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

Mystic Lemur's page

RPG Superstar 2015 Dedicated Voter. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,212 posts (1,246 including aliases). 4 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 18 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,212 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge ****

Dhjika wrote:

Also - if a character has a low wisdom or int - and the dominatrix said "take care of the rest of the party" why would one assume that means to murder them? There has to be reasonableness on the part of the dominatee. If the GM gives an out in words, one should take it.

even "kill them all" might allow a minion to be attacked, or one could go for animal companions and eidolons or high AC types.

If you encounter a group of enemies, and the party leader/strategist tells you to take care of them, do you assume that means draw them a warm bath, or do you kill them? Playing word games because you are dominated when your character would normally just stomp face is a bad as cheating, IMO.

Shadow Lodge ****

We didn't get along, that much is obvious. Despite that, I'm not happy to see you go, and I'm very much unhappy to hear the reason. My thoughts are with you and your family. I do not envy your successor, they will have a lot to live up to.

If you find yourself in Birmingham, the first round's on me.

Shadow Lodge ****

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Then maybe they should add development of PFS chronicles to the regular work of putting out the monthly adventure paths. That way you have APs advertising for Paizo's Organized Play campaign.

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd have to disagree. Never, that I can remember, did they ever guarantee they would sanction all future APS (or past ones, for that matter). They are doing this as the schedule permits in order to give us more playable content for PFS. They should not be putting them on the schedule at the expense of accrual PFS content and other Paizo events.

As for using volunteers, they've said in the past that even volunteer work has to be edited up to Paizo standards, and that takes in-house talent that they really can't spare right now. You're asking then to devote real money resources to something that flat out won't be profitable.

Shadow Lodge

TOZ wrote:
I'm pretty sure your barbarian will be doing just fine without massive bonus increases.

What massive increases? A +4 courageous weapon (or a+2 furious courageous weapon) gave a "massive" +2 to Strength and Constitution while raging. Hardly overpowered at the levels where a +4/+5 weapon are the norm.

What poor wizard felt threatened that y'all had to make sure to nerf martials just that much harder?

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Benefit: Choose one Craft or Profession skill in which you possess at least 5 ranks. You receive a +2 bonus on your chosen Craft or Profession skill. Ranks in your chosen skill count as your caster level for the purposes of qualifying for the Craft Magic Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item feats. You can create magic items using these feats, substituting your ranks in the chosen skill for your total caster level. You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item. The DC to create the item still increases for any necessary spell requirements (see the magic item creation rules in Magic Items). You cannot use this feat to create any spell-trigger or spell-activation item.

"You can create magic items using these feats," Those feats are already banned. There is no problem or confusion in the rules, or in the feat description.

Shadow Lodge ****

Good argument for having paper sheets even if you usually run from a tablet or laptop. :ducks to avoid incoming fire:

To echo the chorus, just do your best.

Shadow Lodge

Why are we still waiting on answers like this a year after the book was "finished"? It doesn't bode well for Occult Adventures. :-/

EDIT: And are we sure it hasn't been answered? I had a question about Hunter ACs using Skirmisher tricks, and finally found the answer in a PDT forum post but it was never added to the FAQ (despite being a very FAQ).

Shadow Lodge

I would disagree with most of the other posters and say don't wait on Power Attack. Gives you a nice punch on a charge or any other times TWF isn't an option. Don't forget that you can swing a double weapon as a two-hander to get the full benefit in those situations.

Two-Weapon Defense is a trap. Better off just taking Dodge if you need extra AC, and even that isn't your best use of a feat. Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, etc. do double duty on a double weapon, so those are good picks. A front liner really can't go wrong with Toughness.

Shadow Lodge ****

Unless they fixed it, deleting a character doesn't free that number. If I delete my -13, the next character I register will still be -14. Doesn't really fix the problem. :shrug:

I'm just glad when I get the chance to report with everyone still at the table. Makes clearing up things like this much easier.

Shadow Lodge ****

I can only imagine. I've only run one Core table and I had to flat out tell someone "Even though this is your first adventure, you registered your character as RPG. I'm not going to report your character because it will mess up the other characters. You've got your chronicle sheet. Don't lose it."

Shadow Lodge ****

Eric Ives wrote:

Perhaps part of the consideration should also be if there are miniatures available for the race. I think Wayangs would be more popular if people could find minis for them.

(Why won't Paizo sell me a Wayang mini?)

Not just minis. Try finding Wayang artwork for character inspiration.

I suppose I would like to see Kobolds, but I'm really fine with the way special races are already handled. There's already so many interesting race/class combinations I'll never have a chance to play them all.

*grumble grumble* I suppose I have until Gen Con to play my 7th level GM Credit Kitsune, my 6th level GM/Dragon's Demand credit Tengu, and a character concept for a Nagaji. Thankfully I've played my Wayang Witch through about half of Emerald Spire.

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tsriel wrote:
The Fox wrote:
LINK
Right, so what I gather is "strongly encouraged" but shouldn't be a douche about it.

Requiring everyone to play by the same rules, once they're made aware of those rules, is being a douche? But it's okay for you to state flat out that you aren't going to follow the rule even when it's linked for you?

It blows my mind that so many of my posts are hidden for "being a jerk", but people are able to flaunt other rules and everyone just says "oh well."

Shadow Lodge ****

2 people marked this as a favorite.

A PC is considered "newly created" until it is played for the first time at higher than level 1. If you have a boon, such as a race boon or the retirement arc boon, that can only be applied to a newly created PC, that PC is still eligible under the retrain rules. This is the same reason people with GM Credit summoners had to retrain if they had never actually played higher than level 1 as an APG Summoner.

Mike Brock wrote:

1st level retrain into a race boon.

You may also rebuild into the retirement arc boon as long as you meet the requirements of 3 XPs or less.

Shadow Lodge

Is there a way to get this marked "Yes, a response is actually required." Getting tired of seeing FAQ requests marked this way without the supposedly clear answer not being posted.

Shadow Lodge ****

2 people marked this as a favorite.

What's more disruptive: "I'm mounted, so my speed is 40ft." or "You can't have an eidolon and a mount. There's a rule. Well, not a rule, a FAQ. Hang on, I'll pull it up. It will just take a minute. Okay, no. Wait. Here it is. Yeah, it does say and, but that's not what it means."

Tsriel wrote:
*facepalm*

100% this.^^^

Shadow Lodge ****

5 people marked this as a favorite.

What makes you think the Silver Crusade is all about tolerance and acceptance? Good doesn't mean Nice.

Shadow Lodge

Chris Clay wrote:
I have been going by the rule of "If it doesn't say it doesn't multiply, then it multiplies" on crits, and will continue to do so until I see an official ruling that says otherwise.

That seems a safe bet to me. It's certainly not binding, but the FAQ for D&D 3.5e says:

Quote:

What bonuses get multiplied when a character confirms a critical hit? Suppose a 10th-level barbarian with a Strength score of 18 confirms a critical hit while raging and using a +3 greataxe and a maximum Power Attack. How much damage does the barbarian deal? Can you even use the Power Attack feat while raging? What if the character is a paladin using the smite evil ability, a fighter with Weapon Specialization, or a rogue using a sneak attack?

It’s easiest to think of a confirmed critical hit as a number of hits equal to the weapon’s critical damage multiplier. The example character is using a greataxe, which has a critical multiplier of x3, so the damage for a confirmed critical is just like the damage for hitting the foe three times. The only damage that is not multiplied in this way is damage expressed in extra dice, such as for a rogue’s sneak attack (see page 123 in the Player’s Handbook).

The example character has a base attack bonus of +10, so the damage bonus for a “maximum power attack” is +10. (Yes, you can use Power Attack while raging. In fact, you can use just about any feat except Expertise while raging; see the section on rage in the barbarian class description in the Players’ Handbook.) The character’s Strength score increases to 22 while he rages, giving him a +6 damage bonus for Strength, which increases to +9 because a greataxe is a two-handed weapon. The greataxe’s +3 enhancement bonus also applies to damage, so the character’s total damage from one hit with the greataxe is 1d12+22 (10+9+3). A confirmed critical hit makes the damage 3d12+66, just as if you had rolled 1d12+22 three times.

As noted earlier, any damage expressed in extra points of damage is multiplied with a confirmed critical hit, so the extra damage from the smite evil ability or the Weapon Specialization feat is also multiplied. But damage expressed as extra dice does not increase, so a rogue doesn’t roll any extra sneak attack damage dice for a confirmed critical hit. However, some magic weapons that deal extra dice of damage do deal some extra damage on a confirmed critical hit, as noted in their descriptions. This ability is a special feature of these weapons.

You do not multiply damage that has already been multiplied. If the example character were striking a foe for double damage already, you would apply the extra (“doubled”) damage only once to the critical damage. For example, suppose the sample barbarian above is an azer, who deals fire damage along with his greataxe attack. The character’s total damage from one hit with the greataxe is 1d12+23 (10+9+3+1 fire). A confirmed critical hit would make the damage 3d12+69, just as if you had rolled 1d12+23 three times. But if the azer attacks a creature with the cold subtype, the fire damage is doubled, so the base damage for the attack is 1d12+24 (10+9+3+2 fire). The doubled damage is not applied to a confirmed critical hit; instead the total damage becomes 3d12+70 (1d12+23 three
times, plus one extra point for the “doubled” fire damage).

Sharp readers may notice that two-handed weapons by their nature deal “multiplied” damage (Strength bonus x1.5), but this is not a true damage multiplier in the sense that the term is used in the D&D game. Thus, the extra damage from a two-handed weapon is multiplied for a confirmed critical hit.

Now, Power Attack works differently in PFRPG, but the damage should be treated the same way. Also, there are effects that do Precision Damage that don't get multiplied that aren't extra dice, but for the most part it seems clear that effects that add to damage should multiply.

Shadow Lodge ****

I once stabbed an incorporeal creature with a ghost salted arrow, because I forgot that I had Ghost Rager.

Shadow Lodge ****

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Next con i am definitely leaving more books at home and taking a picture of them with that mornings paper.

I don't get it.

Shadow Lodge ****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Reid Richter wrote:

It appears to be the consensus that the true primitive should be banned for the same reason the feral child is banned, though this is not what I thought the thread would be heading into.

It still amazes me. Mike Brock is fairly consistent about things like this. One poster will ask why something is not legal and the response will be "it doesn't fit the flavor of Golarion." Then, every time, someone else will say "But what about this? It's got the same flavor, and is legal." And then everyone is surprised when Mike says "Okay, I should probably ban that too, then."

Every. Time.

Maybe folks should quit poking the bear.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well that's not correct (Edit: referring to Michael's post). And as for the nice folks in the rules forum directing you here, that wasn't correct either. Putting "PFS" in a rules question doesn't make it a PFS question. Crits work the same in PFS as they do in regular Pathfinder.

The allegation that VOs are discussing rules in the VO boards, getting them wrong, and then using their status as VOs to spread these wrong interpretations is troubling.

Shadow Lodge ****

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
And it is not like having more GM stars really gives you more forum credibility - personally I think it kinda creates a bit of an unfair expectation like "What did that 4 Star GM just say? I can't believe how someone with so many reported games can still say something so [description] " ...

Hey! I represent that remark! Although I guess I don't have "so many" since I've been sitting at 3 stars for over a year now.

Some folks just like to do the "sanctioned" material. Some like to explore the town and learn all the little plot connections. There's no wrong way to play besides outright cheating. "Alright guys, I have no idea what's in this next room, but for some reason I have a feeling the guy with the highest touch AC needs to go first."

Shadow Lodge ****

Mike says no. That's really all that matters at this point.

Michael Brock wrote:
You can retrain rogue into unchained rogue or vice versa. You can not retrain ninja into unchained rogue unless you want to use the retraining rules already established.

The Ninja is an alternate rogue. It's an option you can take instead of rogue. Just like the Unchained versions of Core classes will be alternate versions. You can pick either Core or Unchained to make, but never the two shall twine.

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can't play an "Unchained Ninja" because it doesn't exist. There are already rules for retraining a character because "I'm tired of playing it." Those retraining rules have a cost, as well they should. Retraining for free is for new characters (never played at level 2) or characters who have the rules changed out from under them.

"I'm bored" is neither of those.

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:
(Although - because this is an issue with the system, everyone *has* experienced it, they may just not have identified this as the cause. How many people have played with a person who has no idea how to play their 9th-level PC? I'd be interested in seeing how many of those issues correlate with how many levels of Emerald Spire/Thornkeep/Free RPG Day modules the person has played, but that sort of evidence is unlikely to be available. Of course, it's hard to disentangle the various factors at play, and local issues would likely dominate anyway.)

Alright, I'll bite. I know of two players who never really developed an understanding of their characters who leveled up to 7 with Thornkeep. One was playing a white-haired witch based on a build he found online. He eventually stopped playing the character because he never could get it to do what he wanted. The other was a Wizard whose spell list might have been composed solely of Magic Missile for all I ever saw cast. Neither of these, in my opinion, were really the fault of Thornkeep itself. Both were newer players playing characters they were new to, in a convention environment where the games tended to be back to back to back. Tell me you wouldn't stumble a bit going from level 2 to level 7 in 72 hours.

I myself am playing my first ever witch in Emerald Spire. I'm having so much fun playing my witch, I think I'm going to make it my "Eyes of the Ten" character. I would love to be able to play her more, but not if it meant having to break immersion and play other things in between levels. We play once a week at most (usually more like 1-2 times a month) so I don't have to rush to level her up between games. I think the time crunch at a convention, or general player inexperience is where the problems come in.

Shadow Lodge ****

If you want to play one of those listed races, you must have a chronicle sheet (similar to the one you get at the end of an adventure), often called a boon, that specifically allows the creation of a character of that race. The only way your friend can play an Aasimar/Tiefling without a boon is if he created one before August 14, 2014 and it earned at least one experience point before that date.

What portion of the text is causing confusion? Do you have any suggestions for clarifying it?

Shadow Lodge ****

The Half- races already get access to things their parent races get (feats, prestige classes, favored class boni, etc.). Why not just allow them to pick an ethnicity like their human parent? Then there wouldn't be any confusing swapping going on.

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The table of credit issue is not going to be fixed. The system recognizes only two types of adventures: Scenarios (worth one table of credit) or Modules (worth two). Paizo decided the resources to fix the system issue weren't worth it compared to the relatively minor problem of some GMs getting two tables worth of credit for a scenario length module.

Shadow Lodge ****

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I went through Thornkeep: The Accursed Halls. There is more than enough xp to take a party of four PC on Medium advancement to 2nd level. Why do you feel that a party of 4-6 PCs who complete the challenges required to advance a level, shouldn't advance a level? How is that fair?

Shadow Lodge ****

UndeadMitch wrote:

No, I'd say that is completely unfair given the number of opinions expressing exactly the opposite in this thread.

I'll throw my hat in with them too: an illiterate shouldn't be in PFS, it does not make sense, and therefore True Primitive should be banned too.

Agreed.

For once, I'm with y'all. Mike should give serious consideration to banning True Primitive.

Shadow Lodge

Wargods of Aegyptus. Those look really cool, Anon.

Shadow Lodge ****

Aaron Motta wrote:
Or are we proposing that people be compelled to GM against their will? Actually, that might help solve the problem of not enough GMs for gamedays... :P

Mandatory fun is the best kind of fun. Mandatory fun for everyone!

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Mystic, how big are the game days where you DM usually? In a really big game day the dm booting you means you play a different scenario. In a reasonably size group it probably means you have to play in another tier. In a smaller group it could mean you have to go home. (or well, you don't have to go home but you can't stay here)

Bigger than I thought, I guess. It's been a while since I was involved, and I wasn't the coordinator, but there were usually three or four tables going. I usually got the new players and the low level tables, but we always seemed to be able to find room for everyone who showed up. If work would relent a little, I'd like to get something going again a little closer to where I live. Honestly, I'm worried about having enough players, not having to turn them away.

I understand, at least on some level, that having a "picky" or "diva" GM who doesn't enjoy running for some combination of players could make coordinating harder, but not as much as not having that GM willing to volunteer at all.

Shadow Lodge ****

Just try to remember that "diva" GM is volunteering to provide entertainment for no compensation other than having a good time themselves. If they make a request (that is entirely reasonable, in my opinion) and that request ensures they have fun too, and continue to volunteer to run games, then I'd do what I can to accommodate. Why wouldn't you? Are you such a "diva" coordinator that you only enjoy GMs who follow your idea of a good time?

I'm really just trying to understand. I've never been in a situation where I had to turn away a player from a public game. If they weren't a good fit for the table, Mike was always able to find them a spot at another table. I've had to turn someone away from a private game at our local shop, but I made sure to let them know when the regular PFS crew played.

Shadow Lodge ****

Borel Bloodbraid wrote:

You could also buy a non-masterwork composite shortbow (+9 STR) for 2PP.

I've found that to be the best power-for-prestige investment. Usefulness may vary.

Yeah, but at -2 to hit when Dex already isn't your best stat... How many low level characters do you know with a 28 Strength? I realize that may be a typo, but I still wanted to remind everyone that if you don't have at least the amount of strength the bow is rated for, you take a -2 to hit.

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Fox wrote:
Mystic Lemur wrote:
It doesn't have a target...
Yes it does.

Well shucky darn. And here I thought that not having a Target line to go along with the Area line meant it didn't have one. Guess I have to look up Invisibility to see how Invisibility Sphere works. Really hope they clean things like this up if they ever put out Pathfinder 2.0

Shadow Lodge ****

It doesn't have a target, so no.

Shadow Lodge ****

I just double checked my CRB, and I couldn't find "Gloves of Dexterity." I checked the Additional Resources page. No "Gloves of Dexterity." They don't exist in PFS unless you can show me an approved resource.

I'm not being nitpicky or arguing semantics. If you show up to a table with your "Gloves of Dexterity" and the GM has never played 3.5, you won't be able to show him a source for your illegal item that he has no reason to believe actually exists.

Shadow Lodge ****

If your level is not the level of the subtier you play at, you get out-of-subtier gold. Doesn't matter if higher, or lower. You're either in subtier, or you're out.

Shadow Lodge ****

They cannot be used in PFS. There is no legal rules source that has stats for "Gloves of Dexterity" or similar items. Being allowed to substitute the PFRPG equivalents is very generous of them.

Shadow Lodge ****

Buena salud a tí y su familia. Felicitaciones.

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tanoshi wrote:
To be fair, in this particular circumstance... we'd been fighting primarily things that either died before I got a chance to do anything but cast haste, or things that were 100% immune to most of my sorcerous tricks. So when this guy showed up, I saw my moment to shine and I took it!

How dare you. Don't you know your moment to shine is supposed to be a solemn occasion where you do something only marginally better than anyone else can. You're not allowed to bust up in there all fabulous covered in sequins screaming "I'm HERE!" Please try to shine more dully in the future. ;)

From the GM side of things, I can see how frustrating it is to have the "end boss" taken out in the first round. But I try to take a step back and realize that my players put in time and effort to be as good as they are, and it would be selfish of me not to allow them to do the things they worked to be good at doing.

Shadow Lodge ****

There are pregens, and there is "find another table."

Shadow Lodge ****

kinevon wrote:
You could have hit his triggers.

Look. I'm an a-hole and I make no (well, very little) apology for it. But I'm not a Venture Officer. I'm not the "face" of PFS. If I'm a jerk, everyone rolls their eyes and goes on about their business. When someone in a position of leadership is a jerk, it sours people on the Organized Play campaign. "Triggers" or not, Kelly was in the wrong.

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
we generally do better, when new players make a new thread and ask specific questions.

No we don't. When we see the same question for the hundredth time, we complain about all the threads asking the same question. Doesn't matter that the new person has never seen the question asked before.

Shadow Lodge ****

You make two assumptions I disagree with. The first is that later seasons (the ones where 5 players would have to play down) are balanced at the low end of the subtier (i.e. balanced for level 1 characters at subtier 1-2). This may be true in some cases, but I wouldn't say most, or even very many. A level 1 who would already be challenged in a 1-2 has very little business being in tier 4-5 that is already a potential party wipe for those level 3's. So your assumption that they would "crush" the scenario just isn't valid.

The second assumption is that those level 3's could ever get high tier gold. That hasn't been trite in about three years. Please tell me there aren't still GMs giving high tier gold for characters that don't fall in the high tier.

BNW, that boils down to people being bad at simple math. Like the OP who thought (3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 1) / 5 = 3.25

Shadow Lodge ****

Maybe it's just my experience, but Seasons 0 and 1 had quite a few undead. I can't speak to their prevalence in later seasons.

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
David_Bross wrote:
A similar scenario occured when I was a player. 3/6 people at the table could always act in the surprise round. The GMs solution was to have stuff happen in a "pre" surprise round where NPCs got in position for an ambush, and then combat broke out of the subsequent round. The payoff was the scenario ran as written, rather than us stiffling the NPCs attempts entirely as they tried to get in position for the ambush, that would have sent the scenario off the rails quickly.

So, the GM cheated to negate specific player investment in their characters, and you're okay with that? In an organized play environment, especially, if I put in the effort to make my character do something most can't, I certainly wouldn't want it invalidated by GM fiat.

Shadow Lodge ****

Sounds like a blast both to run and play. Glad it went well for all of you. :)

Shadow Lodge ****

Can a level 7 pregen play at tier 10-11? If so, are they an exception?

Answer that, you answer the OP.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I noticed yesterday that Seoni in the Pathfinder Origins comic looks like she's wearing a haramaki. If it's good enough for the iconic, it's good enough for me.

1 to 50 of 1,212 << 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.