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

Saint Caleth's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 2013 Dedicated Voter, 2014 Marathon Voter. FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,592 posts (2,967 including aliases). No reviews. 7 lists. No wishlists. 10 Pathfinder Society characters. 8 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,592 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
*

Is there a listing somewhere of what this season's boons do? I keep hearing the names referenced here and have no idea what the boons actually are.

*

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I still think that the correct solution to the problems with the "tech obfuscation" rules would have been to add a boon to the chronicle of each scenario involving tech which basically gives the benefits of Technologist. That way you would have been able to simulate the way that tech would interact in a real campaign, where the characters would presumably become familiar with it after encountering it.

Please put that text about Technologist in a sidebar next to every use of Numerian tech in a scenario, and emphasize the fact that characters should still have a way to succeed at the mission. Otherwise we are going to get all sorts of table variation and nonsense about metagaming whenever tech appears in a scenario.


Rysky wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
In China it is illegal to reincarnate without prior government approval.
Illegal for the one being reincarnated, or the one being reincarnated into?

You have to fill out the paperwork before you die if you plan to be reincarnated.

Just file these 17 pages with the Bureau of Religious Affairs and don't forget to get a notarization from your local police station. Then your application will be forwarded to the central government for approval...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

In China it is illegal to reincarnate without prior government approval.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"subtext" is an anagram of "butt sex"


Chengar Qordath wrote:

I think part of the problem with your argument is that a lot of the issues you're bringing up with torture are really just issues with interrogation in general. Suspects are perfectly capable of lying or giving out bad information during a humane interrogation. False confessions happen all the time even without torture being a factor. You would still need to verify any information a suspect provided under humane interrogation, and so on.

Then again, that might be the best indictment one can level against torture. If it has all the same problems as normal interrogation methods, then that suggests that in most cases any possible increase in effectiveness is minimal at best. And that's not enough to justify doing something morally abhorrent.

Fortunately in a world with magic there are even better ways to get information out of someone which theoretically always produce true information. They would not even need the psychological manipulation of modern interrogation methods. The best magical solution would probably just be to charm or dominate someone and then ask them. Paired with modify memory they won't even know they had been interrogated.

Kain Darkwind wrote:
"Lawful Good is the best alignment because it combined honor with compassion. Also if someone gets in your way and they are wrong, you can torture or beat them until they give into your demands."

I have always had the above mentioned method of dominate/ask be the LG enhanced interrogation technique of choice. It is humane, quick, effective and does not violate anyone's alignment based codes of conduct. The only drawback is that it requires a relatively high level spellcaster, but in an emergency charm person would probably work pretty well too.

*

Pirate Rob wrote:
I believe it's the same elemental boons as last year.

It is not a rotating selection from the races on the Gencon DM boon? That would be disappointing if they didn't follow that precedent.

It is not as vital this year I guess since they did just rotate the open races to give 7 non-core choices that it is relatively easy to get your hands on.

*

What are the race boons for this season? Is there a rotation of four each for three months like there was last season?

*

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Finlanderboy is on the right track. What DMs should not try to do is use pedantic readings (and misinterpretations of the rules) to tear down a player's character when the entire purpose of the game is to be a fun social activity.

I too am very disappointed to see long time 5-star DMs in this thread going against the spirit and precedent of the rebuild rule, which as far as I can tell is to allow players to salvage character broken by rule changes. And seeing this now I am glad that I purposefully did not play any playtest classes above 1st level.

*

FLite wrote:

Saint Caleth,

That implies that everyone is supposed to get the 2nd prestige point.

It has been stated that PCs are only expected to earn ~3/4 of second prestige points. Given the number of 2ndPP that are all but automatic, it is not unreasonable to have the occasional 2ndPP all but unachievable.

I think that the 3/4 prestige success fact is used far to glibly around here. The point of secondary success conditions I think is to get characters to act more like pathfinders are supposed to in-world; not hyper-specializing and not wantonly murder-hoboing, rather than to be some kind of precisely calibrated expectation of failure.

That has no bearing on the fact that gating vital plot information/cool lore/the best bits of content behind skill checks that the vast majority of characters would be expected to fail is pretty much universally recognized as bad adventure writing.

Again the Technologist feat is a pretty cool idea for a long-term campaign with a persistent story, but in an organized play environment it does not really work out, especially when the rule in question is buried in a splatbook.

So for PFS purposes either the "technology obfuscation" rule should be rethought, or at the very least put the benefits of the Technologist feat on the Chronicle for each scenario containing Numerian tech to simulate the character encountering then learning about the tech the best that can be done in the non-persistent context of PFS play.

*

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am honestly disappointed after reading this thread, mostly because of two specific problems not with the rule itself, but with the way it interacts with organized play rules and adventures.

I actually kind of like the rule and it is a perfect way to make a nod to the collision of genres in a homebrew campaign and also presumably in Iron Gods, which I have not had a chance to read yet.

The place where PFS seems to have dropped the ball on this is from both a complication of the existence of "Additional Resources" as well as from the perspective of good adventure writing from what I have heard of 6-02 especially.

The Additional Resources problem is somewhat similar to what was faced with the Animal Archive, where rules which are not core assumption lessen the effectiveness of someone's character and you basically have to buy the book to get back to where you were before. Admittedly this problem stems from the fact that PFS is organized play and cannot really be solved.

The adventure design problem comes from the issue of gating necessary information or even the best bits of flavor behind difficult or impossible skill checks. If it is indeed true like I have read in a few posts that the secondary success condition all but relies on a knowledge check about something technological then it is a perfect illustration of this kind of bad adventure plotting. This is a problem which can be solved by being careful in development.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ooh, I missed this news when it first came out and I really love the precedent of rotating the races available without a boon. Hopefully it continues in future seasons.

Very Exciting!

*

neferphras wrote:
well that what i loved about the shared prep, you had the map versions without the numbers on them and what not. I am not a good artist, and printing the maps for running saved me hours of drawing work. I wish the purchased PDFs had a print ready version of the module or scenerio maps (without the number on it) included so it could be easily printed out, that would be worth an extra dollar per pdf easy for me. It is what it is i guess

Nitro PDF has an "export images" feature which can get the images out of Paizo PDFs the best out of any program I have used. It retains transparency and usually gets the maps without numbers and secret doors.

I am pretty sure the free version of the program can do the same.

Goblin Squad Member

Gol Tigari wrote:
GW already said they don't want ONE settlement to be able to support itself. That goes for training along with resources.

Yes, it always has gone for training. The support idea is what I don't really like, that your character would have to move their affiliation in order to keep using their skills after a certain point. I guess the intent is that someone would have characters in different companies and settlements depending on what types of characters they want to roll.

I kind of get the point, but it seems a little ham-handed and immersion breaking to send all the characters of a certain class packing from their home at a certian level because the settlement cannot support their skill use. On the plus side, it reinforces the importance of supra-national entities which I guess is a good bit of meaningful interaction.

Goblin Squad Member

Lee Hammock wrote:

Basically we have two concepts involved in the settlements, training and support.:

Training: You can actively learn skills from a settlement and settlements can only teach up to a certain level.
Support: Settlements also support skills, i.e. allow you to keep using skills if you have trained them. If a settlement trains something it automatically supports it as well.

For example, Torkville controls 6 towers and is a cleric/fighter settlement. It can train up to level 8 fighter and cleric related skills, feats, etc. It cannot train any wizard or rogue skills, but can support them up to level...say 5 (note I am pulling approxmiate numbers here, so if anyone tries to hold me to them in six months I will laugh and laugh). So people in the settlement can train and use up to level 8 skills for fighter and clerics, and if they train wizard and rogue skills somewhere else they can only use up to level 5 of those skills while being a member of that settlement. This is to stop people from bouncing around settlements, training everyone, and then being completely antisocial as they don't need any more training. But it does allow you to train classes other than those your settlement favors at allied settlements.

This is the only really worrying thing that I have heard in this thread. I was under the impression that the level of the settlement is when the hyper-specialization would stop. The entire way that larger settlements have come together in the land rush has been predicated on there being specialized companies within the settlement catering to different roles. Is the intention that people should send their characters to different settlements depending on what they want to play? Or is it that some of the larger organizations should expect to need to take several settlements in order to support their community?

Goblin Squad Member

Kakafika wrote:

I really see no reason to punish the low-rep characters further by allowing anybody to attack them without consequence.

I think that those that want to dish out cold vengeance should resign themselves to not being the most reputable pinnacles of law and goodness.

We have an alignment system and a reputation system, let them work .

I agree. I assumed that the intent of the reputation system is to cut both ways. Beyond the low-rep that everyone is talking about , there should be low-rep good represented by the exact behavior which Nihimon is advocating, wanting to summarily murder any "evildoers" (judged by whatever standard). Which is exactly the kind of behavior which LG characters are not supposed to engage in and which fuels the endless paladin threads we see on the Paizo forums.

Goblin Squad Member

I'm going to get myself a really nice wireless gaming headset. Nothing drives me up the wall faster than getting up from my computer and having my headphones yanked off my head.

I was looking at something from Logitech since I have a G700s mouse already and it is lightyears better than the Razer peice of crap I had before. I have yet to do much reasearch on the matter yet though. Any ideas?

*

John Francis wrote:
kinevon wrote:
One thing to remember is that this rule is not to prove you own the resource, . . .

See, however, this post, and the immediately following one by Mike Brock.

That makes it pretty clear that owning the resource in question is a requirement.

Yes, but the DM should not be the "give money to Paizo" police. Practically the rule should never realyl be brought up unless there are unfamiliar rules, or someone is harcore splatbook diving from everywhere. That is the take away message of jsut about every discussion about the additional resources rules.

Goblin Squad Member

I am eager to discover who will sack whose cities. I expect that multipolar superpower politics will be a good thing for the map. And I guess new players trying to reach Brighthaven will provide good content for UNC recruits to practice on. I just want to see how it goes.

Hopefully these discoveries will be made amid a bloodbath of biblical proportions.

Goblin Squad Member

I weep for the community if we have reached this point already.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The key point here is that it got personal. It took a week of things becoming and staying personal to get Gologotha's leadership this pissed off. That shows impressive discipline in their response from where I am sitting.

Goblin Squad Member

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Saiph the Fallen wrote:
Gol Morbis wrote:
...
You are just as guilty, if not more so, of slander as you've been throwing mud on Nihimon's good name for the past week. Your organization and yourself are no angels and Nihimon no devil. If you're going to make new threads on this issue at least be fair and also quote the horrid things you've said about him, and any other person that has questioned the happenings here. People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

I have read this controversy in the original thread as well as the numerous threads it has infected after the first was locked as a person who recently returned from a long period of not following this particular forum.

From that perspective, WTF is Nihimon doing? He literally seems like a completely different person since I was last posting here. He not only jumped back into the first thread after the original issue had been dealt with and turned it into a referendum on Golgotha's right to exist, but he then brought all of the same b#!*%@#% into a completely different thread after the first one was locked. In that regard I see exactly what Morbis is talking about. I think that prolonging drama after it gets locked for being toxic is pretty indefensible. If perception can override reality about Pax's organizations structure, then it can equally paint Nihimon as a grade A ego trying to defend his ideological hegemony rather than a pillar of the community trying to get everyone to be collectively better.

I know that Nihimon is capable of owning his mistakes and misdeeds, and I have seen the leadership of Golgotha do the same already during this whole clusterf$$@, so I have no doubt that mutual apologies can be excahanged, but is an apology actually going to end this? I will certainly help, but I don't think that it end things completely at this point. I think that it is related to the emergence of a new power bloc beyond the hegemony of the Roseblood accords rather than anyone's specific alleged misconduct. someone has torn a rift in this community and it is not going to get better until we are killing each other in game. Fortunately that day comes closer as we speak.

Goblin Squad Member

Forencith of Phaeros, TSV wrote:
Gol PotatoMcWhiskey wrote:
TEO Alexander Damocles wrote:
Massive Quote wall...

I feel like I need to start quoting myself.

Nihimon is on a petty crusade against Pax.

I'm just having fun watching himself dig his self righteous hole as deep as it goes.

Nihimon is doing what he feels is his duty as a member of this community to "crusade" not against anything rather for the stated intents of the devs. I think Nihimon feels the "crusade" itself is part of the stated intent of the devs...specifically that the community police itself.

This is obvious.

I would have agreed that his intentions were obvious right up until the point when he started beating the "Pax is one guild" horse again after Golgotha had rectified the irregular votes. If that were not bad enough I would say that the fact that he moved all the b+~$&!&! into this thread after the other one was locked moves this beyond community anything and into "crusade" territory.

As far as I am concerned he has lost the ability to say he speaks for the standards of the community, as opposed to just being another ego knocking around these boards while we all wait for the game.

Goblin Squad Member

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Artistic interpretation of the last week or so ---> (ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
T7V Avari wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
T7V Avari wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:


This describes 90% of the people in this thread. Everyone should have left long before two-three pages ago, yet here we are. What is your point?
Welcome to the mud pit! The edge did say "slippery when wet".

Yep, little did I know...

That's a lie. I totally should have known better.

A "pox on both houses" only works when you die after you say it ;p

Don't worry about that, we'll be able to kill each other soon enough. Over and over and over again.

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Avari wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:


This describes 90% of the people in this thread. Everyone should have left long before two-three pages ago, yet here we are. What is your point?
Welcome to the mud pit! The edge did say "slippery when wet".

Yep, little did I know...

That's a lie. I totally should have known better.

Goblin Squad Member

Summersnow wrote:
Most of those posts have been petty, childish, undignified, immature rants directed at the community as a whole.

This describes 90% of the people in this thread. Everyone should have left long before two-three pages ago, yet here we are. What is your point?

Goblin Squad Member

Gol Tigari wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
I gleefully await the carnage that will ensue once everyone gets into the game itself.

And I will be part of the hand that exacts that carnage! The Bloody Hand!

(see what I did there!)

I just want to see blood and tears failing to extinguish the flaming remains of the high and mighty's hubris.*

* No promises on how bloody my hands will be. Terms and conditions apply.

Goblin Squad Member

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Nihimon wrote:
If nothing else, this thread has served to illuminate the differences between us.

As someone who has read all 19 pages of this garbage before commenting, I actually have no idea what purpose this thread has served, ever since the point when you jumped back in after Golgotha reverted the votes people felt were improper and turned this into a referendum on Golgotha's right to exist.

I have been on these forums from the beginning and on the Paizo forums since long before that and this is the absolutely most toxic b~*$*%&% I have seen so far. Before I left this community for several months I would have never in a million years guessed that you, Nihimon, would become the sort to perpetuate this crap across multiple threads for over a week.

I gleefully await the carnage that will ensue once everyone gets into the game itself.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravenlute wrote:
Welcome to the start of a long and brutal war.

This is exactly what I alluded to before as a feature rather than a bug. Now that we have an Evil empire, a self-righteously LG hegemony and morally flexible mercenaries as power blocs we are all set for a powder keg of carnage, which is, I assume, exactly what Ryan and GW want going into Alpha and EE.

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

I have nothing I can give

But the chance that you may live
I pray we'll meet again
If you will DELIVER UUUUUS

G~%~!#NS&#(F&#! GET OUT OF MY BRAIN DREAMWORKS

Maybe another language or seventeen would help

Goblin Squad Member

Do we have any information on the granularity of crafting facilities yet?

Are there different buildings for each step of the crafting process?

Are there vertically integrated facilities for each kind of crafting material? I think that this is the most likely, with forges, mills, etc.

Are there too many different facilities for one modestly-sized settlement to have good development of all of them? I could see how this too is desirable from GW's point of view.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I was a little dismayed to watch that get as out of hand as it did, since on any other section of the Paizo forums that s@~# would have been locked at the very least when people jumped right back in after the original issue was dealt with, if not long before that.

I think I kind of see Ryan's philosophy about managing the community. I don't think it is the right approach, but I see how it matches the avowed point of GW's design goals. I certainly see it upping the brutality of PvP by a lot, which might be a feature rather than a bug to GW.

*

If they were going to make a reappearance it probably would have been along with the dhampir splatbook.

*

I would assume that a lot of the campaign mode play happens in home groups, either as a break from the strictures of PFS, or as a way to wean groups off of PFS.

Obviously that would not be apparent on the collective beyond the threads recruiting for private groups, leaving only the separate play of the evergreen areas apparent as is presumably the case. I see nothing either surprising or wrong with this.

I still don't think that there should be campaign mode for Emerald Spire since it is presumably not actually a campaign any more than Thornkeep is. The model of loosely connected dungeon levels is perfectly tailored for the paradigm of PFS play with discrete adventures for each level like in Thornkeep. I have always assumed that the purpose of campaign mode was to allow groups strongly wedded to PFS play to experience the APs and new modules without slice-and-dicing them up into PFS sized chunks and completely bowdlerizing the story.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mattastrophic wrote:

Assuming that figure is correct, I'd say that the real question here is:

Why?

Why are so few games at Tier 7-11? Why are so many players dropping out of the campaign before they play Tier 7-11?

Even if the campaign were to add fifty Tier 1-5s a year, that would not address the issue of player retention that the Tier 7-11 figure is indicative of.

-Matt

I bet that people who play regularly enough to have characters in the 7-11 range wind up spinning off home groups for real campaigns which then take up much of their gaming time. I don't see this as a bad thing though, since arguably part of the purpose of a robust organized play campaign is to strengthen a gaming community to the point where it can support regular home groups.

*

I'd say no. The bounds of a scenario are very clear, from the briefing until the time when conditions have to be cleared. That is basically the only time which truly happens in a PFS character's life. Everything else is just notional as far as I am concerned. That is not to say that it is completely impossible to "pre-cast" things. Many modules and scenarios have at least a day of travel actually in the scenario and that is the time when you would be able to precast muti-day buffs.

Anything else between scenarios is just nebulous time assumed to be there in order to give PFS the facade of being a persistent campaign and nothing can happen then except for house-ruled things like day jobs and buying off chronicles. The only thing that I can think of which persists between scenarios besides the spells enumerated in the guide is charges in spell-storing items, and that is only because I am pretty sure that I remember a specific ruling by Mike about it.


Tacticslion wrote:
While he does overturn social mores, he overturns wicked, self-serving, dehumanizing social mores.

That sounds awfully Chaotic Good to me. I definitely accept the interpretation of NG on the basis of having both distinct Lawful and Chaotic traits.


thorin001 wrote:
Jaelithe wrote:

Adhering so firmly to a code that you defeat the purpose for which the code has been put in place is not only monolithic, it's asinine.

"The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."

I really doubt Jesus was LG. He was a "compassion comes first" kind of guy, and that says NG to me. Not to mention such not-really-lawful sentiments as "Judge not lest ye be judged."
Arthurian knights are the definition of LG. And they are supposed to be emulating Jesus, so I would say that Jesus would then be LG.

That is ridiculous. They emulated the then current interpretation of what Jesus did, removed from the man himself by over a millennium not to mention a vast gap of cultural context.

Jesus actually came from a tradition of apocalyptic preachers and prophets. He associated himself with marginalized members of society and turned aspects of traditional social order upside down. That sounds to me like a chaotic good attitude of being perfectly fine with tossing out rules which contribute to marginalizing certain members of society while still being fine with the rules which constructively add to society.

Now something on topic though. Being able to toss out rules which do not serve their purpose or are otherwise objectionable with no compunctions is the essence of a chaotic alignment. Civil disobedience is a quintessentially chaotic act because it revolves around purposefully disobeying the law to make a point. The difference between CG, CN and CE is why they each would find a law objectionable. CG would find a law or custom objectionable if it is unjust. CN would think something is objectionable if it were unjust, but also if it were just out of keeping with contemporary attitudes or even if it benefits a group of people they don't like. CE would find something objectionable because f#&# you is why.

Lawful alignments would not be ok with tossing out a law entirely. They would instead try to amend or repeal it through the accepted process. A lawful person would rather write a letter to their congressman than protest something. LG wants the same standards of justice that CG does, they just think that CG cases too much collateral grief to society in the process of attaining that justice.

The one thing which LG heroes have trouble fighting is entrenched and unjust social mores and laws, such as those in a LE but stable and functional society.

*

Nefreet wrote:
Pathfinder Society FAQ wrote:
The only pregenerated characters legal for the Pathfinder Society campaign are the 1st-, 4th-, and 7th-level Iconics available as free PDF downloads.

This is why you won't find non-Paizo pregens being handed out at Conventions.

Your 1st level slaughterhouse, if handed over to someone else, is technically a "pregenerated character", parsing the words "pre", "generated", and "character", and would not be legal either.

You can absolutely hand someone a 1st level character for them to play. Are you trying to argue that someone can only play characters that they themselves roll up?

This cannot possibly be the intended purpose of the rule you are citing, which exists mostly to keep people from jumping into high-level games with characters they have just rolled up at the right level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quote:
Personally I don't understand where the black people are bad thing comes from, when you consider China has little if any interaction with Africans until modern times.
Probably from American films, and news reports on American big cities like New York and Detroit.

The etymological implications of the Chinese word for Africa do not help either. In Chinese, Africa is 非洲 (Feizhou). Where 洲 just means continent, but 非 literally means "wrong" or "to blame". So in Chinese, Africa literally can be parsed as "Bad/Wrong Continent". It does not actually mean that since it is one word and not just two characters and the word was actually coined to echo the sound of "Africa", but 非 as a character or radical has negative connotations since it is both a grammatical negator and sounds like and appears as a component of characters like 菲 (poor; unworthy), 匪 (bandit; robber), 罪 (crime; guilt) and 䨿 (evil; wicked). I remember being really taken aback when I learned this in China.

I kind of wonder to what extent the coining of this word was influenced by Western attitudes of the 18th and 19th centuries and/or to what extent it unconsciously shapes Chinese attitudes today.

Sorry that is kind of off-topic, but language definitely shapes the way that people think about things.

*

Yea, but the presumption that the Handle Animal conditions work like RAW is a lot of the reason it is so good.

*

Nebten wrote:

From FAQ

Can I improve my companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher and give it weapon feats?

No. An Intelligence of 3 does not grant animals sentience, the ability to use weapons or tools, speak a language (though they may understand one with a rank in Linguistics; this does not grant literacy), or activate magic devices. Also note that raising an animal companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher does not eliminate the need to make Handle Animal checks to direct its actions; even semi-intelligent animals still act like animals unless trained not to. An animal with Intelligence of 3 or higher remains a creature of the animal type unless its type is specifically changed by another ability. An animal may learn 3 additional tricks per point of Intelligence above 2.

This still leaves the question of what to do if your Animal Companion is not an animal, such as with Celestial Servant.

By RAW I am all but certain that as a Magical Beast, once it has INT 3+ it is not bound by the Handle Animal rules. However I know that PFS house rules animal companions and familiars very heavily so in PFS does requiring Handle Animal trigger off of a creature's intelligence and type like by RAW or does it trigger off of the creature being granted by the Animal Companion class feature even if that creature is intelligent and not an animal? I suspect that in PFS it is the latter since that seems to fit with all the other changes PFS makes to Animal Companions.


If you don't already, you should check out cartographer's guild.com. They have a whole forum for people requesting maps as well as all sorts of other great stuff. I have seen more than a few publishers seeking stuff out there.

*

By RAW you are right and you would ask your DM, but remember that in PFS you are always limited to things which are specifically listed, even if that list is missing subsequent character options.

*

Deane Beman wrote:
Running a single game for either of the official PbP game days would earn a racial boon without ever having to leave the house or spending a dime.

I just want to point out that non-standerd races are not nearly the source of problems that they used to be now that we have online events. Even if you don't get a race boon, you can head over to the boon trading thread and the community is usually prepared to be generous.

*

There are no clerics of an ideal in Golarion last time I checked, and the pantheistic clerics had been reconned out. The reason given is that otherwise it would not make any sense from a setting standpoint that the priests of Razmir had to fake their divine magic. So that ruling at least makes sense and kind of needs to exist logically.

The paladin thing is a PFS rule, probably intended to stop things like the infamous paladin of Pharasma. Specifically the arguments about said paladin.

*

By RAW if you are not a divine spellcaster who gets their power from a specific source (if you don't have domains) you can switch deity or alignment at your own discretion.

Looks like the PFS rule requires an atonement which makes sence is a campaign where everything needs to be tracked.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm just wondering if this actually Golarion cannon like the must worship one and only one deity to get divine spells ruling, or just a PFS house rule?

Does this new atonement rule now cover all alignment changes in PFS, or only changes of what deity you worship? I assume it also applies if you are going from having no god to choosing your one god you can worship.

*

That still does not invalidate all the rest of the wand use rules. It just restates that a familiar uses their master's skill ranks which is already the rule by RAW.

With your reading a faerie dragon can use a staff but not a wand which is just weird and obviously not RAI by either RAW or PFS house rules.

1 to 50 of 1,592 << 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.