Scribbling Rambler's page

1 re-roll/session is relatively minor, so I'm extremely lenient with shirt use. Especially at a multi-day convention.

While I understand the wish to see people wearing the shirts to promote PFS and Paizo, what Jokem is suggesting can be a great way to increase the enthusiasm of a player at their first session. I often will bring my faction shirt when I GM, just to allow a newbie a re-roll. And I'm pretty sure we would be equally unenthusiastic about them wearing my clothes.

Actually, I think I have 9 shirts which allow re-rolls now, with only 1 faction shirt. Of course, I can't wear 4 of them to cons any more ;)

Some argue that the small amount of gold you earn does not match the usefulness of putting skill points into other, more immediately useful, skills. Example, if you don't have Perception maxed out, putting ranks into a Day Job skill allows you to be surprised easier, miss spotting traps and treasure, etc.

As well, those skill ranks may be important for Faction Missions (ex Diplomacy). Or for Knowledges which will help you on your mission (ex Local, History, Geography). Or for many other situations.

Bottom line, if you are short on skill ranks, there are probably more useful things to take. However, if you have ranks to spare, extra cash will help.

Alternatively, the Profession/Craft may just fit your character from a role-playing perspective - like my street-urchin Rogue with ranks in Profession (Guide), or my brother's Taldan legionaire with ranks in Profession (Soldier).

Have fun at your game!

Thank you all for the kind words, but I'll still be on the boards fairly regularly, albeit under my restored cloak of anonymity ;)

Jason, Feegle, Cainus: I still hope to be running games at StrDexCon, Game Summit, SpellStorm, GryphCon, and Phantasm (which takes me thru March). However, I know that I'm already scheduled for work for the first 3, with more announcements to come.

Which is where the problem comes in. It's hard to coordinate things when I'm unable to commit to attending. And too exhausted to be effective on my off weekends.

I still hope to make it to Origins and Gen Con, and will throw dice with many of you there. Tho I admit I'm looking forward to seeing the area outside the Gen Con PFS room for the first time in 4 years :)

You can not spellcraft SLA's.

Citation?

Spell-Like Abilities: Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.

If a character class grants a spell-like ability that is not based on an actual spell, the ability's effective spell level is equal to the highest-level class spell the character can cast, and is cast at the class level the ability is granted.

(Bold mine)

I'm not making a definitive claim, but I think it's a grey area.

Thanks, Mike (tho I think you meant honour ;) )

I forgot to mention that I will still be checking my VCNeilOnt gmail, and I'm still happy to help folks with PFS questions however I can, when possible.

Hey All,

With great regret I have tendered my resignation from the position of Ontario Venture-Captain.

Unfortunately, a consistent schedule of mandatory 6 shifts a week on midnights has taken its toll, interfering with my ability to live up to what I expect from myself as a representative of Pathfinder Society Organized Play.

This is almost entirely based on Real Life priorities. It certainly has nothing to do with Society leadership or direction. I have greatly enjoyed working with Mike, Mark, my fellow Venture-Officers, and the Paizo folks, and hope further opportunities will arise when life settles down.

I'd like to thank all of the GMs and organizers from my region, including (but not limited to) Steel_Wind, TorbinWren, Rolen, Feegle, Jason S, and Armac.

I'll still be GMing and organizing Society whenever possible, and I will continue to be as annoying as ever on these boards: answering questions, debating grey areas, flagging non-Society questions, using the Queen's English, and reminding people to hyphenate Venture-Captain ;)

Good Gaming All!

A helmet with a sheet of lead in it should shield you from all mental detections without the need for magic.

Assuming it has no holes in it for eyes, nose, etc.

And assuming that detect spells are only focused on your brain, and not your entire body (ie your spirit).

Glad it worked out for you, Fromper.

Disclaimer: I'm biased on this scenario, for obvious reasons.

I've actually killed characters in more runnings of this scenario than any others - specifically due to the archer crits.

Sorry that I'm chiming in too late for your session, but when I run it, the "caravan" is just the PCs and some pack horses. I handwave the journey and give away that the described campsite is a likely ambush site, based on the history of attacks (but mostly to get the PCs into the action ASAP).

People tend to complain about some of the Faction Missions for this one, but I like that some obscure skills are used. If Perception, Diplomacy, and Intimidate (as examples of "must-have" skills) are all that get used for Faction Missions, it takes a lot away from the skill-based classes like rogues and bards. Also, not every Prestige Point should be easily gained.

That said, I don't think the awards are as difficult to get as many think.

Summary: I think Andoran & Osirion will almost always get 2 Fame, Cheliax will usually get 2 Fame, and Taldor & Qadira will be about 50/50 to get 2 Fame. Considering the goal is to average around 1.5 Fame per scenario, that's not really that nasty.

IM(biased)O

Just watch out for the archers :)

Olaf, I think it is worth pointing out that what you are complaining about with the ranger is not a Society rule, but part of the Core Rules.

A ranger who selects an animal companion can choose from the following list: badger, bird, camel, cat (small), dire rat, dog, horse, pony, snake (viper or constrictor), or wolf. If the campaign takes place wholly or partly in an aquatic environment, the ranger may choose a shark instead.

Unfortunately, many people ignore that part of the rules, so it had to be spelled out in the Society FAQ.

As many have said before, this does not prevent you from using archetypes, as those specific rules trump the general Ranger rules. A Beastmaster can take any legal animal companion, like a Druid. A Falconer can take any bird of prey, provided you have the appropriate book with its stats. A Horselord can take any legal mount based on their level.

But the day job roll is a skill check. ...

I'm sorry, but there's no reason for it NOT to be a skill check.
...
So it IS a skill check, and it's one that they arbitrarily disallow one to take 10 on.

Except that it ISN'T a skill check, and has been specifically been called out as not being a skill check since the beginning of the campaign.

It still does not allow all of the potential modifiers on it that a skill check does (ex spells), and the Take 10 restriction is one example of that.

There is an in-game logic which has been consistently explained. People may disagree with the ruling, but there is nothing arbitrary about it.

You receive full Day Job gold based on your roll.

It is a small increase in potential earnings, but is more than offset by the increase in risk and consumable use for taking Slow Advancement, IMO.

But remember, wands of first level spells are always available for 750 gp.

Just wanted to clarify that this is not the case. 1st-level potions and scrolls are always available, wands require a Chronicle or the appropriate amount of Fame to be able to purchase.

From a purely "fluff" standpoint, this is all fine.

Where it becomes an issue is if there are mechanics tied into being a worshiper (or even a priest) of a particular deity.

It has been previously clarified that for PFS purposes, "priest" only refers to a cleric. This is important for any of the customized summon lists, which are only available to "priests".

Any other mechanic that requires you to be a "worshiper" of a deity (Ex a Religion Trait with that prerequisite) or a deity to be your "patron" (like the items in Gods & Magic) means that you must be within one alignment step of the deity.

Beyond what Mike listed, and the obligation to GM at a major national convention, what a Venture-Captain focuses on as part of their volunteer position may vary due to a lot of factors.

• What real-world obligations does the V-C have?
• What are the V-C's personal strengths? (co-ordination? GMing? Communicating on boards?)
• What is the population of the V-C's region?
• How many game stores/conventions/game clubs/colleges are in the V-C's region?
• What is the physical size of the V-C's region? (Australia vs Seattle, for example)
• Is there a history of Organized Play in the region?

Some of us will GM and run a large number of conventions/game days, others maintain an extremely active presence on the boards, still others work more behind the scenes...

I believe that actual PFRPG rules knowledge is a relatively low priority. Yes, a working knowledge is important - but knowing the nuances of a particular archetype, spell, corner case,... are less important than understanding the way Org Play rules differ, or being able to communicate a region's needs to Paizo, or being able to pass on information to a player or venue.

For reference I have a level 9 and a level 3, playing at almost every opportunity for 8-9 months now.

I'm not intending to dispute your concerns, but I wanted to point out that with those characters, and the option of a new 1st-level character, you can play:

• We Be Goblins! (1st)
• Crypt of the Everflame (1st)
• Master of the Fallen Fortress (1st)
• The Godsmouth Heresy (1st)
• Masks of the Living God (3rd)
• Feast of Ravenmoor (3rd)
• Cult of the Ebon Destroyers (8th)
• The Harrowing (9th)
• Curse of the Riven Sky (10th)

That's 9 of the 15 sanctioned modules. And if your 3rd-level character gains a level, it opens up Carrion Crown and City of the Golden Death (and From Shore to Sea is just one more). Further, 2 of the next 3 module releases are within one level of your characters.

Yes, this will temporarily limit your access to some of the modules (most notably Fellnight Queen). However, I think it is less limiting than some people are portraying.

Sorry for saying that, Gary.

gary: you'll never crush anybody's spirit with apologies

Pffft.... Gary hasn't spent enough time with Canadians.

Not really a PFS question. I'll flag it for the Rules forum.

Flagged to be moved to general Rules forum.

Not PFS related.

One of the things which may affect people's perspective on this issue is when they started GMing for PFS.
The GM credit rules have changed a few times.
At first, there was no Chronicle for GMing.
Then, you could get credit, but only if you "ate" the scenario.
Then, you got credit, but only once - while a player could get up to 5 Chronicles for the same scenario.
Then the "1 & 1" rule came in partway thru Season 2.

The rules as written are relatively new (I believe all of the Guide text quoted above is unique to version 4.0). Some of us may not have immediately applied Chronicles because we initially did not get them, then the rules changed a few times. The changes also created some weird cases where some GMs could get a Chronicle for a Scenario while others could not, using some people's interpretation.

Honestly, as long as a GM is applying Chronicles in the proper order, to legal characters, I don't know why there has to be a timer placed on them.

Edit: I agree that at this point, ideally, the Chronicle should be immediately applied. However, I don't think it is as cut & dried as some point out. And there is a varying history.

I'm not sure there is an official answer to this.
I have always seen the current Chronicle be allowed to be used, and done it that way myself.

I have not run any of the sanctioned modules for Society play, save MotFF and WBG (which hardly count).
The main reasons, in order:

• scheduling increased play time, and getting away from the stand-alone, anyone-can-show-up session
• increased prep time
• lack of thematic tie-ins to PFS
• lack of consequences (no used consumables, no death)

So these changes are unlikely to push me into running more than I already am, as only my most minor complaint is being eliminated.

However, as an observer who has been in on this discussion from the start (during the Replay threads), I'm fully in support of the framework Mike has come up with.

I want to address a few of the complaints.

These changes get away from the original intent of providing a way to close the level gap
The original intent of sanctioning modules was not to close the level gap, but (as MillerHero pointed out and linkified) to allow more play opportunities to players who were complaining about running out of scenarios if they couldn't Play, Play, Play. Being able to use that greater play opportunity to bring character levels in-line was merely a side-effect of the rules being set up the way they were.
Problem is, it only closes the gap if you use it that way. And if you're continually having to run modules, it's not working.
The way it closes the gap:

Thing is, that will still work under the new system. It just means the GM has to run an appropriately Tiered module, just as he would an appropriately Tiered Scenario.
Further, there have been over 30 Scenarios and 15 modules released since module sanctioning started. More than half have been for low levels. Running out of options is much less likely than it was.

The changes mean you cannot use modules to "fix" characters
Unfortunately, bad things happen to adventurers. A player cannot use module play to boost their rewards to raise a killed character, so why should they be able to use it to gain rewards to remove a lesser condition?

The pre-gens suck, and are not an option for play
I have players playing a 7th-level Ezren, and a 5th-level Valeros (the original builds, not the improved ones from this year), which started play as 1st-level pre-gens. Some people optimize, some don't. While they are not optimal, the pre-gens are valid, survivable characters.
And honestly, it is better for the campaign as a whole if the pre-gens are not overly optimized. It is better if people want to play their own characters.

Some modules are not survivable at the end, because they presume you have levelled
Under the current proposal, modules are playable by any character within 1 level of the stated starting level.
So, "Carrion Hill" is playable for 4-6 characters of levels 4-6 (stated for 4 characters of 5th). "Crypt of the Everflame" is playable by 4-6 characters of levels 1-2.
The level variance and the increased party size can offset some of the tougher later encounters.
However, a GM may have to consider their group when picking an adventure.

I'm not opposed to tweaking things a bit (like looking at pre-gen linking), but I'm fully behind the general idea.

Yep. Loved "Up" and Dug (or is that DugDug?). And I even wrote a story for Wayfinder where the narrator is a witch's familiar.

However, I read the belt of dwarvenkind as providing the ability to speak dwarven, not the ability of speech.

To clarify, J-Bone, an increase in difficulty for 6 PCs is built in by having the APL raised by one.
No changes should be made to the foes beyond that. PFS scenarios are built using specific CRs for various Tiers. While it is tempting to do something to "challenge" the party, doing so often imbalances the campaign, and miscalculating has led to TPKs and players leaving the program.

Never say never, but I think it is unlikely there will be svirfneblin PCs in Society play. Any variant races which have been allowed so far are theoretically of equivalent power to the CRB races: CR 1/2 at 1st level. While the svirfneblin is only CR 1, that makes him the equivalent of a level 2 character.

Would you, as a GM, allow a belt of dwarvenkind to grant its animal wearer, the ability to understand, speak, and write the Dwarf language?

With animal intelligence, it is still going to be unable to understand the nuances of any sort of speech, save a few simple commands.

Further, most animal companions lack the vocal apparatus to speak.

So... nope.

Characters who become wantonly (read as deliberate and without motive or provocation) evil are retired from the campaign.

So if you want, you can take that level.

But the character is no longer in the campaign.

Like this? No avatars tho.

Jiggy, perhaps I phrased my response incorrectly.
I was not implying that I would assume a cleric would focus on healing, but that if they did have prepared healing spells, or convertible spells at the end of a game day, or positive channeling which was not needed for undead, that it would be reasonable to expect them to contribute to the party in that way.
More importantly, that it is unreasonable to expect the cleric (or other healer) to always foot the bill for healing consumables.

It's a philosophy we use in my home games: CLW wands are usually considered party treasure, and not part of a healer's WBL.

Reporting the character as dead would be incorrect, and appealable.

However, if a player walked away as you indicate, I would not be likely to make space for them at my table in future, or muster them to a table at an event I was co-ordinating.

We have several books coming out in the spring focused entirely on pirates, to support the Skull and Shackletons Adventure Path. I can't make any promises, but it seems like those books are likely to have lots of piratey gear in them that are likely to be made legal for Pathfinder Society characters.

Fixed that for you.

Nosig, Matthew (even tho you've bowed out):
I think the concern is not so much whether the cleric should use whatever healing they have, but whether they should be the only one responsible for purchasing consumables to supplement it.

... I guess you're playing this module at 2 negative levels down...except that you're now below the minimum level to play this mod." There's a very good chance that said player is going to feel like the rules got changed on him, and will leave.

That should not happen, as a negative level does not actually remove levels in PFRPG. A 5th-level character with 2 negative levels is still a 5th-level character - they just have penalties in place they must resolve.

Or, worse yet, said player tries to spend all the money for the two Restorations - and then finds out, "Oh, wait, you have to wait a week between those spells. Guess you're playing at one negative level."

PFS is about customer service. Giving clear expectations is part of good customer service and customer relations.

PFS is also the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign, and uses the Pathfinder Role-Playing Game rules. Those are the PFRPG rules on raise dead and restoration. The way it was run in previous seasons was what deviated from PFRPG expectations.

I can understand people questioning the current cost on these boards. But if you don't like the rules for restoration, that needs to be addressed with the designers on the Rules boards.

blue chris: Shall we just sit back and wait for Cosmo to finish role-playing with himself?

That will make his optician rich.

The 3 characters I have played all have CLW wands.

However, I think there would be a lot of game variance based on:

• how many players are experienced
• how many players read the boards
• how many players go to conventions or travel to other games
• how many healers are regularly played locally, lessening the need
• how much the experienced players/GMs push the idea
• how much the same group always plays together. ie if you know 3 of your regular party-mates has a wand, you may hold off

I think the 80% is about correct for characters of experienced, travelling players, but I would not be surprised if it's under 50% for the Society as a whole.

Samuel, the majority of PFS sessions are the Pathfinder Society Scenarios. Other than that, you can run/play the Sanctioned Modules.

There are currently no plans to sanction the APs, and no 3rd-party material is allowed (including adventures).

Still, there are currently 88 scenarios available for play, not including the Specials (multi-table adventures), Exclusive (run only by 4-star GMs or campaign co-ordinators), or the multi-session Sanctioned Modules. That's a lot of play time! And 2 more scenarios are released every month!

Welcome to the Society!

Mr. Brock, I think that it's interesting how avatars influence writing, ....

I think it is more accurate to say that avatars influence reading. I often catch myself misreading the intent of somebody with an angry avatar, and I'm sure that people have assumed that I intend to be condescending much of the time when there is no such intent.

As Mike B has stated a couple of times that there will be an update on this topic later this week, perhaps people should save some energy to argue about it after the update ;)

Edit: Sneaky Twilight ninjas!!! All sparkly in the daylight & stuff :(

I was finally able to use the Deathweb minis on my group this weekend, and the reaction was almost as horrified as I hoped. However, I think they were more aghast when I drew the small tunnels and surrounded them with

. :)

The players were impressed with the minis, but they were even more impressed when I told them of the quick responses to my prior posts. Well done, Jack and Liz!!

PaulH wrote:

Hi

It's the 'bring this book ...' bit that's difficult. Since the book's not due out until April, the boons out now.

Simpler when the specific details are on the chronicle sheet. (As been explained).

Thanks
Paul H

no it is for the bestiary versions that there for

That is correct. The Chronicle states that the character uses the rules in the Bestiary or Bestiary 2, depending on the race.

So far, IIRC, there have been boons for: tieflings, aasimar, tengu, dhampir, undines, sylphs, ifrits, and oreads.

I just wanted to clairify, no one should pester people into playing up. I usually am in groups with 6 players at a "table" so this is when I will ask if the group wants to play up.

Just because it is often misunderstood: playing up is NOT a universal option - it should only occur when the APL is within a certain range.

Congrats, Evan.

I look forward to working with you.

IIRC, about 4-6 weeks notice was given in advance of the previous retirements.

K Neil Shackleton wrote:

Bob Jonquet wrote:

I have seen plenty of low/non-star GM's who I feel are as good, if not better, at our "craft" than many 5-star GM's.

Is that a shot at Kyle? ;)

I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a great GM. All I can say is that I try hard, and that at every single table I give it my all.

Kidding aside, I thought you were great at U-Con last year. You are easily one of the more prepared GMs I've played with, as well as being extremely rules knowledgeable and tactically creative.

Of course, we all find fault with ourselves. Mostly because we have the ideal of Captain Morgan to aspire to.

GMing class/seminars are a great help. I think GMing experience is more valuable (but doesn't preclude the value of a seminar). But it is also very important for a GM to PLAY, with a variety of GMs of different styles. Even playing with a "bad" GM is a valuable experience in improving your own abilities. And I've learned something from every "good" GM I've played a session with.

I have seen plenty of low/non-star GM's who I feel are as good, if not better, at our "craft" than many 5-star GM's.

Is that a shot at Kyle? ;)

If a PC cannot be raised from the dead during or after the scenario in which it died, that PC is dead and removed

from play. In this instance, the GM reports that the
character in question died during the course of play on
the tracking sheet provided with the scenario and on the
character’s Chronicle for that scenario, and the player will
need to make a new 1st-level character to continue play in
Pathfinder Society.

Sorry, Lyle. This looks pretty clear to me.

If the character cannot be raised at the end of the session, they can never come back.

Most people won't take Qadiran for roleplaying reason alone (why would you want to be Qadiran, boring! :) ), but it does have the most powerful faction benefit.

I dunno about that, Jason.

There were a lot of us playing Qadirans before the Field Guide came out. More than were playing Chels, I believe ;)

Elondor, I think you are overestimating the value of Scribe Scroll at low levels. Remember, it is only saving a 1st or 2nd level wizard 12.5 gold on those first-level spells that they are capable of scribing. That difference in cost is covered 6 x over by the increase in starting gold a PFS wizard gets over core (odd that people don't complain the fighter-types got gimped by having their starting gold decreased when all the other classes got an increase). By the time you would be ready to scribe 2nd-level spells, you should have sufficient Fame to buy them.

I agree that it hits a spellcaster in the pocketbook a bit, but that imbalance is much less than the imbalance created in Org Play when crafting is allowed.

Timothy McNeil

Fromper, I would advise against running Season 0 scenarios to start. Converting from 3.5 is not difficult, but it is one more small thing to worry about when you are beginning.

Sticking with a Tier 1-5 scenario is usually easiest, and I would avoid multi-part adventures for a first go (except for maybe the Intros).

Because you mentioned it, from pg 24 of the Guide:
For Seasons 0-2
Grand Lodge uses Osirion faction missions
Lantern Lodge uses Qadira
Sczarni uses Taldor
Shadow Lodge uses Cheliax
Silver Crusade uses Andoran

Other than that, have fun! And thanks for GMing!

With the understanding that I was not there (tho some of the comments above make it clear which scenario you are talking about)...

While the quoted section of the Guide in your 1st post is important, sometimes the party goes so far off the rails of a scenario (and outside the expected behaviour of a Pathfinder in a social situation) that there is no bringing them back. Especially when the events of the scenario are on a strict timeline.

In those cases, a GM is still obligated to issue a Chronicle and report the session, as the players have still played the adventure. Prestige earned should still be awarded and the characters should still get XP, based on the scenario still being completed (even if unsuccessfully).

As far as a player walking away partway thru a session, while I disagree with Don's suggestion, as a GM I would still report the session appropriately and fill out a Chronicle (xp based on how much the player was there for, PP if earned, whatever gold they found).

While it may suck to play a game with a GM you don't see eye-to-eye with, walking away from a session is a pretty extreme step to take, and I think that many times it is suggested far too lightly.