|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
People like pointing out the wording in Bull Rush to show that movement generally provokes. I think Bull Rush is worded like it is to show a change from D&D 3.5 was intentional and not an unintended change from editing.
Here is the 3.5 Bull Rush text.
"First, you move into the defender’s space. Doing this provokes an attack of opportunity from each opponent that threatens you, including the defender. (If you have the Improved Bull Rush feat, you don’t provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender.) Any attack of opportunity made by anyone other than the defender against you during a bull rush has a 25% chance of accidentally targeting the defender instead, and any attack of opportunity by anyone other than you against the defender likewise has a 25% chance of accidentally targeting you. (When someone makes an attack of opportunity, make the attack roll and then roll to see whether the attack went astray.)"
For people switching from 3.5 to Pathfinder it seemed like there was an effort to remove cases where forced movement provoked.
If you are not set on Glitterdust you could use the rogue trick Fast Getaway with a Decoy Ring. This doesn't let you full attack, but does have several advantages. 1. You are often invisible from the middle of you turn until you attack at the start of your next turn. 2. You generate a ton of distracting targets. 3. There is no limit to the number of times you can do this in a day.
Summons can make great flanking buddies. When you are vanished you could UMD a summon out of a Wand. It would appear right before your actions so even a first level monster wouldn't die before your attacks. Problem is if your target moves further than a 5' step will take you.
On the other hand if they used one of the rolling methods for character generation you would be rewarding them for rolling better and having a higher stat. Don't odd rolled stats deserve some love.
When I read about the oblivion shaft I thought it would be amazing if the next scenario of the series starts with Venture-Captain Benarry suggesting the Pathfinders drink from the Chalice of Undeath that appeared in You Only Die Twice. It would be a cool connection to past scenarios and show that the Pathfinders use the artifacts they find when it is appropriate.
I enjoy seeing boons with mechanical benefits and consequences like several of the evil boons.
I have one character that has taken evil boons out of fourteen characters. He is a cleric of Besmara that always had death knell memorized to press gang souls for Besmara. He ended up with two season 4 boons.
Season 4 Boons:
I did not know what the mechanical effects would be before I acquired either boon and did not have to pay the cost at the end of the season as he hit 33 exp before the hidden dept was called in.
Ioun stone: I know someone at my table accidentally acquired the boon, may have been me was a long time ago. I do remember convincing half the rest of the table to take one after I had one. Hey it is free for you crazy good people, and Besmara will help cleanse you of evil if you slip too far. Of course I was evil when I was convincing the others.
Sigil Wafers: My cleric was happy to eat a Sigil Wafer as that was like press ganging a portion of their soul. The cleric of Nethys was happy acquiring knowlege. Several people told us not to do it, but we pointed out the chance of getting the right wafer to the right person was minuscule. We knew about the affects of the wafer, but the GM had not shared the destruction knowledge. We also did not realize that the wafers were distinct.
The most memorable boons I have run across have been mixed blessing Boons.
I remember a mysterious stranger that stopped the party when they were on their way to face demons during the Living City campaign. The guy said he hated demons and would be happy to do a favor to the party by giving them a fine demon slaying weapon for some future favor in return. The weapon was both evil outsider and chaotic outsider bane (and it stacked) unfortunately it wasn't mentioned that it also acted as a -5 weapon that teleported to your hand if faced with a devil. There were also several situations when parties had to made decisions on who to help in future scenarios and the stranger would show up forcing your character to vote one way.
There was a Living Greyhawk scenario in Zeif that had tougher than normal encounters that were designed to capture the party. If the party was captured they became research subjects and got a cert that as time went by you gained resistances, lost states, and died two years after you got the cert. I was really looking forward to the other scenarios in the series to discover a way to get rid of the parasitic alien baby replacing some of my major organs. If you made it though the series with the bad boon you were given the choice removing/killing the celestial being your body was corrupting and living, saving the celestial and having your character removed from play(dead), or getting blended with it (chance you were removed from play or you got a boon that gave you some powers from the half celestial template.
After reading the posts I have figured out how I will rule in my games.
1. I will let the invisible party determine if the enemy can move through their square. As Snowblind states they can determine that the enemy is an ally and since they are the ones in control of the square I think it is their decision.
2. If the enemy ends their move in a square occupied by the invisible party they bounce back to the last/closest legal space and know they bumped off of someone. This makes sense to me as I have bumped into people in open areas that are not paying attention and just move in the same direction as me when I try to avoid them.
I have read several bodyguard threads. What I have seen is that while the text does not let people decisively determine how the feat works, most people (based on a poll performed by liking one of two posts) thought it was acceptable to only be next to the ally. I also saw posts from a person claiming to have written the feat that said, they were picturing the person only being adjacent to the person being defended and were aiding by pushing them out of the way of incoming attacks.
As the feat stands right now talk to your GM before investing in the feat to see if he interprets the feat in a way you find it worth spending a feat on. If you are in organized play, every once in a while the feat will do basically nothing.
I once had a PFS judge rule that I could only use Bodyguard if the opponent provoked an AOO as AOOs are not an action so you don't get to spend them without being given them.
For the original poster,
If you are adjacent to your target and use James Jacobs interpretation of Bodyguard, and your GM has a problem with you having a ranged weapon in your hands when you perform Bodyguard,you can use an unarmed strike, gauntlet, armor spikes, dwarven boulder helm or one of several other weapons which do not take up your hands. You could probably even say you are using the ranged weapon as an improvised club.
On the other hand the normal text of bodyguard doesn't mention that you normally only have to be in position to make a melee attack on an opponent that is engaging a friend in melee combat. So using the normal sections referenced to determine what the benefit section changes would mean you wouldn't have to be adjacent to your ally.
So why does Life Bubble not let you breath freely when it is right in the spell description as its own distinct sentence?
From Life Bubble
You surround the touched creatures with a constant and moveable 1-inch shell of tolerable living conditions. This shell enables the subjects to breathe freely, even underwater or in a vacuum, as well as making them immune to harmful gases and vapors, including inhaled diseases and poisons and spells like cloudkill and stinking cloud.In addition, the shell protects subjects from extremes of temperature (per endure elements) as well as extremes of pressure.
Life bubble does not provide protection from negative or positive energy (such as found on the Negative and Positive Energy planes), the ability to see in conditions of poor visibility (such as in smoke or fog), nor the ability to move or act normally in conditions that impede movement (such as underwater).
It seems like the original question about chokehold and cave-ins is covered in the second paragraph that says Life bubble does not provide protection from ... conditions that impede movement.
We ran an event to encourage people to GM based on all the scenarios that mention solo pathfinders that are sent into the field.
We selected two scenarios (Immortal Conundrum and Golemworks Incident) and sent half our player home with one and the other half home with the other to prepare them. The next week players with separate scenarios were paired and ran the scenario for a character 3-4 levels higher than tier.
I the event was a success. People enjoyed seeing their experienced Pathfinders lording their skills over weaker opponents, several people that hadn't GMed before mentioned that they liked getting some experience at it in a low pressure environment, and as organizers we could spot some people that we really wanted to get to GM. In the 1 on 1 setting the scenarios ran 1.5 to 2.5 hours so both parties could run in one normal session. Players did not receive any rewards as this is a non-sanctioned format, but were excited at the end of the night and traded stories of how they handed the various encounters.
I feel the pain of dumping mental stats more society play than in a home game for a few reasons.
-In a home game you are with a consistent group of people so you can coordinate character development to cover each others weak points.
-PFS missions often require skill checks to complete successfully.
-There are several social scenarios where the low charisma is a huge hindrance.
If the player of the low intelligence character has not used up much table time before the puzzle I would be happy for him to solve it, as it is nice to give multiple players the spotlight during a scenario. If the player had already made most of the decisions I may ask the low int player to either give the other players 5 minutes to solve the puzzle before helping, or say your character can not complete the puzzle but you can pass on one piece of insight/comment a minute. Either way if the party reaches a point where they are stuck let all the players loose on the puzzle.
What I have found works well with low charisma characters being played by charismatic players is either have them make their roll at the beginning and then have the conversation, or when it comes time for the social role and they get a bad result I will say "In your head you had a great speech but you had a hard time putting it into words and it came out as (something appropriate for the role)"
Here is a list that I hand to people playing Confirmation, some items may not apply. It is never too early to worry about harpies, swarms, animated objects, and dr silver/cold iron.
· Tindertwig (1 gp,) standard action to light fire
Potions/Oils (scrolls are ½ price of potions, if useable) (*Potions can be faster for some spells)
Wands of cure light wounds for 2 PP
It seems to me that Pathfinders should be well trained in tolerance. You have necromancers hanging out with clerics of Pharasma, pirates from the Shackles and Hellknights, and barbarians from the Land of the Linnorm Kings and Irrisen witch all managing to work together. But that one noble kid manages to ruin everything.
It would be funny if the NPC in 5-08 Confirmation was played like many of you handled the prince. Anyone who was uppity for a low level character gets knocked out and the rest get to carry him.
I was thinking of the 10%+5% per round that when you play the drum it causes unattended alchemical items to catch fire. That is about 6 grenades on the first round and 8 on the second.
Read that section again. The food flavor is affected by points but I don't see them getting a point there.
The spell should remove the poison, but I would leave the different flavoring in.
If you wanted you could use the second part of the spell to have the food they purify spoil and rot in front of them. That may cause some fun RP as the worshipers wonder why the visitors just did horrible things to their food.
I would not count on too much help from Zey. There is a season 5 scenario in which it mentions that you are the 17th group he has briefed for the tapestry that day. Between the meetings to determine which Pathfinders are sent where, preparing his own spells, and sending off the PF teams that seems like a full day.
I have used the rule if you can carry it you can take it.
It is easy to end up with the free feat reward by accident if nobody in the party has spellcraft. Pathfinders often remove unfamiliar magic gear from foes and use it to fill a free item slot. I have seen several people take potions off defeated foes and drink them assuming they will be cure potions. Most of the time they are right.
Well lets look at the disadvantages of being neutral.
1. Role-playing: Given the episodic nature of PFS you have to sometimes have to change your characters behavior as a GM will warn you that your character is being too evil. Perhaps you are playing one of only 3 scenarios actually triggers your characters darker side in the 33 scenarios it takes to get to 12 level, but because that GM doesn't realize that in the other 30 scenarios you are good you do not get to express the range of your character.
2. Mechanical Disadvantages Neutral characters are subject to Unholy Blight and Holy Smite, at times in the same round. When targeted my a holy smite will they will often let the no pvp clause of pfs slide and get hit because it does more damage to the opponents. You do not get a Holy Word/Blasphemy that does not affect you.
3. Morally Questionable Orders A neutral character on the good/evil axis is more likely to follow their law/chaos alignment and not be able to accomplish faction mission if role played correctly that good characters could find it in their hearts to accomplish. When asked to acquire an item from an organization that legally owns it a lawful neutral character will likely disregard that the item will save many lives and have to leave the item behind if the organization is unwilling to part with it. While a could character will see a greater benefit to society in ignoring the law.
4. Lack of Adventure Rewards I have seen several Boons that slide your character one step closer to evil if your character takes it. These boons are very powerful (i.e. free feat). In game you do not know that acquiring the Boon shifts your alignment, so neutral characters need to atone to not be removed from PFS play and get an evil act recorded on their character sheet. Good characters can get a free boon and are neutral or can chose to atone and stay good.
Here's what worries me: if all scenarios have an "exclusivity period" it could easily have the effect of drawing many of the most active players from the local level to the convention level. They stop going to FLGS.
I find that the most active players in my area are willing to GM. A large con lets us play the newer scenarios before running them at FLGS. It actually increases the quality of the local games as the GMs are able to take what they liked from their play experience and incorporate it into the game at the scenario at the FLGS.
The last couple years after PaizoCon we have had to tell people they can not GM for a couple of weeks as too many people would volunteer in order to run their favorite scenarios from PaizoCon.
I think your worry about splash damage with large level differences is only an issue at low levels, as the splash damage doesn't scale much and the HP you get per level at low levels are huge percentage increase to total HP. I suppose if the low level characters are still playing in their tier and the alchemist is playing below tier the alchemist can hand out infusions and do actions that will not hurt the party on a failure. If however the low level is playing up, then I think the low level melee should grab a ranged weapon rather than have a damage dealer not be able to function.
I am not advocating that a bomb alchemist should not get precise bomb. I have been in a party where a 9th level alchemist bomber did not have it and my tank would routinely take more damage from the alchemist than the opponents. I am saying that when an alchemist has taken precautions to avoid friendly fire damage on a success, you should not force them to get permission for their actions because of the possibility of unintended damage on a failure.
I do not think that we should force people to ask for permission to do actions that could have negative affects on failure. As it raises the question of how responsible are you for bad rolls? If an alchemist should ask before throwing any alchemist bombs because of damage on a failure, should people have to ask to perform any of the following actions
-Using diplomacy on an unfriendly npc? Failure can cause combat.
I think the cut off point needs to be at the intent of the player. As long as the player does not intend to harm the PCs the action should be fine. I also think that alchemists should be prepared to heal any damage their bombs may cause with their own resources. It is annoying to tank an encounter not receive any damage from the foes and over half you health from alchemists and then when you ask to be healed they ask for your wand of CLW.
John McConnell wrote:
Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment
I like this guy as well. I think he may be influencing the Society already. I have seen half a dozen Barbarians saying they worship a deity and getting the tenants all wrong. The worst was the barbarian that played the Temple and said "Hey wait. I follow Korada." That barbarian found the temple very welcoming.
Deanoth: I understand what you are saying but I think it is different when the GM is trying to pick scenarios which his players will have fun with vs a player cherry picking certs. This post is in the GM forum and is asking for scenarios that will be fun for rogues, not asking for scenarios that will have items for rogues (i.e. poison for a poisoner rogue).
When I played 5–04: The Stolen Heir (1-5), we had great fun with 3 rogues that had stealth synergy.
In the scenario there is a crazy NPC you meet that is very sleep deprived. The party wanted to rest before entering the dungeon after taking some fall damage. The NPC kept waking people up until they bound and gagged him. They found out that they did not want to sleep as that is when she gets you. After they "rested" and were now fatigued and having other penalties, the faction that wanted to leave leaned heavily on the guy that was a different faction. This was ok as we were all friends playing at a home and watched a movie to pass the rest of the evening.
I noticed that many people are making the assumption that you are casting Death Knell on an intelligent creature and basing their arguments on that.