|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Eric Hinkle wrote:
I suspect I'd call it Poison Master's Handbook, and I'd shoot for an Oct release, and that I haven't actually gotten it on the schedule yet....
If I were the sort of person who speculates on such things.
Folks have already covered this, but the really, really short answer is that when I have checked on what rounds developers within the company felt were both good tests for adventure writers and a useful benchmark to see the skills of contestants who don't happen to win, the monster round is almost unanimously listed near the top. and an npc round almost never listed at all.
2) Is there anything to help the Kineticist handle more burn?
Fairly emphatically no. Kineticist burn is a lot like limiting spellcasters to spells of a given level - it's a numerical value, but one so crucial to balance that it's unlikely to be altered by things like feats, magic items, or archetypes.
Anything for summoners or archtypes that let us play more with summoner eidilon's for psychics-- teh creation of a (non-undead) ectoplasmic monster is pretty common in psychic stories and of course the origional psionics rules let you summon up ectoplasmic beaties.
That's already pretty much the schtick of the spiritualist class. And a psychic spellcaster using the summon monster spells can pretty well be seen as doing the same thing.
First, let me say that this is great feedback. Sadly, the book is well past making any changes, and for various reasons there's not nearly as much of any of the things you suggest as I'd like there to be. I like what we did with it, but we took a different tack on what kind of material should be the focus of this volume.
I find Power Attack and Furious Focus work nicely for a war priest with Vital Strike and Greater Weapon of the Chosen.
Staggering Blow can also be worth it on the right build.
And while Cleave is often not worth it for this build, Cleaving Finish totally is by the time you've maximized your Vital Strike damage potential.
I've actually seen some devastating magus 7/eldritch knight x builds. It keeps you in medium armor, but you can gain additional magus arcane with feats if you need them and end up with a lot more bab and some more hp. And while m7/ek 10 is only a concern in high level campaigns, combining spell combat, spell strike, and spell critical is amazing. :)
I'd have to check but I know "Sideburn Side Burn" (which, oddly, gives you defensive flaming muttonchops) didn't make the final cut.
Secret Wizard wrote:
i really hope there's some options in this book for my derro character to rock a handlebar mustache like those.
I'm afraid the psychic feat "'Stache Stash," which allowed you to store ki in facial hair but only for purposes of opening chakras to "look awesome," was cut for space.
"Can I do a location that contains just one encounter, such as a campsite ambush?"
There's nothing incorrect about the statement. An entire dungeon could be a single encounter, such as an abandoned structure with only one thing of interest in the entire building.
Unless you had some amazing idea that would make it awesome, in which case we'd all be very impressed.
Garrick Williams wrote:
The rules say we can use a part of the map for the encounter. Does this mean we can crop one of the provided maps and say that's part of our location?
There's no mechanism in place to display anything but the map as it is provided.
The rules say "The map may be a small part of your new location, or the entirety of the location." No option is given for only part of the map to be used for your location.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
"Altogether, your entry must be at least 1,300 words and no more than 1,400 words."
Even if a specific example is off, this range is given more than once in the rules.
Charlie Brooks wrote:
How you choose to interpret this section of the rules is up to the contestant. Which doesn't mean there isn't am right answer, just that at this point unless a rule is explicitly incorrect, this is as much direction in that regard as we're giving. If I were you, I'd be guided by what we said, and what we list as grounds for DQ, and us my best judgement.
The Raven Black wrote:
"Altogether, your entry must be at least 1,300 words and no more than 1,400 words."
Even if an example is off, this range is listed more than once in the rules.
Stephen Stack wrote:
Do contestants really have to reference page numbers for monsters? What if they don't own a particular bestiary, even though the monster is on the PRD?
Then they should do whatever they would do to solve that same problem if it came up when writing a project for Paizo.
We only have two rounds left to see the quality of a Superstar's work. The winner of this contest gets a contract to write an adventure for us, and that adventure must meet the Paizo style in how things are done.
Requiring contestants to show they can do that doesn't feel at all unreasonable to me.
Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:
Due to our required lead time, Occult Origins is the first Player Companion that we could add any psychic support to. After that, we'll support the occult classes as and when we are available.
The short answer is that which is not forbidden or against Paizo standards is allowed.
So I'd recommend calling out the top of the map is north rather than assuming it (others may assume differently), but you may do so since the rules say nothing that can reasonably be interpreted as forbidding it.
The rules do not require a specific scale, so you may declare one.
It's your word count, use it wisely. You are all in the same boat in that regard, and wise choices will go a long way to determining the winner.
Philip Tucker wrote:
Are there ever any restrictions or limits on Round 5 modules that we might run afoul of if we start plotting our pitch now?
100% yes. Almost guaranteed. We have specific needs, which we'll let people who need to know, know.
Not all of which are decided yet, so I couldn't preview them to you know even if I wanted to.
Which of course I do.
The eldritch knight has a greater BAB, can be used with a range of class combinations, has greater spellcasting if you come into it as a 9-level caster (a fighter 1/wizard 5/ek 5, for example, has 5th level spells, a 10th level magus just has 4th), and if you really want to you can take it as a single-class magus just to boost your bab.
There are lots of reasons not to choose to play the ftr/wiz/ek, but it still does things a magus of the same level can't.
The short elevator pitches for round 5 happen during the voting period for Round 4, before you know if you actually get to go on or not. That was we can give you a thumbs up, thumbs down, or feedback on what needs changing before the official writing period begins.
We have to be soooper serious about how we handle Round 5 pitches, because once those get turned into full contest entries, one of them is going to be an actual product we want to make money on. So it has to fit in with our world, our publishing plans, our schedule, the limits of our printing technology, and so on.
We're working on the preview, but have run into a process question. Until that question is answered, I don't know exactly how we're handling some crucial elements of round 4. I don't want to say anything that turns out to be incorrect, so the preview must be delayed.
Mark's knowledge of the game is so amazing that, no kidding, I have walked into his office and asked "Do we have anything like a [*some fantasy concept*]?" only to have him ask me if I want to know where to find the druid version, the ranger version, or the oracle version.
Jacob W. Michaels wrote:
Deciding who to disqualify is the hardest part of being host. Once I make that decision (almost always in consultation with numerous other people, but the final call is mine), is the hardest part of this job.
Contacting them and letting them know is my least favorite part.
Thomas LeBlanc wrote:
Imagine someone submitted a monster close to word count and missed a few spaces or required parts of the template. DQ for word count?
That would depend on a number of factors, but there certainly have been round 1 items that were cut because they were exactly at wordcount and forgot, for example, the item's name.
The other crucial questio0n is WHAT got forgotten. Remember that one of the things that gets you disqualified for this round is: "Submission does not contain all required information."
A host I make the final call on what's a case of bad choices and presentation, and what's "required information." If you give a monster an AC of 10, and didn't think to mention it's Dex bonus, or add in the chainmail you mention in it's equipment, I'd be inclined to think you did a bad job presenting information, and let the judges call you out for it and have the voters decide.
Isaac Volynskiy wrote:
What happens if there is a DQ at this point? Does it just become Top 15, no alts anymore?
We have, in fact, had a DQ already this round (who has been notified and replied so don't panic, if you haven't talked to me back and forth several times about it, it's not you).And yes, we'll just have a Top 15 - no more alts for Season 9.
Last year I had an alternate ready from round 2 to go into round 3, because I was pretty sure Jason Keeley was going to get hired, and thus not be able to continue the contest, but that was an extremely rare case where we knew before the round even began that is was likely to lose someone as a result of them being so good we were going to DQ them ourselves (since employees can't participate).
Philip Tucker wrote:
*glances at Owen* Now that submissions are in, is there any chance of getting a sneak preview of the next round's rules?
We'll do a preview, but almost certainly not until after the weekend. I'm out of the office until Tuesday, and I need to coordinate some things with other people before I can be certain the exact details of round 4.
Yep, it was very late. I'll live with the embarrassment of showing what happens when I bypass editors. :)
(Or some kind soul might end up fixing it for me.)
Matthew Morris wrote:
My only question is the cost of the wand. As i read it it would be normal cost, since the coins are listed as material components (but you need the coins at the time of casting)
That would certainly be my interpretation, much as a wand of greater magic weapon doesn't have to account for the cost of weapons, but doesn't do any good if there's no weapon around when you try to use the wand. The coins are officially the spell's target.My 2 cents only. This is not errata. This is not a faq.
I was never here.
Would you add you strength mod to the attack, given that they're described as throwing weapons? by attack I mean damage of course.
They can be "used as" simple throwing weapons, that largely determines proficiency (sorcerers yes, wizards no). However they "gain the velocity of a bullet" when thrown, do bullet damage types, hit like bullets in the first range increment, and the spell doesn't say they are "treated as" thrown weapons.It seems clear to be they intent is for them to be virtual bullets, and bullets don't add Strength to damage. The coins also gain a damage bonus based on caster level, which also tells me other bonus damage wasn't intended.
My opinion. This is not errata. This is not a FAQ.
I was not here.
Sounds like a great book, wish an Urban Druid archetype was tried for, maybe something using urban or domesticated animals, or something that finds nature in community or tends to the little nature left in urban areas.
The urban druid archetype is in Advanced Player's Guide. :)
We do have somethings for druids operating within a city, but didn't want to compete with that archetype.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
As an aside, I've always thought that the Genius Guide to the Talented Cavalier's approach of, "the cavalier is the fighter with societal clout and authority," was a brilliant direction to take the class in, and I definitely got shades of that with the constable archetype.
There, ah, there might be a reason for a similar outlook between the two products.
Urath DM wrote:
I don't think Cavaliers work as rank-and-file members. Constable seems to fit the same mold.. more officer than standard member.
I'd expect MOST members of a city watch to be commoners, warriors, or possibly (in a few cases) aristocrats (like a baroness's second daughter who won't inherit, but is interested with keeping the peace in her mother's capital city).
Any archetype for heroic classes is going to represent someone exceptional, be that an officer of the watch, or some other more-than-typical role. A constable in charge of a group of warrior town guards makes sense to me, as does a noble son who trained with the guard but has become a local hero within the city. That said, as a player if I discovered a squad of city guards in Canorate or Vigil were all low-level cavalier constables with military training (for example), I'd totally buy that.
Eldritch Archer is a ranged magus that actually works.
Thanks! I gave David N. Ross some idea how I wanted that to come together in the outline (it seemed like both something the game could use, and a very flavorful example of a heroic defender of the walls in Golarion), and he did a great job with it!