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

Patrick Harris @ SD's page

1,354 posts. Alias of pathar.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,354 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
****

My fellow San Diego Pathfinders:

I just wanted to say that I have adored the opportunity to play with you all. You introduced me to Organized Play, to which I immediately became addicted, and you dragged me kicking and screaming into the GM's seat, which became rather funny once I realized how enjoyable it is.

I won't bore you with a lot of "heavy heart" talk, but I am sad to leave, and sad that I won't get to game at Game Empire or At Ease Games anymore. Eric, Katie, you guys are fantastic Venture-Officers, and I'm delighted to have had the opportunity to work with you both.

To all of my players and GMs at the short-lived Villainous game day: Thank you so much. It was an awesome experiment and I enjoyed working with all of you.

To everyone: Y'all are just the best a dude could ask for. I hope to see as many of you as possible at future conventions, and if I ever find myself back in your neck of the woods, I will make hitting up a game day my highest priority.

Much love, kids.

****

Drogon wrote:

Not true. This thread serves at least two purposes:

1 - Gives Mike insight into what kind of boon he may want to give out.

2 - Lets everyone know that I'm about to win a bet. (-;

Ha! We'll see, my friend--implementation takes a while. ;p

****

Michael Brock wrote:
I actually have something similar to this on my list handed over to IT. When a GM earns a new star, they receive a thank you email and a special boon.

(From here.)

Freakin'. SWEET. Also, kind of makes this entire thread pointless.

****

Michael Brock wrote:
I actually have something similar to this on my list handed over to IT. When a GM earns a new star, they receive a thank you email and a special boon.

That is awesome.

****

F'sho. There is still an open call for quests, though, and since they only have two quests so far, they'd probably be pretty happy to see a good one come their way. If you've got the skills, I say go for it.

****

Vic Wertz wrote:
Including GM stats would be counterproductive to gauging demand for material since GMs can and do GM the same modules repeatedly.

My question was about GMs who only GMed each once. Not every GM wants to run modules more than once, since they get no credit after the first time.

****

Caderyn wrote:

I would say you could but remember that you require enough levels in the class to actually enchant your item

for example if you bond with a shield and a dagger you require 5 levels of wizard (to meet the level requirement of craft arms and armor), and 5 levels of skirnir (to meet the level requirement of craft arms and armor).

The lowest level combination available is Amulet + Shield (which is level 3 wizard + level 5 magus)

Relevant rules text

"A wizard can add additional magic abilities to his bonded object as if he has the required Item Creation Feats and if he meets the level prerequisites of the feat. For example, a wizard with a bonded dagger must be at least 5th level to add magic abilities to the dagger (see Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat)."

Agreed, except that you don't have to have relevant levels in the RIGHT class. A Wizard 1 / Cleric 10 could still use his cleric spells to enchant his bonded item; that would theoretically be the same here.

****

Officially, no, that's not how it works.

Practically, there's not really going to be any way to stop it, and it seems pretty harmless.

****

Robert A Matthews wrote:
Skirnir wrote:


Arcane Bond (Su)

At 1st level, a skirnir gains a shield (except for a tower shield) as an arcane bond item. This is identical to the wizard class ability, but the skirnir may only bond with a shield, not a familiar or other item.

I don't recall the Arcane Bond ability saying you can have two, therefore no.

Yes, but all the text you didn't bold argues the opposite. A wizard can't bond with a shield, and the Skirnir can only bond with a shield. Neither power satisfies the requirements of the other; so it can't be limited to one object between them.

****

R.E.N. KalTheo wrote:
Both the Magus Skirnir and Wizard are legal in PFS. I'm not likely to do this in that environment, but I've read the section on Arcane Bonded items several times now, and nothing seems to say that you can't acquire another from another source... Could you have both an Arcane Bonded weapon and a shield if you chose to have a level in each of these classes?

Yes.

Reasoning:

Each class is assumed to be balanced with that ability. Removing that ability removes a class feature. The discount on crafting on that item is considered part of that class feature.

To make someone taking a level of Skirnir ignore the "bonded object" feature because they already have one from the Wizard nerfs their personal implementation of Skirnir (without nerfing anyone else's).

Since the discount is considered part of the class feature, you get it twice.

****

There used to be an open call for scenarios. Now it's an open call for quests.

Also, there's the RPG Superstar competition every year; you just missed that.

Presently there's no way to get yourself added to a scenario other than to write one. The closest thing I've seen to a rumor about GMs getting written in to things is someone suggesting that it might be cool. (Which really demonstrates how quickly a casual word can turn into a rumor on these boards, although that's really neither here nor there.)


Iorthol wrote:

Simple enough thread, I just want to know at what point are you not able to edit your posts on the paizo messageboards.

Is it a time limit? Whether you've signed out or not?
I'd just like to know so I know what not to do so I can keep being able to edit posts if I need to.

One hour, I think.

****

Seth Gipson wrote:
Hundreds of dollars worth of product takes a long time to earn when it's released as $8 a month worth of product.

Ah, you're a VL, not a VC. My bad. You receive significantly less compensation, true. On the other hand, your job duties are a lot more flexible, in that you and your VC sort out which of you is doing what. So maybe you are under-compensated, but that doesn't mean you aren't compensated.

Honestly, I think VLs should get more, and that would open the current VL tier for game day organizers in general. But that's all better suited to that other thread.

The point is, yes, we do appear to be arguing the definition of compensation, so let's just drop it, I suppose.

****

Seth Gipson wrote:
There is a difference between compensation and a small thank you being imparted on someone for their service.

That's exactly my point. But I feel that hundreds of dollars of free product falls well within the compensation category.

****

Seth Gipson wrote:
If you voluntarily did 30+ hours of work for someone who, in thanks, bought you lunch one day at McDonalds, would you call that 'compensation'? I wouldnt. I'd call it you volunteered for a job and got a small thank you in return.
Patrick Harris @ SD wrote:
Whether that compensation is sufficient is a matter on which I'm not qualified to comment. If it's not, that's something VOs should take up with campaign leadership. But there is a schedule of compensation, including free product, which means it's not a "volunteer" position per se.

****

Akeela Valerian, the Wolf wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
The Great Rinaldo! wrote:
Are there "official" portraits for the major NPCs in Blakros Matrimony? I was looking around, and couldn't find any.
Not currently, as we don't have the budget to do that many headshots for a single scenario. But many of the NPCs in that adventure will be appearing in later scenarios, and they should get headshots at that time.
Is there a headshot of Hamaria Blakros specifically out there in any of the Blakros-related scenarios? In the alternative, any suggestions on a good fill-in?

I used a headshot of Judy Dench. It seemed appropriate.

****

This is evil. I would suggest that, if they were warned, and did it anyway, the character should be removed from play. If they killed these people with a sword, or with a fireball, would there even be a question? The fact that it's a channel means diddly squat.

****

Seth Gipson wrote:
I want to mention this now cause this is, I think, the second time you have brought up the volunteers (by which I assume you mean VOs and those GMs who volunteer at cons) not being told how much they are appreciated.

Venture Officers are compensated for their time.

Whether that compensation is sufficient is a matter on which I'm not qualified to comment. If it's not, that's something VOs should take up with campaign leadership. But there is a schedule of compensation, including free product, which means it's not a "volunteer" position per se.

Now, compensation isn't the same as reward. So a GM at a con--especially a GM who organizes a con--might get some tchotchkes and I would still count them as a volunteer.

But I have to insist that appreciation for Venture Officers and appreciation for campaign volunteers are two separate issues.

Edit: One, I'm not arguing that either group is morally superior to the other, so don't start on that crap. Two, I recognize that there are other conditions that can remove someone from volunteer status--Drogon, for instance, has mentioned several times that he does this because it brings him business. We all make the choice to be involved, but some of us are compensated and some of us aren't, and all I'm saying is that I think those should be considered separate categories.

****

When I was running in SD proper, I was having trouble keeping track of what was going on at Katie's game day and all the others, so I wound up making a spreadsheet to track when each scenario had most recently been played. Then, any time I was picking a schedule, I'd just sort the list by date and pick the oldest based on tiers (usually I was running two low-tier tables).

The spreadsheet's still floating around somewhere, although I don't know if it's up to date since my game day went under. It didn't require a lot of upkeep--usually just a few minutes a month, once the other game days posted their schedules--and it was really handy; I'd recommend that for anyone who wants to keep up a good rotation.

****

Vic Wertz wrote:
thejeff wrote:
But again, this is info Paizo can glean from their database: How many people are playing 24+ scenarios in a year? Anyone playing less than that isn't going to need more.
I'll tell you this: as of today, we've released 20 scenarios so far this season. The number of people who have reported playing 18 or more of those? 42.

I'm going to second a question I saw at least one other person ask: How many people have played all of the 1-5 scenarios that were released this season?

Edit: More relevantly, how many people GMed each 1-5, but only once? More interestingly, in each of those games, how many people were playing their very first game? This is where things start to get interesting for me personally.

****

According to this page: http://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Category:Pathfinder_Society_scenarios_set_in _Jalmeray there's only the one.

****

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Sure. Well let's talk about how my gf and I learned a lot from Gencon's Runecarved Key, leading her to overseer it later at Totalcon in an experience I consider to have been superior for the players involved overall compared to the Gencon version. Note that spoilers for the scenario abound here, so just stop reading if you don't want spoilers for Runecarved Key:

Spoiler:

Thank you. That's really cool.

It seems like the big thing is the time. So maybe in order to do a PFS tournament "properly" you need to split it up over multiple slots, so that one party can take time to do all the RP while another just cruises through it, and nobody's penalized.

Better standardization of scoring for various actions seems like a pretty important aspect too.

****

Rogue Eidolon wrote:
There were several things wrong with Runecarved Key that could have been most easily fixed by making it not a tournament style. Patrick nailed the issue with table variation--since the scenario was full to bursting with material for the time allotted, it meant that if you have a fast GM who has mastered the material, you're scoring more points than if you have a slow GM, even for exactly the same players. To make matters worse, if you have a GM who is very descriptive and really gets you into the RP, for instance asking for what tact you would take with each Diplomacy check, you're in big trouble compared to the table with the GM who just says "Roll Diplomacy. Oh you got 40? You convinced him, on to the next part." If you, as a player, tell the GM "can it with the descriptive text, we're on a timer here!" then it's extremely rude, but if you don't, you are losing key points compared to the other tables and there's literally nothing you can do about it, no matter how solid your team is. There's more, but I don't want to derail this thread. I'm happy to PM or start a new thread if anyone's interested in hearing why I heard a lot of negative feedback on RftRK even though Kyle and Tim wrote a scenario full of amazing stuff that deserved better reviews if it hadn't been a tournament style.

This is interesting to me because I wasn't there, so I'm curious about it; it's also relevant because it's the sort of information that can be used by campaign leadership to make improvements going forward. So I say go for it. :D

****

Michael Brock wrote:
Patrick Harris @ SD wrote:
Lab_Rat wrote:

This idea just popped in my head because I was thinking about GenCon and how Drogon has not gone yet.

What about a tournament based around PFS to be run at Cons? The idea is like the old school Goodman Games Tournies.

-Build a 6 person team of level 1 characters.
-Everyone runs through a new scenario and is graded (points for knowledge checks, finding certain items, etc and negative points for failures, deaths, etc).
-Each team is scored and only x number of teams move on.
-If your team moves on you get to progress your character to some new level for the next round. If your team does not progress you get credit for the scenario played.
-Repeat the next round with a new scenario. Run as many rounds as needed to eliminate all but 1 team.
-Winning team ends at level 12 with some door prizes, a lvl 12 character, and some cool boon.

Isn't that how Runecarved worked? I thought the goblin boons went to the high score teams/GMs.
Yes it was. And by and large, we received an overwhelmingly negative response because people advised they would rather have a game they worked together with instead of a game they competed against each other. We are not planning another tournament style event for the foreseeable future, and instead focusing future efforts on cooperative game play, such as this year's special.

Interesting. I'm inclined to wonder if the prize in question didn't sway that opinion, though--given how upset people are about missing the chance to get a goblin boon, I suspect that having the chance to get one and "losing" stings even more.

Overall I think coop play is a better decision, though--table variation makes it really difficult to assign objective points to things. I look forward to seeing how people react to this new format.

****

Lab_Rat wrote:

This idea just popped in my head because I was thinking about GenCon and how Drogon has not gone yet.

What about a tournament based around PFS to be run at Cons? The idea is like the old school Goodman Games Tournies.

-Build a 6 person team of level 1 characters.
-Everyone runs through a new scenario and is graded (points for knowledge checks, finding certain items, etc and negative points for failures, deaths, etc).
-Each team is scored and only x number of teams move on.
-If your team moves on you get to progress your character to some new level for the next round. If your team does not progress you get credit for the scenario played.
-Repeat the next round with a new scenario. Run as many rounds as needed to eliminate all but 1 team.
-Winning team ends at level 12 with some door prizes, a lvl 12 character, and some cool boon.

Isn't that how Runecarved worked? I thought the goblin boons went to the high score teams/GMs.

****

Jessica Price wrote:
I'll leave that call up to people above my pay grade. My concern is doing the most we can with our current resources. And at this time it is not apparent that our current resources can support more than two scenarios a month unless we cancel something else.

That's regrettable. I was under the impression that Paizo was dominating the industry and expanding rapidly, so I didn't expect limited resources to be an issue.

Speaking as a PFS player, I'm inclined to at least ask--are you certain that the return on increasing PFS output (vs. something else) would be so low that it's not worth canceling anything? Or is your next-lowest-returning product so awesome that PFS can't hope to compare?

(That question is not sarcasm! You guys do have a tendency to produce some seriously awesome stuff. And PFS is a marketing tool, so if you guys have decided that expanding it won't be worth your time, that's fair. But it would save a lot of time and debate to know that now.)

****

Michael Brock wrote:
This is something we receive a good deal of feedback on. I'm curious what the best number of scenarios released each month is. I know there are some people who would advise they could play 10 scenarios a month. However, 10 simply isn't feasible. So, what do you think is the target number for players, where PFS is the primary source of their Pathfinder games.

I don't think there's any straightforward answer. I guess the questions would be this:

1. Can you, with current manpower, produce more scenarios a month? If so, I would say do it.
2. Based on some of Mark's comments, it seems like it's not that you guys can't find authors or balance story; it's more about editing and development. With the addition of one person on the back end, can you afford to produce more scenarios per month? If so, I would recommend hiring them and increasing output accordingly.

Long story short, I'd say to start making the minimum more than you can, either without hiring anyone, or with a minimal staff increase. That way Paizo isn't risking any more than it has to, and you can watch for results before adding more.

****

Fromper wrote:

While I'd love to see Paizo start publishing a greater quantity of scenarios, we don't know if the company can afford that extra manpower. More quantity = more cost, so it has to be a financial decision more than anything.

People aren't going to suddenly start playing more PFS, thus buying more scenarios to run, just because there are more available. So there won't be an immediate increase in revenue to make up that cost. It's more of a long term investment in keeping PFS players engaged longer before they run out of scenarios to play, so the exact value to the company will be harder to determine.

It's not a question of "will new scenarios make us more money," it's a question of whether Pathfinder Society is a useful tool for Paizo overall. If the answer is yes, then it makes sense to want to grow it.

We move on then to, "Is PFS in a place where it needs some growth?" Or, if you prefer, "Does D&D Next present a challenge that should be responded to with growth?" I contend that the answer to both is yes.

From there, the question becomes, "Does increasing the number of scenarios lead to growth of PFS?" I think yes, but I have no data to go with that. Neither, it seems, does anyone else, since Paizo staff types are asking for our opinions on the matter. Which isn't a bad thing--it just hasn't been tried, so there can't be any data. So then it becomes a question of whether it's worth the risk.

tl;dr: PFS isn't about selling scenarios, it's about getting people to play Pathfinder, which leads quite naturally to people becoming customers of Paizo. Spending money on this seems like a good idea to me.

****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason S wrote:
Drogon wrote:
PFS has grown; you need to begin to publish more adventures. PFS needs to continue to grow; you need to publish more entry level adventures so that veterans can sit with their trainees. PFS has become a massive volunteer network; you need to begin to show those volunteers that they MEAN something to you and that you are aware of everything they have done for you.

So if I understood your feedback correctly, your feedback is:

1) Produce more tier 1-5 scenarios.
2) Produce more scenarios in general.
3) Do more to support new players.
4) Support the GM network in some undetermined way.
5) Create innovative ideas to be better than the D&D Next OP program.

Is that right?

I agree wholeheartedly with #1 & #2. I'm of the opinion that we're approaching (if not already beyond) the point where it would behoove Paizo to add another person or two and up their scenario release schedule. More and more threads are popping up from people who've played everything available, after which the only option is to run for no credit.

Which leads to the importance of #4, because some people will get bored with rerunning for no credit eventually, and wander off, which is bad, because they're the ones who we should be keeping on hand to help with #3, which grows the product line.

Also, #5 is going to come from a combination of new people with new ideas and established people who know how everything works, so #3 & #4 will lead to #5.

It's all connected, y'see ... :D

****

Michael Brock wrote:
Then let me clarify since people want to read way too much into one word. We may use parts of the Mythic Hardcover when it becomes available. We may not use parts of the Mythic Hardcover when it becomes available. Once the book is on my desk, and I have a chance to look at the final product, I can provide a better answer. Until such a time, everything is conjecture as nothing has been decided. Does that clear it up?

Got it: Definitely "maybe." ;)

****

Michael Brock wrote:
I guess I can see how "maybe" could be construed as "Acquiring mythic tiers requires fighting mythic monsters or accomplishing other epic deeds. They could easily control access to mythic tiers by making very few scenarios/sanctioned modules that increase your mythic tier so that you don't become too ridiculously

That's all conjecture on the OPs part, actually. The ony rumors he alluded to were "that content from this book might be making an appearance in PFS." Which came from you, assuming we accept the correlation between "maybe" and "might be."

****

If you want to be quick about it, Aram Zey teleports them all to the dungeon entrance, tells the to go to town, then has to get back to foundling his tapestry.

****

Michael Brock wrote:
Robert A Matthews wrote:
I have heard rumor that content from this book might be making an appearance in PFS. Acquiring mythic tiers requires fighting mythic monsters or accomplishing other epic deeds. They could easily control access to mythic tiers by making very few scenarios/sanctioned modules that increase your mythic tier so that you don't become too ridiculously overpowered.
Those sound like some juicy and interesting rumors. I would love to hear more of what you've heard .

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p5n7?Mythic-Society#2

Probably this, where you said "maybe" to a lot of questions about PFS inclusion of Mythic content, thus making people think you were considering it.

Mike Brock wrote:
since I didn't start any rumors and have yet to even see the book so have no idea what might and might not be legal, if anything

... unless someone hacked your account, I suppose.

****

Are you sure it's "torture" and not "enhanced interrogation"?

****

Chris Mortika wrote:

All right, John.

Reduce the thresh-hold to three, or write the website code to drop maps in whenever the GM gets at least five games reported, so that a GM still gets rewarded if it takes her three months to get that.

The point is to reward continual GMing, rather than passing big mile-markers.

Actually, this reminds me of another issue with the "X a month" theory--reporting isn't automatic and some event organizers are terrible about it. Like months behind. It's annoying enough if you're waiting for another star, but if it affects your continued eligibility for something, it's going to start to be a problem.

****

Tim Vincent wrote:
One of Paizo's other ventures, Goblinworks, just sold boons for $5. They weren't race boons like you are looking for but yes you can buy boons.

Touché.

****

Ira kroll wrote:

Help a new GM!!

I just ran Reign of Winter: Snows of Summer as a PFS, and now, I'm looking to report the game and give credit to the players. But, when I try to report the game, it asks for scenarios, but doesn't give a choice for RoW:SoS. How can I report this so that the players get the credit?

Reporting is broken. They're working on it.

****

Nefreet wrote:
If that is the quote that Mike Brock is referring to, then it will be the first time I've disagreed with anything he's ruled.

It is. And I agree with your disagreement (although not the qualifier of frequency :P ).

Nevertheless, it has been ruled that everyone must own the core assumption.

****

There are, to the best of my knowledge, about 20 surviving goblins of the original 37. So he'll want to let that dream go.

As to buying a boon, campaign leadership has said that they don't want people to do so, but they have also said that they can't and/or won't stop eBay auctions of boons. That said, I've had an eBay alert on "pathfinder boon" for quite some time due to an overwhelmingly mischievous sense of curiosity, and I've seen none. Unless there's a sudden surge of them after the big cons this summer, I'm going to assume that the campaign leadership disapproving of the process was sufficient to prevent people from bothering.

****

Nefreet wrote:
I completely disagree. That's the whole idea behind the Core Assumption. The Core Rulebook, the Pathfinder Society Field Guide, and the Guide to Organized Play are assumed to be at every table. Everything within them (with few exceptions) is legal for play. Not only do you needn't own them, you don't even have to bring them to a game. If you read the Guide to Organized Play, page 5, you'll see that "In order to utilize content from an Additional Resource (emphasis mine), a player must have a physical copy of the Additional Resource in question". Nowhere in the Guide does it say you must own or bring a copy of the Core Rulebook with you.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p8nl?Policing-the-Core-Assumption#43

todd morgan wrote:

Enough of the back and forth. The rules are clear, you have to have the physical book or a pdf of any book you use to build your character.

"Pathfinder Society Organized Play assumes that every player has the following resources.
• Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook
• Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Pathfinder Society Field Guide
• Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play"

It doesn't state "has access to" it states "has", therefore you have to own these three resources.

mike brock wrote:
Todd said it very well. Topic is now locked. Time to move on.

****

Chris Mortika wrote:

All right, John.

Reduce the thresh-hold to three, or write the website code to drop maps in whenever the GM gets at least five games reported, so that a GM still gets rewarded if it takes her three months to get that.

The point is to reward continual GMing, rather than passing big mile-markers.

If you really run that often, I am deeply impressed, and I'm not just saying that--that's an impressive level of commitment. We have a few GMs in this region who are that in to it, and that's awesome. I'd love to see some sort of reward for them.

The issue, though, is getting the "little guy" more interested in GMing. This is why I've been proposing tiered rewards. Star tier is the easiest, because it requires no work on Paizo's part, but I'd be willing to work with regular games too--or maybe to compromise, require both; you have to run a certain amount of games to get the reward activated, but then run X games a month to keep it active.

****

Chris Bonnet wrote:
Patrick they do have day passes. They are available at the door. There isn't any info yet about the cost. The con people are going to try to post it. They had a quick reply to my question.

Groovy, thanks!


DM_Blake wrote:

All weapons do damage of some kind (that's the point of being a weapon) and many of them can be used to perform a Trip maneuver. None of them do damage and Trip at the same time.

I guess I shouldn't say "none" because I haven't read every weapon in every supplement, maybe there is one that somewhere does, but I will say that if there is, then that weapon has specific wording to allow it to do damage while tripping.

Otherwise, you pick one - use the weapon to hurt your enemy (roll hit and damage) or use the weapon to trip your enemy (roll CMB).

As for the specific Scorpion Whip, the text you quoted is to override the normal whip that deals only non-lethal damage to armored targets - the quoted text makes it clear that the scorpion whip works differently than other whips, not that it works differently than other trip-capable weapons.

That was my argument at the time.

****

Bigdaddyjug wrote:

Somebody else mentioned the same problem to me, FT, so I was hoping to solve the problem rather than have to innoculate every single person who GMs for that character.

I have since learned my lesson and created this messageboard alias and no longer post as any of my characters.

... until after you play them at 2nd level, at which point their names are presumably unlikely to change, yes?

****

Are day passes available? I don't see any prices listed for them.


Ah! A good argument. Thank you.

****

It's been my experience that the first four run in a four-hour slot, but the last one will go long.

Also some people report needing nearly eight hours for the first level, but YMMV.

****

Nefreet wrote:
You don't need to own any books if the class/race/feats you're using are part of the Core Assumption.

Of course you do--you need to own the core assumption. You just don't need to own any extra books.

****

Correct. Each level is a module by itself.


The description says, "It deals lethal damage, even to creatures with armor bonuses." I assume this means on an attack, not on a combat maneuver. However, the flavor text says "This whip has a series of razorsharp blades and fangs inset along its tip." This implies that it will damage anyone being hit by it.

Interestingly it was the GM who thought it might cause damage, because I was using it to trip an ally (long story); I argued that it doesn't, because that would be overpowered. But I figured I should check.

1 to 50 of 1,354 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 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.