|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
If you're playing PFS with a 7PM start time and a varying store close of 11:30pm, truncating beginning to a standard VC briefing q&a and starting at the dungeon entrance is more than fine given it is a basic dungeon crawl. I doubt I can GM L1 in under 5 hours, but the other levels seem/have been doable in that period with our playerbase.
PFS scenario design has the same issue that Guild Wars 2 (a MMO) has.
GW2 did away with the trinity (tank, heals, dps) so people were not forced into roles in a 5-person party. Initially, the playerbase still created tanky-type and support-type characters, but players realized all those builds did was extend fights and give bossess/mobs/etc more time to do more damage to the party. The community switched over to all DPS parties to burn through encounters--while players still had support abilities, for the most part, parties were based around damage-dealing and damage-boosting abilities first and healing/condition-cleansing skills second.
The PF system itself does not allow mmo-style "tanking" and generally, except in dire circumstances, in-combat healing is not the best use of resources. (And, with the easy access to CLW/IH wands, classes with CLW/IH on their spell lists and/or the UMD skill, post-combat healing definitely does not require a healer in-party for PFS.) For PFS scenarios, a competent six-person party primarily focused on combat ability or boosting combat ability with a secondary foci on skills or support abilities spread throughout the party is going to handily cakewalk through most PFS scenarios and use less resources than a "balanced" party by dint of ending encounters quickly. This has a snowball effect as it is assumed prior encounters tax the party's resources, but the party actually saves resources and can go full tilt in later in encounters.
This puts PFS in an awkward position: to change the meta-game of PFS scenarios would unfairly punish players with fair-to-middling system mastery or tables with problematical party composition, yielding a poor experience and driving away potential customers. Leaving it as is can lead to disengagement from their most involved players who grow bored from the lack of challenge, again losing players. While PFS has made strides in increasing the challenge in recent seasons (switching to the 6-person party assumption, Hard Mode), it is still hampered by the CR system and the necessity of one-size fits all encounters.
And, sure, self-regulation is a possible solution but it can be an unsatisfactory one.
ACG introduces a number of magic rings which add summon options to your list. The Daemon one is excellent as you can summon Cuestodaemons with SMV which have at will dimension door (with nothing limiting it to just the daemon), 3/day dispel magic and fly, 1/day hold monster and slow and constant see invisibility.
Summon Monster wrote:
A summoned monster cannot summon or otherwise conjure another creature, nor can it use any teleportation or planar travel abilities.
The Grab ability changed from Bestiary 1 to Bestiary 2 and the FAQ stated that B2 was the correct, updated version.
Bestiary 4 used the language of the old Bestiary 1 version of the Grab ability.
Is Bestiary 4 correct or incorrect?
I know a Grappling FAQ/tune-up is far down the line, but are you willing to share your thoughts on how you feel it is currently balanced? Too strong, too weak, just about right?
As it is right now, if you play by RAW (not JJ's interpretation) that on Round 1 you can only initiate the grapple and then on subsequent rounds us Greater/Rapid/Standard grapple, it means that even when a L11 grappler is next to his target, it takes 2 rounds to do a whole grapple routine...while in that same time a Full Caster has dropped at least 2 Save or Die spells and a Full BAB martial has full attacked twice.
If you play by JJ's interpretation, that you can use standard/Greater/Rapid in a single round, that puts a martial grappler back on par with a melee.
(I could see pushing Rapid Grappler back to L11 to keep it on pace with BAB full attacks and/or cumulative -5 CMB penalties on each additional grapples past the first in the same round.)
Fred gets the Blind condition.
Charlie Binding Ties the Blind. Fred can see, Charlie is Blinded.
Charlie drinks a Potion of Remove Blindness. Removing the condition.
BT wears off. Blindness does not revert to Fred as it has ended/been removed.
You need to remove the effect ON YOURSELF to prevent reversion.
So, if you are the cleric and used Binding Ties on a dead PC, healing that PC doesn't stop the death effect from returning and killing them outright. You need to remove the Dead condition ON THE CLERIC to prevent it from jumping back to the PC.
"If more than one condition affects a character, apply them all. If effects can't combine, apply the most severe effect."
You have the Dying condition.
You then get the Dead condition.
You removed the Dead condition.
You have the Dying condition.
Anyways, back to the original topic.
Remember the CRPG Icewind Dale 2? It was the first Infinity Engine game to use the 3.0 ruleset. You could forgo leveling ("level squat") and artificially boost the xp gained. Then level individual characters strategically when the challenges rose. You'd have a party of all L4s squatting into the midgame, run into a mass of melee monsters, then decide to spike your fighter to L8 cut through the horde while the rest remained L4 and soaked up xp.
Why not? If you run it as RAW for the dead condition:
It's a 1 for 1 trade (I'm dead, you're not dead).
The target reverts to the DYING condition and still needs healing to positive HP. (Hilariously, they can keep failing stabilize checks and end up even more in the hole as they are immune to the Dead condition.)
The target, when healed to positive, has the prone condition AND dropped their weapon.
The target is going to die again.
It's actually a bad trade action economy-wise. Tactically, its value varies greatly as it depends on if the person you're bringing back is key for the fight.
eta: concur with Finlanderboy
If two people traded conditions would they also be immune the condition??
Let's say the clerics are L2.
Cleric 2 uses Binding Ties. C2 gains Nausea. C1 loses Nausea and gains Immunity.
TL;DR If you run 2 clerics with this, you're just begging for table variation and GM consternation
Victor Zajic wrote:
I would expect that the vast majority of GMs will not let you treat dead as a condition for this ability.
As PFS is run RAW, Dead is a condition and the player would have a valid complaint if the GM did not allow the ability to work as written.
Death is a condition.
How it would work:
Fred the Fighter (14 Con) is reduced to -15 HP. He dies.
Charlie the Cleric uses Binding Ties.
Charlie the Cleric takes on the dead condition. Let's say he's sixth level, so it lasts six rounds (Charlie cannot end the condition as a free action because he's dead, so it will run its full duration).
Fred the Fighter is still at -15 HP. As he is immune to the Dead, he now has the Dying condition.
Bob the Barbarian pours a cure potion down Fred's throat and Fred is now at 1 HP.
Several rounds later, Binding Ties ends. Charlie loses the Dead condition and it reverts back to Fred. While Fred is at positive HP, the Dead condition applies and he's dead. Again.
We actually had a pair of brothers at our FLGS who played characters who were brothers and each dipped 1 level Cleric for this. They would daisy chain conditions.
The board post is not irrelevant as it is the organizer of PFS.
claudekennilol is correct.
Andy Ferguson wrote:
In order to preserve build diversification and minimize the power of Racial Heritage, PFS made the conscious choice to restrict racial archetypes/feats/etc for certain sources. (imho)
To be fair, bam bam wacky wacks have been overshadowed by laser pew pews since 3P0. While the CoreBeyonce hulky smash 'ems are great with their rage 'em ups, the new AceyGeeWhiz! gave us the compelling hulky spell 'ems, hulky sing 'ems and non-pally divine warrior bible thumpers (which has the best archetype, Bruce pallee)
Negative Zer0 wrote:
I would strongly caution that for PFS you need to check additional resources as there feats, items and archetypes that specifically called out as needing to be of that that race for that source (like the entirety of the ARG).
Zen Archer 8/Inquisitor 2
Buffs on: Mage Armor (wand), Barkskin (Qiggong)
I haven't played this guy in a while, so if something's slightly off, I just haven't got around to adjusting it.
Male dwarf inquisitor (infiltrator) of Irori 2/monk (zen archer, qinggong monk) 8
LN Medium humanoid (dwarf)
Init +17; Senses darkvision 60 ft.; Perception +21
AC 31, touch 23, flat-footed 29 (+4 armor, +2 Dex, +4 natural, +1 deflection, +10 untyped)
Speed 40 ft.
Str 14, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 26, Cha 5
Meanwhile, in the lobby of the Grand Lodge:
<LFG><Tootsweet>LF3M Blackros Matrimony, Min Diplo +12, No PreGens, link char sheet
<general><Bardtarded>HAHAHA I SAW SUM1 W/ A L4 ROGUE WAT A NOOB
<LFG><DrFunkenstein>LFG Aas Life Oracle ChannSpecced, any 7-11, NO HARD MOAD PLZ
<general><GetAGrippli>What do I spend PP on?
<trade><KitKatsune>Why is there even a trade channel, isn't crafting banned in PFS?
<LFG><MysticSurge>LF2Melee subtier 4-5, 20 DPR or GTFO
<general><GetAGrippli>What do I spend PP on?
<trade><Sexysaurus>@kitkatsune, people trade PFS boons in trade
<trade><KitKatsune>WTB PFS BOON
<LFG><AsmodeusExMachina>LF2M for Hard Mode Kyle Baird speedrun. Chat specs for invite
Yes, you will get 3 tables of credit towards GM stars.
No, you will not get 3 GM chronicle sheets. You only get a chronicle sheet the first time you run this scenario. Only tier 1 scenarios and level 1 modules are eligible for reruns for credit (this is a tier 1-5 scenario, not tier 1 like First Steps).
Fictional or non-fictional, who is the creative inspiration for your character(s) mechanics/thematics/roleplay?
Dagvaar Inkalde, Mystic Theurge of Asmodeus: Al Pacino from the Devil's Advocate...but really Al Pacino from Scent of a Woman. HOOAH!
Konraeus, Barbarian in service to Zarta's Dark Archive: Doctore (Oenomaus) from Spartacus--especially his dialogue styling.
Bruno Breakbone, a beautiful and handsome Tetori: Bruno Sammartino (and old school wrasslers)
Just to save everyone time rehashing this topic (bringing your own healing), may I suggest this 591-post thread, "I bought a Gosh Darn cure wand" for your perusal?
@Finlanderboy, I'm sorry for the lack of players in your area. I posted an inquiry for my FLGS this past week to gauge interest in post L12+ play. Between that post's response and folks I know, we have 20ish folks with 30ish characters about to hit 12 or are 12+.
@David_Bross, yeah, I was hoping for newer info than that older posting.
While EoTT is a great series, it's growing less relevant as more and more seasons pass (especially for players who may not have played early season scenarios).
I've seen it several times.
Dazing Assault at L11+ is also popular as a hasted melee can hit a single target 4 times and force a DC 21+ FORT each time (or spread the love around to other targets in reach once the first foe is dazed). The DC doesn't have to spectacular if you force a creature to roll multiple times in a round.
doesn't help much if I take 10 on the roll... and if I don't take 10 I roll less than 10 on both rolls, so taking 10 is normally better for me anyway.
On rolls you are confident you can take 10 on and ace, simply don't use the effect. For trickier knowledges or combat knowledge checks, this would be ideal.
From the PFS blog for this week: