bulmahn's new blog posts on rules clarifications but if the animal companion post was any indication, there are going to be a lot of people crying doom. I know of a couple druids who will not be happy, but I am glad that its now abundantly clear and we can play consistently.

See Eric, told you so. ;-)

Also to clarify, the Organized Play Guide has not been updated since the date you noted. Mark has made it clear that the updated guide is being worked on and that announcements to its status will coming at some point in the future.

As Callarek noted though, the Additional Resources section of the guide has been moved to the Paizo site in order to keep it up-to-date a little easier. The link he provided is the replacement for Chapter 13.

Amazing, we already have 3 of the 5 new factions!

2 - Edward/Adouard

Which demographic are we actually going for with these additions? :)

There's a sparkly vampire faction? Well I guess we know what the new demographic is.

As of Friday

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderS ociety/general/newFactions

Was posted, and so I think we can safely bet that the new factions are not going to be racial.

That is unless Mark was just giving us some misdirection prior to the new information formally being released?

Linkimificated

Photocopy the page from your book.

Clone Kyle and just bring him to your sessions.

Dun-dun-dunnnnn!

So now you all need to start guessing amongst yourselves on what factions you'll be looking at.

Ryan Bolduan wrote:

8 is outright not permitted, even by Play, Play, Play. If you're seeing 8 show up, somebody should be stepping up to GM a second table.

Nice world, wish we lived in it. People come to play at meetups. They are often new players and wouldn't know how to GM a game even if they wanted to do so. More often than not, they don't want to GM. They want to play.

So in this example, I would absolutely have been (by your way of thinking) required to select one person (at random as I wasn't sure who got there last) to eject from the game. Do I pick a friend because they will forgive me? Do I pick a new unknown person? They might not show up the next time.

Interesting...because I do live in that world. I have yet to turn away a player due to lack of seats. At this point though, I'd say roughly 1/3 of my players have volunteered to GM though, which is going to make my life easier. Unfortunately, if your players aren't volunteering, you're going to hit a wall eventually, which is a pretty significant problem if you're already hitting 8 people at a table.

I know players come to play at Meetups, but I'm not willing to blow everybody's fun to simply put more players at the table. I believe the max table size is there for good reasons. I also think it's important to pull in new players, which means being flexible, just not that flexible. Also, in order to give players the best experience they can, it is in our best interests to keep things smaller. Large table sizes means less personal GM interaction, and in some fights means sitting there for 45 minutes, before it gets to be your turn, only to watch everything die. Frankly, that's almost if not more annoying than not getting to play.

So yes, in my example I would have had to turn away the 8th player, and it likely would have been the last player to show up, such is life. I could turn the question around just as easily and say, "what do you plan to do when 12 players show up?" At some point the idea of just adding players for the sake of adding players becomes unsustainable.

I also put a lot of planning into my sessions. I have a Warhorn site and make sure that players understand that X GMs means Y seats. I make sure that I advertise well in advance, and I organize player/GMs who are ready to run a module at a moment's notice, but who can play if not enough players show up. Yes, this kind of thing requires planning, but it's a good way to mitigate large table sizes.

It is not a typo. The thing to remember is that for all sub-tiers higher than 1-2 you earn ALL rewards for the lower tiers in addition to the higher tiers. This means your level 6 character has access to any item present in the Sub-tier 6-7, 3-4, AND 1-2 boxes. So in this case, likely in order to save space since the boon/bane is so verbose, it was just placed in the one sub-tier box simply because everybody has access to it, even at the higher tiers.

It would seem to me that you might be short changing your characters in regards to access to equipment.

As Mark and Mark pointed out, updating from 3.5 is something that needs to be done with all Season 0 modules except Mists of Mwangi which Mark has already converted to Pathfinder.

My rule of thumb are as follows:

1. If the monster/NPC stats are in the module - run them exactly as written with a recalculation on the fly of things like CMB/CMD/Perception. Yes this means that a cleric for example won't get channel energy. Thus is the way of conversion.

2. If the monster/NPC stats are not in the module, but the stats are in the Bestiary/Bestiary 2, use the Bestiary stats but be very careful. The goal is to get an analogue. If a CR 2 critter from 3.5 suddenly becomes a CR 4 critter in PFS, it's probably not a good idea to run the creature stats out of the Bestiary.

3. If you happen to have an old MM 3.5 around, that's another option if the Bestiary analogue isn't accurate and there are no stats in the module. In those cases just do a conversion on the fly as if the stats were in the module.

Conversion sometimes is pretty straightforward and sometimes is really a quite tricky business. I usually spend about twice as long prepping a season zero module than I do on a season 1 or 2 module. Some modules have mechanics that don't work as well in PFS (for example, a spiked chain wielding fighter in a module loses a lot of its challenge in PFS if the entire fight was supposed to be fought at range), but you can generally make things work fairly similarly.

Still a fan of Baron Taco myself.

"Our number one rule in Pathfinder Society Organized Play is to get as many people playing as often as possible. If the rules are preventing you from getting a legal table assembled for play, then the rules need to change."

IMO, if this is truly the "number one rule" then it trumps all others, when necessary. Yes, eight players breaks the "hard cap" and he should have split the tables. However, he cannot force anyone to GM. So if no one steps up, he has two choices. (1) Break the cap or (2) deny someone a seat. There are a lot of issues to consider in this case. Are these all regular players? Are they max-optimized? Do they mind adding an extra player? Is there a signup with preference to early arrivals? etc. And, before anyone says it, if no one is willing to step up and run, then he has another issue to deal with.

It is easy for us on the boards to jump to conclusions about an organizer's decision, but in most cases, we do not know the dynamic of the area in question. Ideally, we want everyone to stick to the guidelines as printed, but I caution those of you who slam a GM/coordinator for a decision they made to be inclusive. Too many of those and we could find players for PFS hard to come-by. YMMV

But where does one stop? Technically he broke the cap the moment he seated the 7th player - but as it it happens, 7 is specifically allowed under Play, Play, Play. Do you just play when 9 show up, what about 10 or 11? As others have mentioned in other threads, the game gets a lot less fun the more players you've seated, and the 7 player "hard-cap" was set for a reason. Play, Play, Play is unclear enough as-is and while I appreciate the desire to get as many people playing as much as possible, running the game with 8 every time is unsustainable, you should be splitting into more tables. At some point a coordinator is going to have to say, "I'm sorry, I can't seat any more of you." In the case of 8 players one clearly has enough for two tables, and in the spirit of PFS, at that point if you've been playing for awhile, I'd hope one of the players is willing to step up and GM.

How could you not even recognize the VC who always sends you off into the Blakros Museum?

Not always. I just ran Mists of Mwangi last weekend and they updated it with a picture Adril Hestram's smiling mug since he's the one that sends you to your most certain death.

I rarely freelance during small public local meetups, but mostly to allow people to play (such as running a table with 8 when I'm the only DM and 8 people want to play.)

We're set at a hard-cap of 7 players, 8 is outright not permitted, even by Play, Play, Play. If you're seeing 8 show up, somebody should be stepping up to GM a second table.

Asking if we're there yet won't get us there any faster. ;-) Now quit poking your brother and play auto-bingo.

If we look at last year's PFS GM request for Gen Con/Paizo Con we're not really behind schedule yet.

Now if we can only get a Venture-Captain to represent Chicago...

And Madison. There are a lot of gamers in that college town.

I think what is being noted here is a tad endemic at some of the tables I've played and GMed at. There is a lot of focus on combat by a lot of the players. Even the suggestion of spending a rank that could otherwise be spent on perception (and it's always perception) on a skill like knowledge local (or any other knowledge), linguistics, and diplomacy makes them give you the stink-eye.

I like that the system is flexible enough to allow a character to take a few bonus languages, know a little side-hand knowledge, and still be a kick-butt fighter. For third season I hope that the trend of non-traditional encounters requiring strange language knowledge, stealth, diplomacy, or other mechanics (I'm looking at you Bloodcove Disguise) continues because it really makes the game fun and encourages a diverse character-base.

i would like to go 6 paladin / 3 rogue two weapon fighting i know it a lot feats but im trying something new just asking info on it we have 90 build points to start max 18 to a stat at lvl 1 so my stats at start would be like this:

As has been pointed out, the Book of Exhaled Deeds is not a Pathfinder Society compatible product. Your 90 point build would also indicate that this question is in relation to a home game. You will have better luck asking this question over on the advice boards. I've flagged the thread to have it moved for you.

The Slankster's got a real name? huh.

If you'd like, you can even meet me at PaizoCon this year. Dragnmoon did in the FFG checkout lane last year - much to his disappointment I might add.