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

Neo2151's page

1,431 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 alias.



1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Why are Treants vulnerable to fire? Wouldn't electric make more sense?
I mean, there's a reason we use fire for burning - it takes a long time to burn! Hence, it's more resistant than, say, the flesh and fat of a human, which burns and boils sooo easily. :)

Thoughts?


Looking for tips on build here. Thinking of a Barbarian/Sorcerer base with either Demon-Blooded Tiefling or Half-Elf for race. Just to give a general idea, I'm looking to be as "half-dragon" as I can - meaning not a caster with stat buffs and not a fighter with a couple spells, but sort of a blending of the two. (GM is cool with the Claw power lasting indefinitely, so was thinking of going the Nat Weapon route.)

Also I'm having a little trouble understanding the relationship between Blood of Dragons and Crossblooded Sorcerer. Can someone help me out with that?

Thanks!


This is a 9th level spell.
It has to be better than just, "+2 to AC and Ref, and cannot be caught by surprise or flat-footed."
That clause about, "In addition, the spell gives you a general idea of what action you might take to best protect yourself" just has to have some sort of benefit beyond the listed amount.
Otherwise, how is this even a 4th level spell?

So, my question is, how do you handle it? How do you make Foresight worth casting in your game?


Can someone help me understand why Mage Armor is a Conj spell, but Shield is an Abj spell, even though they are practically identical in effect? (ie: both are protective barriers that are created [not summoned] around the caster.)


So my group is starting a 3.5 game that is Pathfinder compatible (as opposed to a PF game that is 3.5 compatible), and my collection of 3.5 books was sold off long long ago!
Ergo, I have no recollection of what feats were available and/or good for said style of Wizard! So I'm looking for tips/suggestions on feats for an Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil that is 10th level. Abjuration specialist, Enchantment and Necromancy are prohibited.

Thanks!


I mean, yeah, it works on incorporeal creatures, but c'mon...
Even at it's most powerful, we're talking about 5d4+5 damage at level 9.

How has this spell survived sooo long when it's so terrible?


Playing a Sandman Bard and can't decide on my 2nd trait.
The first one is going to be Trapfinder (for when the rogue doesn't show up to our dungeon-crawl game) but I can't decide on a 2nd.

Any suggestions? (Preferably something interesting - not just a stat bump).


Why is "00" + "0" considered a 100? Why isn't it a 10? or a 110?
So it goes:
00+1=1
00+2=2
00+3=3
00+4=4
00+5=5
00+6=6
00+7=7
00+8=8
00+9=9
00+0=100...?

Wait... How did that happen?
Why does the value of 00 change based on the roll?

If 00 always equals zero, and 0 always equals 10, then you get a possible 1-100 result without ever worrying about changing the die values.
But if 00+0 equals 100, then that means the value of 00 changes based on what the d10 shows.

That seems dumb to me.
Anyone else?


Consider the spell Dominate Person:
Bards cast it as a 4th level spell, while Wizards, Sorcerers, and Witches cast it as a 5th level spell.

How is this a good thing for the Bard? On the one hand, yes, he can cast it a whole spell-level earlier than the other classes. But what that actually translates to is that while a Wizard/Witch can cast the spell at character level 9, the Bard/Sorcerer has to wait until level 10.
And the difference between the Bard and Sorcerer casting is that the Bard's is at a -1 DC value because of the lower spell level.

tl;dr - Spell casting is kinda broken for anyone who isn't a full caster. Early Access isn't a good thing. It just turns a ridiculously bad thing into a not-quite-as-bad thing.


Here's the deal:
I wanna be a "sneak thief" type character, and I wanna do it with a Bard.

1- I'm torn between core Bard and Sandman. I really like Slumbersong, Greater Stealspell, Spell Catching, Master of Deception, and Trap Sense. On the other hand, I really hate giving up Versatile Performance, and to a lesser degree, Inspire Courage.
(I will not play an Archeologist, even though it's the obvious "fit," because another character in the group is playing one.)

2- I also really wanna play a Halfling, but I really don't want to be an archer. There are just too many "necessary" feats. Obviously I want to be able to contribute in combat, but with the small size and Str penalty, am I just asking for trouble, or is it do-able?

Any feedback is incredibly welcome. :)


Why do all the good and/or fun archetypes have to replace Versatile Performance?
I mean, you have to use a Performance to make your Bardic Performance abilities work, and isn't Versatile Performance meant to offset being required to take "flavor" skills?

/trying to talk myself into Sandman
/having a hard time about it


Two things concern me about casters (power-level aside):

1- Save DCs are super-awful for low-level spells.
2- Metamagic is only good when it's abusable and a headache otherwise.

So I'm considering the following:
1- Spell save DCs follow the CL instead of the SL. So the formula would be, "10 + 1/2CL + Ability Mod." This way by the time you hit mid-levels, you don't feel like your lower-level offensive options are useless because they're no longer auto-savable.

2- Treat all metamagic feats the way the Spell-like Ability version works. ie: Instead of increasing spell level or casting time or both, they're usable X times per day (X being a value that shifts depending on the power of the feat - Enlarge would be more times per day than Quicken, for example).

Thoughts?


Is Spellsteal actually a good ability, or does it 9 times out of 10 end up stealing some random spell that you have little or no use for because knowing what the enemy has prepared is tough to do (and being close enough to touch them is either hard, dangerous, or both?)

(I can totally see how Greater Spellsteal would be awesome. But it's also a 15th level ability and there's a pretty good chance the game doesn't go that long.)


So my group is having some trouble with our "trap handlers" showing up to game recently, so I offered to make a Bard to help with things.

I haven't actually played a Bard since 3.5, so I'm a little ignorant of, and curious about, my options.
The only thing I don't want to do is Archeologist (one of the aforementioned characters is already an Archeologist Bard and I don't want to step on his toes, so to speak.)

Thanks. :)


What's the difference?
I mean descriptively. I know the mechanical differences, but how do you describe, oh say, a vampire's Slam vs a vampire's Unarmed Strike?

A vampire punches you in the face. It's super-effective! Take d4+str lethal damage and suffer two negative levels!
vs.
A vampire punches you in the face. It's not very effective! Take d3+str nonlethal damage and enjoy your free attack of opportunity.


So I'm playing a Reach Cleric, and it feels like my spell list, with the rare exception (like a well-placed Windwall) feels like a waste.

I'm 6th level wearing +1 Armor, +1 Cloak of Res, and a +2 Longspear (lucky loot roll).

I'm too low of a level for the typical buff spells to be truly useful. I have Sacred Summons but no use for it until 5th level spells (CG alignment).
Am I just stuck feeling like a wasted caster until higher spell levels, or am I missing obvious greatness?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's incredibly frustrating to, say, take a Spell Focus as a prereq when playing a Druid or a Cleric. So much mindless digging to find out exactly which spells benefit! :(


Where can I find all those lovely character sheet options that PathfinderDB doesn't host anymore? The internet is totally failing me at the moment.

On a related note - wtf happened to PathfinderDB? None of the links work. Everything is gone!


6 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

As the title suggests, there is some hostility floating around surrounding the mechanics behind "attacking defensively as a standard action."

Can we get a clear answer on how this works?

Pathfinder PRD wrote:
Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action: You can choose to fight defensively when attacking. If you do so, you take a –4 penalty on all attacks in a round to gain a +2 dodge bonus to AC until the start of your next turn.

Link: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html#_fighting-defensively-as-a-s tandard-action

Does the above require you to make an attack action (as in, using your simple action attack against a foe such as with the Defender weapon property) or can you just declare you are "attacking defensively" and gain the bonus to AC/penalty to attacks without doing anything other than declaring?

Please FAQ


Not Invulnerable Rager DR, but just run-of-the-mill, core, 5-points-over-20-levels Barbarian DR.

Have Barb players noticed it making much difference? Is it important, or does it go almost unnoticed?


The armor tables seem to suggest that even light armor would limit a wearer's speed, as the "limit" for a character with 30ft speed is 30ft, not "-".

Example of my train of thought: Human Magus is wearing a chain shirt and casts Expeditious Retreat. The spell doesn't have any text that allows a bypass of armor speed restrictions, so wouldn't the wearer still be limited to 30ft?

I know I've always played that "light armor doesn't limit your movement speed at all" but now that I'm thinking about it, I can't actually find any justification for that in the RAW.
Is there any? If so, where is it?


So there are a ton of complaints (some from me even) that the errata we tend to see is incredibly uneven.
"Martials get all the nerfs while casters stay strong."

The Devs, on the other hand, stick like glue to the line that, "We consider everything equally and make changes where needed; we don't target melee more than casters." (paraphrased)

Well, can we prove that here?

Here's what I'm looking for: As many "caster and/or spell nerfs" as you can think of since Pathfinder started. If the nerfs really do come even-handed, then there should be evidence to back that up, yes?
Here's what I'm not looking for: Snark. I'm honestly, legitimately, interested to see the disparity between caster nerfs and non-caster nerfs. If you wanna just be snarky, please make a different thread, or post in one of the various ones that already exist?

(And yes, before anyone brings it up, the Crane Wing discussions are what make me want to do this. I have a hard time believing that Crane Wing caused more problems for GMs than something like Color Spray, which has gone untouched, afaik, since PF 1.0.)


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Snake style lets you use an Immediate Action to replace your AC with a Sense Motive check's results.

Snake Fang lets you make an AoO against a missed attack and then, if you hit with that AoO, use an Immediate Action to make an additional attack.

...

Except you only get one Immediate Action, so you can't use the benefit of both feats at the same time.

That seems dumb. Was this intentional?


Seems like having a list of options for FE that is 32 choices long seems like a dumb relic that never got polished up from previous editions.

Here's what I'm thinking:
•Beasts (Animals, Magical Beasts, Vermin)
•Dragons
•Outsiders* (Aligned Outsiders)
•Elementals (Elemental Outsiders)
•Humanoids (Civilized)
Oozes
•Otherworldly (Aberrations, Fey)
Plant
•Savages (Uncivilized Humanoids, Monstrous Humanoids, Giants)
•Unliving (Undead, Constructs)

(*Native Outsiders treated as Humanoid and/or Outsider, on an individual basis.)

And honestly, I'd like to either wrap Oozes and Plants together (but can't think of a good "theme" that covers both) or wrap each one into another group. Simply put, no one will ever pick those by themselves, because there just aren't enough monsters of those types to be worth it, ever (oozes especially!).

Thoughts/criticisms welcome. :)


Let me introduce you to the available feats in Pathfinder:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats

There is literally hundreds of them, and that's not including anything 3rd Party (to my knowledge - I'm not double-checking that list!)

So I'm wondering, would it really break the bank to offer characters a feat every level instead of every other level?


I tried searching but couldn't come up with anything.

I'm curious to know if you can attack with a reach weapon through an allied square.
For example, imagine XYZ are standing in a row. X has a reach weapon, Y is his ally, and X wants to attack Z.

Is this possible?
If it is, does cover apply? (Everything I can find on Cover is related to Ranged Attacks.)
If cover applies, what kind of cover is it?

Thanks!


So my group's about to do a good ol' fashion dungeon crawl, and I've been itching to play a Reach Cleric.

My only problem is that I haven't played a divine caster since 3.0 was the new kid on the block!

What's a good "standard lineup" of spells for such a character these days? Maybe one lineup for low level and another one for mid level? (I don't expect the game to get into high levels, and I should have a clue by then anyway, lol).

Any help is greatly appreciated. :D


So these "fizzle" at spell level 8 and 9, due to the fact that Summon Nature's Ally VIII / IX don't have any animal options.

What do?


Just wanted to throw these out there and see what other people think:

•Needs more unique names (like it or not SKR ;) ).
Brawler is taken.
Swashbuckler is taken.
Shaman isn't taken, but it's so close to other archetype names that it's questionable.
Etc.

•Spell lists need to be somewhat more unique to the class.
Yes, that is a lot of work, but that's what goes along with making a 20-level class.

•Arcanist
Pretty much makes both Sorcerers and Wizards obsolete.
Even with the penalty of lesser spells to cast, the benefits of combining prepared and spontaneous spell-casting, cost free, are huge. We're talking, "All the strengths of the Wizard with none of the weaknesses."
Seems like the only reason to play a Sor or Wiz with Arcanist as an option is for flavor alone.

•Bloodrager
Don't get me wrong, I like the concept, but how is this it's own entire class? Currently it's a Barbarian archetype that trades Rage Powers and Trap Sense for a spell-casting ability and bloodline powers.
I think this class really needs something to give it it's own identity. Otherwise, again, how is it anything more than an archetype?
"Worst-case scenario" question: How is this not just a huge upgrade over Barbarian? Bloodline Abilities are similar to Rage Powers, but spell-casting is SO MUCH BETTER than Trap Sense. Every other ability is shared with the Barbarian class.

•Brawler
I think it's very well done, if not that exciting. My only real concern is that it makes the core Monk class obsolete; If you want to be martial, go Brawler - If you want to be mystical, you'll need a Monk archetype to actually pull that off anyway, so there's no longer a niche for the Core Monk class other than as a stepping stone for archetypes.
That said, it's not like Monk was ever going to get enough errata to truly fix the class, so with that consideration I think the Brawler will fit in just fine.
Only concern is the Knockout ability - While I realize it's a strong ability, I worry that a cumulative -5 penalty is so severe that it will never land past the first use in a day.

•Hunter
Really trying to get those teamwork feats used, huh? ;)
I don't dislike the class, but nothing about it "wows" me. For example, this is one of those classes that really needs a unique spell list; some blending of the Druid and Ranger lists would be great, I think.
Animal Focus seems rather weak as well. It could use some love, maybe increasing the number of times per day it can be activated, or adding something to each animal type to make it more desirable.
I do also worry about it's offensive potential. It doesn't really get anything in the way of Martial abilities, so is it supposed to rely on the Pet and Spells for almost all of it's Offense? If so, another hint that it needs a unique spell list.

•Investigator
I'll start off by saying this style of class really isn't my cup of tea.
However, I feel even more bad for the poor Rogue class now - Another class that just utterly outdoes it. I think the best thing for people to do here is just accept that Ninja is the new martial Rogue, and Investigator is the new non-Martial Rogue, and just never bother with that poor abused Core class again. (Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, I'll leave up to the individual opinion.)

•Shaman
I really like this class, and it's the first class that I'm fine with it borrowing from another caster's spell list. However, I think Cleric was the wrong choice - It really needs to be drawing from the Witch list, regardless that it's a divine caster and not arcane; that's just semantics at this point. I also don't think Shaman should be spell-restricted by alignment; this is a primal caster, and primal forces do not pick sides the way other divine powers might.

•Skald
I've always liked Viking-style warrior poets, but simply put, I see no reason to play this over a Bard.
It's offensive capability is actually worse. Your friends won't always enjoy the benefit you bring to the party until level 20, but most people don't play at that level. The spell-casting is identical, so no boon there. Bardic Music offers a host of potential abilities while Raging Song only offers one.
At the very minimum, I think Dirge of Doom and Raging Song should stack.
Admittedly, Spell Kenning is great, and being able to hand out Rage Powers is neat, but I really think the class still needs some work if it's ever going to compare.

•Slayer
I'll echo some others that this should probably be "Any non-good" required, but I won't get too much into that.
And did I say earlier that Ninja was the new Martial Rogue? Well, no, apparently it's Slayer! Yet another stab to the Rogue class, but much like the Monk, errata won't be fixing the Rogue anyway. That said, I don't really see anything about it I don't like - A playable Assassin, finally! I'm surprised that Skill points aren't 6+Int though.
There is some formatting issues with the Sneak Attack description, but that's easily cleaned up.

•Swashbuckler
Can I just start by saying I've grown incredibly tired of years and years of being told I cannot buckle any swash with one-handed slashing weapons? Why do you hate Longswords?? For reals!
Ahem, anyway...
So I really like the class, but there's some things I want to pick at:
Opportune Parry - Should really be activated after an opponent's attack roll, not before. It's not exactly cheap to activate, and if you activate it and they miss, then what exactly were you attempting to parry in the first place? The whoosh of air from their not-hitting you?
Swift Feint - This should really replace an attack instead of requiring a Standard Action to activate. Make your attack - decide if you want to spend the Panache and miss or not - make the rest of your attacks, or do whatever else you would in that turn.
Deeds in general also seem unclear. Do you have to select them at the appropriate levels? If so, why are they worded as if you just get them as an option once you hit a certain level? And why are they so randomly scattered through the leveling process?
The Bonus Feat ability is also unclear. Is it, "Starting at 4th and every even level after," or is it "every 4 levels after?" The Ability reads like a bad copy/paste from Fighter while table 1-12 reads as it's one feat every 4 levels.

•Warpriest
Arguably a much-needed class, since Paladin is so limited in it's scope because of it's LG requirement and it's Code (it's also arguable that Cleric's were already good enough at combat based on spell selection, and I tend to agree - Errata base Clerics to be less martially proficient already!)
Also, I know I'm getting to be a broken record here, but seriously! Unique spell lists! Late-casting spells that are power-balanced for earlier levels is super-annoying!
Otherwise... Seems fine. Much like Hunter, it's not incredibly exciting. You take a Cleric, give him free Armor and Weapon bonuses, strip his highest level spells and the majority of his Domain powers, and toss in some bonus feats for good measure. It works, but it's kinda "meh."
If Clerics alone couldn't already make for very good combatants, then I think this class would be more exciting. As is? I just don't see the point.


Yeah yeah, it'll be available to download in two days. Whatever. :P

But seriously, tell me how the idea of combining the Ranger and the Druid doesn't sound utterly redundant?


3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Only one question per thread, so here we are (not my rule, just following the rules).

Can a Bastard Sword be chosen for the Heirloom Weapon trait, since it becomes a Martial weapon when used in two-hands?


Is the Hellknight (Enforcer on d20pfsrd... Don't remember what it's actually called) the only PrC that offers Medium BAB and 10 levels of "+1 level of spellcasting class" or is there another?

I'm trying to build that EK that ends up with 4 iterative attacks and still has access to 9th level spells. My current GM isn't a fan of reflavoring things and "Hellknight" is about as far away from the concept I want to work with as possible (going for that old-school Elven Bladesinger vibe).

(I know Magus is an option, but I'd much rather have the Wiz/Sor spell options instead of the Magus ones, not to mention 4 attacks instead of 3.)


Throwback for throwback's sake is dumb.
Reverie (I refuse to call it "trance") is why elves from previous editions were immune to sleep (because they didn't sleep).
PF elves sleep. What's the reason now?


I admit I've never played PFS, but in my entire gaming career, I've never seen a player "demand" the GM do anything. Never ever ever.

So how often does this really happen? Or is this just the hypothetical straw-man for the sake of internet argument?


Or really, any version of an ability/spell that allows you to go to the Ethereal Plane?

I ask because these are high level spells/abilities and you've probably long since figured out how to successfully fight Ghosts and Specters, etc.


Command Word wrote:

If the activation is on command or if no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed.

A command word can be a real word, but when this is the case, the holder of the item runs the risk of activating the item accidentally by speaking the word in normal conversation. More often, the command word is some nonsensical word, or a word or phrase from an ancient language. Activating a command word magic item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Free Actions wrote:

Speak

In general, speaking is a free action that you can perform even when it isn't your turn. Speaking more than a few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action.

Sooo, yeah...

Command Word activation taking a standard action when speaking a single word is a free action?
Dumb.


9 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ.

If you are granted an additional action (such as an additional Move action) during your round, can you perform a Full-Round Action and still have access to that additional Move action?
(ie: Move + Full Attack -or- Move + Summon Monster spell)

Or does the fact that the "Full-Round Action" specifically states that it takes up your entire action and the only movement you can make is a 5ft step mean that any extra granted actions are also lost when you choose to perform a Full-Round Action?

Relevant text:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html#_full-round-action
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html#_full-round-actions-list

Pathfinder SRD wrote:

Full-Round Action: A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round. The only movement you can take during a full-round action is a 5-foot step before, during, or after the action. You can also perform free actions and swift actions (see below). See Table: Actions in Combat for a list of full-round actions.

Some full-round actions do not allow you to take a 5-foot step.

Some full-round actions can be taken as standard actions, but only in situations when you are limited to performing only a standard action during your round. The descriptions of specific actions detail which actions allow this option.

Pathfinder SRD wrote:
A full-round action requires an entire round to complete. Thus, it can't be coupled with a standard or a move action, though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can take a 5-foot step.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Can an Oracle of Waves, using the Water Form revelation, still cast spells?


Group is going to be playing a "shonin-esque" type of game with Gestalt rules, and I'm considering the above as a character (think Naruto for inspiration - ie: magical ninja).

Personally, I've never been huge on Divine spells for anything other than support, so I'm kind of wondering if Oracle is a good fit or if I should just bite the bullet and go Sorcerer. My issue with going Sorcerer is that, simply put, I like the options with the Waves mystery better for the character concept than any of the Sorcerer Bloodlines.

I realize I can be a pretty great support character, but how offensive can I be? What Cleric spells would compliment a "strike-hard-from-the-shadows" style of character?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A friend of mine is throwing together a fun anime-ish type gestalt game, and I ran across an idea by TheSideKick here about mixing Oracle of Waves and Ninja in a way that just makes me feel all Naruto inside.

Since said character is going to be a bit feat starved, I'm just curious to know what feats are absolutely necessary to pull of such a thrower? (Other than TWF, Point Blank, and Rapid Shot.)


There's a possibility of a PF game coming up in the distant future, and I've had my eye set pretty hard on a Druid for my next PF character.
The game would be in a homebrew world and the action would be taking place on a largely "untamed jungle" continent with strong naga influence.

I've pretty much decided on a caster druid instead of a combat druid (still deciding on whether I wanna stay core or go Menhir Savant - thoughts?) and domain instead of animal companion, and I've narrowed it down to:
Fire,
Ash, or
Weather

I know there isn't one "right" answer, so I'm just looking on general opinions on these three domains (or other options if you think they're good - caves maybe?) that I can browse through to help me make the decision.

Thanks!


5 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Considering the GMF UAS faq, can we expect this rage power to be altered/updated any time soon? Now that Unarmed Strikes are officially regarded as a single weapon (and rightly so) then the rage power does nothing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why don't these stack?

Isn't Sean K. Reynolds one of the lead developers? Isn't he also the guy who wrote this?
(http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/keenimprovedcritstacking.html)

What happened?


So if a character's spells are always under the effects of a metamagic feat (such as a Cleric with the healing Domain after level 6), does a wand/staff/etc. crafted by that character apply said metamagic to it's charges?


Creating a Half-Dragon wrote:
Special Abilities: A half-dragon retains all the special attacks of the base creature and gains a breath weapon usable once per day based on the dragon variety (see below). The breath weapon deals 1d6 hit points of damage per racial HD possessed by the half-dragon (Reflex half; DC 10 + 1/2 creature's racial HD + creature's Con modifier).

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/halfDragon.html#half-dragon

Bolded emphases mine.

Is the inclusion of "racial" a typo, or does a PC that becomes a half-dragon have no breath weapon (by lieu of having only class HD and no racial HD - 0d6 damage?)


Just like the subject-title asks. Why, or why not?

1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 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.