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

Sean H's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 460 posts (468 including aliases). 3 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 9 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 460 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1) Yes. "deals damage normally and detonates as if the alchemist had thrown the bomb at the target" - whatever the bomb would normally do if thrown will also happen here.

2) I think it's whatever order is most beneficial to the creature using the abilities(in this case the alchemist), but I'm not sure.

As per RAW, only evil.

Same penalties as Two-Weapon Fighting normally. Unarmed Strikes would count as light weapons, so -4/-8 without the feat and -2/-2 with it.

AFAIK, they don't interact at all. The T-Rex can either use x2 it's strength modifier, or 1.5x it's strength modifier.

My reasoning for this is that neither ability says that it increases the strength modifier; rather it sets the strength modifier at a certain value. Compare that to, say, Dragon Ferocity:

dragon ferocity wrote:
While using Dragon Style, you gain a bonus on unarmed strike damage rolls equal to half your Strength bonus.

That's very different language, and it seems to be written that way expressly to stack with the original bonus to Dragon Style:

dragon style wrote:
you can add 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus on the damage roll for your first unarmed strike on a given round.

Arachnofiend wrote:
Yes, but you'd need a level of Monk (or a class/archetype that gives the Monk's Unarmed Strike class feature). Unarmed Strikes can normally only be used with your fists, the Monk ability is what lets you use any part of your body.

You don't need Monk levels, actually(Though it certainly makes you much better at unarmed attacks if you have them):

PRD wrote:

Unarmed Attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:

Attacks of Opportunity: Attacking unarmed provokes an attack of opportunity from the character you attack, provided she is armed. The attack of opportunity comes before your attack. An unarmed attack does not provoke attacks of opportunity from other foes, nor does it provoke an attack of opportunity from an unarmed foe.

An unarmed character can't take attacks of opportunity (but see “Armed” Unarmed Attacks, below).

“Armed” Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character's or creature's unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed (see natural attacks).

Note that being armed counts for both offense and defense (the character can make attacks of opportunity).

Unarmed Strike Damage: An unarmed strike from a Medium character deals 1d3 points of bludgeoning damage (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). A Small character's unarmed strike deals 1d2 points of bludgeoning damage, while a Large character's unarmed strike deals 1d4 points of bludgeoning damage. All damage from unarmed strikes is nonlethal damage. Unarmed strikes count as light weapons (for purposes of two-weapon attack penalties and so on).

Dealing Lethal Damage: You can specify that your unarmed strike will deal lethal damage before you make your attack roll, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll. If you have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, you can deal lethal damage with an unarmed strike without taking a penalty on the attack roll.

Dragon Ferocity wrote:
When you score a critical hit or a successful Stunning Fist attempt against an opponent while using this style, that opponent is also shaken for a number of rounds equal to 1d4 + your Strength bonus.

Since the Shaken given by Dragon Ferocity doesn't seem to reference the Intimidate skill at all, I believe you can stack the Shaken effect from multiple criticals(or multiple stunning fists) to make an opponent Frightened or Panicked.

But what if you hit someone with a successful Stunning Fist, and the attack that delivered the Stunning Fist also happens to be a critical hit? Do they get Shaken twice, becoming Frightened immediately? Or are the only Shaken once, because they've only been hit by one attack(which met both qualifiers?)

Whether or not you Skalds can give allies any bonuses to DR that they have is irrelevant to the original question, due to the following line:

James Risner wrote:
Core Rulebook p208 wrote:
Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.

So let's say you get that 11 DR/-, and share that among allies. Your allies also get your rage powers, including Increased Damage Reduction. This would give them an increase to their DR, but because they are already getting the same increase to DR from the exact same source, it has no effect. Their DR stays at 11 DR/-

I would say no. Since Advice is identical to Bardic Performance, it counts as having a Performance active for the purposes of any feats and abilities you have - including Bardic Performance itself. That means you couldn't use a Bardic Performance while you have Advice active.

Ohhhh. I feel silly now. Thanks for the clarification!

The abrupt edge of the damage is just how most area effects work in Pathfinder, sound or no sound. If you're in the spell area, you take full damage. Outside of it, you take none. It's not terribly realistic, but it makes playing the game much, much easier. I don't know about you, but I don't want to calculate how severely burned people are after a Fireball based on their proximity to the blast.

As far as house rules go, I would be fine reducing Chime to a full-round cast. Heck, I would be fine with a standard action cast. It is a 6th level spell after all, and is competing with the likes of Overwhelming Presence, Waves of Ecstasy and Dirge of Victorious Knights.

Since 'no noise issues from, enters, or passes through the area', if the vibrating object was outside of the silence, the damage would affect the whole area excluding the silence. If the object as inside the silence, there would be no noticeable effect at all, as the noise can't travel from the source to a point outside of the silence.

Looking at the Wall of Lava spell, I can't figure out how the height for this spell is supposed to work. Am I missing something here?

This spell creates a vertical wall of lava that is 1 inch thick for every 4 caster levels and composed of up to one 5-foot square per level. A wall of lava's maximum height cannot exceed half of its width (with a minimum height of 5 feet). The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space as a creature or object. A section of a wall of lava can be destroyed by damage (hardness 4, hp 90), but if a section is destroyed, the remaining lava in the wall immediately fills in any such hole created, reducing the wall's overall size by one 5-foot square but remaining a contiguous barrier.

So if it's height can't exceed half it's width, you need it to be 20 feet thick to have a 10 foot high wall. However, you only get 1 inch per 4 CL, so you need a CL of 960 to create a wall of lava that is taller than 5 feet!? That can't possibly be right, can it?

I have a couple questions about using scrolls in combat:

1) If I cast a touch spell from a scroll, can my familiar deliver it?

2) Can I activate a scroll while grappled, assuming it is in hand?
2a) If yes, do I need to make a concentration check? If so, do I use my caster level or the scroll's caster level?
2b) If yes, what happens if I fail the concentration check? Is the scroll destroyed, or can I try again?

Azten wrote:
Some new spells in the ARG(like the Oread spells) were made options for Qinggong Monks.

Huh, you're right. Oreads never interested me, but reading through their section now...

Mighty Fist of the Earth wrote:
At 4th level, a qinggong monk (Ultimate Magic 51) may select this spell as a ki power costing 1 ki point to activate.
Stone Shield wrote:
A qinggong monk (Ultimate Magic) may select this spell as a ki power at 4th level.

That's a very simple and easy way to add spells to the Qinggong list. Are those two Oread spells the only ones which were added though? I don't see any others in ARG anywhere.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I loved the Qinggong Monk when it first came out, but as more and more books are released it makes me sad that none of the new spells are ever added to the Qinggong's list.

Looking at the spells in ACG, we have Air Step, Blessed Fist, Blurred Movement, Heightened Awareness, Heightened Reflexed, Long Arm, Thunderstomp... all exceptionally Monk-esque abilities, moreso that many SLAs Qinggong actually has, but nothing is ever added to their list.

We need some monk love :(

A slightly less cheesy(though admittedly still cheesy) possibility:

A Fighter picks up Slashing Grace(Battleaxe) and Martial Versatility(Slashing Grace) to spread that out to the Axes group. Can he now add his Dex to damage when throwing a Throwing Axe?

You can't make potions of personal spells. You can UMD a scroll, wand, or staff of a personal spell, however.

I'm trying to make a Wild Empathy focused character in PFS. I know that numerical bonuses to Diplomacy like skill ranks don't apply to Wild Empathy, but what about non-numerical modifiers?

Wild Empathy states "This ability functions just like a Diplomacy check made to improve the attitude of a person." If you have an ability that changes how Diplomacy checks made to improve the attitude of a person works, do those also apply to Wild Empathy?

Take the alternate racial trait Silver Tongued:

"Humans with this trait gain a +2 bonus on Diplomacy and Bluff checks. In addition, when they use Diplomacy to shift a creature's attitude, they can shift up to three steps up rather than just two."

The +2 bonus won't apply to Wild Empathy, because it doesn't get included in the Druid level + CHA calculation. But what about the second part? Since Wild Empathy "functions just like a Diplomacy check made to improve the attitude of a person", would the ability to shift a creature's attitude by 3 steps apply to Wild Empathy?

It's not apples to oranges, it's apple cobbler to apple pie. I can't tell you the pie is a cobbler, but I can say that given some apples, I think we should make a cobbler instead of a pie.

I wish that undercasting was like Summon Monster, because at least with Summon Monster you get choices. Do I summon a Giant Frog or a Small Elemental... or take a gamble and hope for 3 Dogs? With undercasting there are no choices. I don't like Cure X Wounds because it has the same problem as undercasting, but at least that's only a single line of spells and not an entire magic system.

The way I see it undercasting doesn't give psychic casters two or three spells for the price of one at all. They get one spell with a slightly modified power level. If twisting could be considered just another form of metamagic, then what is undercasting but another form of Empower Spell?

That system adds complexity without doing stuff we can't already do, so if we're going to add complexity why not at least make it different? Alternatively we could just remove undercasting entirely and give psychic casters a couple new spells like a true Vancian caster should. I would be happier with than than the current system.

As far as the Occult to 3.5 comparisons, those are going to continue to happen because the Occult Magic DOES have a relations to 3.5 Psionics. Ego Whip? Mind Thrust? Intellect Fortress? Those are all 3.5 Psionic Powers. They essentially do the same things that they did in 3.5, so of course they are going to be compared.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I was really excited to see Paizo's take on psychic magic, but I'm disappointed with the current implementation. It just feels rather... stilted, like they tried to cram the 3.5 PP system into the Vancian Magic system, and the result is not pretty.

While I love the PP system, Dreamscarred Press has cornered that market, so I see why Paizo didn't go that route. However, psychic magic feels like it's fighting against itself in it's current state, and I think this is because it's trying to be too many different things at once. Instead of being tied down to the past, I want to focus on ways we could make Psychic Magic into something new, cool, and distinctly Pathfinder.

Undercasting feels like it's trying to fill the same role that Augmentation did for PP, but since you can't split a higher level spell slot into multiple lower ones there's no reason to undercast a spell when you have higher level slots available unless you KNOW you're fighting a weaker foe. Against true threats, there's no reason to even consider not using your highest tier spell, since the high-level ones are always straight upgrades.

Compare this to say, Burning Hands v.s. Scorching Ray v.s. Fireball, which not only have varying damage but also have varying utility; which one you want to use can be heavily influenced by how enemies are positioned. With undercast spells, this isn't the case; the next level is always just a better version.

One possibility I think it would work better is if instead of having spells that just get bigger numbers as they level, these new occult classes learned ways to 'twist' their spells to better suit their needs. You could never quite know what to expect when fighting an occult caster; this would help add to that eerie, strange feeling that the occult is supposed to give. I think the Alchemist Admixtures are a good example of this; the Alchemist is still throwing bombs, but the exact effect it has been shifted to produce strange results.

Another option would be to use a system like Monk Ki or the Magus Arcana Pool for enhancing these spells. If instead of having Ego Whip I, Ego Whip II, Ego Whip III, etc., the Psychic just had Ego Whip with the ability to boost their spells up to higher strength by spending Ki or some similar resource, you would get the benefits of having multiple power levels without the weird dissonance that undercasting produces in a Vancian magic system. Players are also already familar with this kind of system, which is another bonus. It also opens the door for more possibilities like this in the future... I don't know about you, but I would totally play a Ki-based full caster.

There's a handful of buff spells (Sun Metal, Magic Weapon, Weapon of Awe, etc) which all are [Target: Weapon touched]. Obviously these work when cast on a mundane melee weapon, but what about a Spiritual Weapon?

This spell has [Effect: Magic weapon of force]. The question is, does this qualify for the [Target: Weapon touched] of the earlier spells?

My cleric just hit 9th, and looking at spells I found Lesser Astral Projection:

PRD wrote:

School necromancy; Level cleric 5, sorcerer/wizard 5

This spell functions as astral projection, except you cannot leave the Astral Plane and explore other planes (though you can still return to the plane you were on when you cast this spell).

And looking at the full one:

PRD wrote:

By freeing your spirit from your physical body, this spell allows you to project an astral body onto another plane altogether. You can bring the astral forms of other willing creatures with you, provided that these subjects are linked in a circle with you at the time of the casting. These fellow travelers are dependent upon you and must accompany you at all times. If something happens to you during the journey, your companions are stranded wherever you left them.

You project your astral self onto the Astral Plane, leaving your physical body behind on the Material Plane in a state of suspended animation. The spell projects an astral copy of you and all you wear or carry onto the Astral Plane. Since the Astral Plane touches upon other planes, you can travel astrally to any of these other planes as you will. To enter one, you leave the Astral Plane, forming a new physical body (and equipment) on the plane of existence you have chosen to enter.

While you are on the Astral Plane, your astral body is connected at all times to your physical body by an incorporeal silver cord. If the cord is broken, you are killed, astrally and physically. Luckily, very few things can destroy a silver cord. When a second body is formed on a different plane, the silver cord remains invisibly attached to the new body. If the second body or the astral form is slain, the cord simply returns to your body where it rests on the Material Plane, thereby reviving it from its state of suspended animation. This is a traumatic affair, however, and you gain two permanent negative levels if your second body or astral form is slain.Although astral projections are able to function on the Astral Plane, their actions affect only creatures existing on the Astral Plane; a physical body must be materialized on other planes.

You and your companions may travel through the Astral Plane indefinitely. Your bodies simply wait behind in a state of suspended animation until you choose to return your spirits to them. The spell lasts until you desire to end it, or until it is terminated by some outside means, such as dispel magic cast upon either the physical body or the astral form, the breaking of the silver cord, or the destruction of your body back on the Material Plane (which kills you).

When this spell ends, your astral body and all of its gear, vanishes.

Does this mean that, after paying 1,000 gp for the material component, I can cast this spell once to project myself... then return to the material plane as a projection, allowing me to adventure as normal and do normal people things, only if I die I will re-awaken wherever my real body is(admittedly with 2 negative levels)?

If so, that seems like it functions almost as a 'save point'... sure, it's 3k/'death', but it's a lot cheaper than the 8k/death you would pay normally to have someone raise you, and you don't have to worry about death effects/disintegration as much.

I just found this spell Blood Crow Strike, which sounds cool but I can't actually figure out how it works.

Based on the spell block, this looks like a spell that you hit an enemy creature with:


Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Target one creature
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell resistance yes

Yet the spell description itself sounds much more like a buff spell you would cast on an ally:


Your unarmed strikes release blasts of energy in the form of bolts of fire or glowing red crows, which fly instantaneously to strike your target. You can make unarmed strike or flurry of blows attacks against the target as if it were in your threatened area; each successful attack deals damage as if you had hit it with your unarmed strike, except half the damage is fire and half is negative energy (this negative energy does not heal undead).

To complicate matters further, this is a 4th-level Cleric spell, which means you must be at least 7th level to cast it. However, the example given uses a 14th-level Monk, and I don't believe characters can go up to 21st level.

This further reinforces the idea that this would be a buff spell that you cast on an allied Monk, but since the duration is instantaneous I don't have any idea how this would work, unless you are permanently imbuing them with the power to make ranged Unarmed Strikes, which seems... incorrect.

I'm looking at Shatter Resolve specifically. It says that when creatures fail a save versus your channel, creatures become shaken for a number of rounds. Due to the way that fear effects work, subsequent channels would stack this effect, making creatures frightened and then panicked.

But what if you don't want them to run away? What if you only want them to remain shaken? Can you simply not use your feat?

I've hit the limit, and often. You can't actually start a scenario with any undead, but Command Undead's HD limit is equal to your own HD; it's quite often where I hit that limit with a single channel. Just last session we fought against an undead creature with 11 HD, who was thus completely immune to my Command Undead.

Animate Dead is a bit more lenient, with a limit of twice your caster level, and I haven't hit the limit on that one(they're separate pools). That costs gold though, so I use it less often than Command, which is free.

EDIT: For the rest, my defenses are pretty strong already. Now that you mention it though, my biggest weakness is versus Constructs, which I'm almost ineffectual against; do you know of anything that would help there?

I have a level 10 Cleric of Urgathoa in PFS, with about 20,000 gold and no idea what to spend it on other than generic +stat, +AC, and +Save items. Currently I have the following:

Headband of Charisma +4
Cloak of Resistance +2
Belt of Constitution +2
Handy Haversack
Metamagic Rod of Reach, Lesser

While I'm open on any suggestions for what to buy, ideally I would like to increase one(or more) of the following:

Channel DC
Spell DCs
HD Limit for Command Undead feat
EDIT: Also tools for dealing with constructs.

Unfortunately, I don't have enough fame for a +6 headband, can't buy a headband of wisdom because I need my charisma one(though I suppose I could get an ioun stone), and I don't know of anything that would increase my effective HD for channeling.

So... any ideas?


After seeing some fantastic examples of 3D terrain for various scenarios, I decided that I would like to try my hand at building my own 3D terrain. However, since this will likely be a large investment of time and money I want to make sure that the scenario I build it for is relatively uncommon, so that I can run it for a large number of groups(both locally and at cons).

The scenario I was thinking about was Haunting of Hinojai, but since it's an older scenario I have no idea what % of PFS players have played it. Does anyone have some numbers I could reference?


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Is it possible to use PP in order to purchase expensive spell components? I'm looking at Stoneskin, and I would like to use 2 PP to buy a giant jar of granite dust(worth 750gp) which I could then use to cast the spell 3 times. I'm not sure how this fits into the rules legality though.

On the one hand, this could be considered purchasing a single item(the jar of dust) with multiple uses, not unlike buying a scroll with duplicate spells, wand with multiple charges, or a bottle of sovereign glue.

On the other hand, it could be considered 3 separate items(3 separate spell components), which just happen to be the same type of item that is stuffed into a single container.

I was working on prepping for a session I will be running this weekend where I was going to have the party ambushed by a group of monstrous humanoids. After looking at the statblock for Gnolls, Hobgoblins and Bugbears though, I noticed a... discrepancy.

The stats for all 3 of these monsters are very, very similar. Similar HP, similar attack, similar damage... but not similar CR. Hobgoblins are CR 1/2, Gnolls are CR 1 and Bugbears are CR 2.

What am I missing that is supposed to make a Bugbear as challenging as 3 Hobgoblins? I think a hobgoblin would stand a good chance 1v1 with a bugbear, so one of these monsters must be mis-CRed.

Hmm... so I could get a Scorpion Whip with Cold Iron blades, but just use it as a normal Whip(which then happens to be Cold Iron)?


Since whips are traditionally made out of leather, are these any special materials you can use to make them? It seems like whipwood is the only one which seems like it could work, but even then that's almost a houserule since whipwood is in fact a type of wood, and whips aren't generally made from wood.

I really like the Moonlight Stalker feat, as +2 to Attack and Damage is nothing to sneeze at. However, to get it you need darkvision, Blind-Fight(kinda useful) and Combat Expertise(a feat tax).

Is it worth it to get Stalker if you're not otherwise going to pick up Blind-Fight or Combat Expertise?


pathar wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Further Update:

The rules thread, asking whether the FAQs really mean that you can get into PrC's early, was marked as "Answered in the FAQ".
So that means "yes," right?

I think it does. Well dang. I want to make an Arcane Trickster now.

I've got a Fetchling character with 3 levels of GM credit on it that I never actually built in PFS, and I think it's about time to do so. After much deliberation I'm sure that I want to go into the Shadowdancer PRC, but I'm not sure how I want to get there, so I would like some opinions from you guys.

My background story is going to be that I was an enforcer for the Onyx Alliance, then while on a mission in the Shadow Plane found the banished fae Count Ralnac. The Count caused me character to embrace freedom and reject the slave-trading Alliance, so he joined one of the Alliance's rivals - the Pathfinder Society.

Right now, the options I have considered are:

1) Monk -> Fighter -> Shadowdancer

This takes care of most of the feat requirements for Shadowdancer, allowing me to spend my other feats on more useful combat abilities. I had considered going for the Moonlight Stalker feat chain as it works well with the Fetchling's Shadow Blending, and I think this is the only way I would actually have enough feats to do it.

2) Ninja -> Shadowdancer

This has more of a focus on stealth, and as long as I'm picking up Dodge/Mobility being able to benefit from Sneak Attack when flanking could be nice. Pressure points synergies moderately well with the shadow's strength drain attack, too.

3) Summoner -> Shadowdancer

Sadly the Shadow Caller archetype isn't allowed in PFS, but I could still use my eidolon as a flank-buddy up until I get my shadow, then focus on buffing/support spells while my shadow melees. Here I would be directly contributing less, but have more versatility.

What do you guys think? Anything I haven't considered?

I have a Maneuver Master Monk in PFS with the Moonlight Stalker feat chain, and I regularly make use of Feinting in order to deny opponents their DEX versus my attack. However, I was recently told that Feint isn't actually a combat maneuver since it doesn't use CMB/CMD, and thus I can't use it with Maneuver Master.

Is this correct? It seems utterly bizarre to me, but a cursory reading of the rules doesn't find anything to contradict this...

Cleric's two main stats are WIS and CHA. WIS is used for spellcasting, and is most commonly the 'primary' stat for clerics, while CHA is used for channeling energy and is most commonly the 'secondary' stat.

How you will want to allocate your stats will depend on what kind of cleric you want to be. A couple suggestions:

'Vanilla' Party Support Cleric:
11 Str
13 Dex
16 Con
13 Int
18 Wis
18 Cha

Melee Crusader-Style Cleric:
18 Str
13 Dex
16 Con
11 Int
18 Wis
13 Cha

Undead-Bane Cleric:
18 Str
13 Dex
13 Con
11 Int
16 Wis
18 Cha

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Hmm... okay, so question. If you have a Myrmidarch Magus who uses his Ranged Spellstrike through a scatter weapon such as a Dragon Pistol, what happens? Does the spell affect all targets in the cone(Such as the Holy Gun's Smiting Shot?), or does it only affect one target(chosen before or after the attack rolls?) or something else entirely?

Nicos wrote:
It would be good if you tell us what the other encounters are so we can see what you are aiming for.

Evocation - Puzzle-Room with a constant elemental storm(Bolts of fire, ice, lightning and acid flying everywhere).

Necromancy - Wight with 2 Ghoul servants.
Transmutation - Terrified rat, polymorphed & buffed with magic into something more fearsome.
Conjuration - Bound outsider the PCs can either fight or negotiate with.
Illusion - Series or trapped hallways.
Abjuration - Variety of magical sigils, glyphs and wards.

I'm running a campaign where the PCs are currently in Nex and will be entering a tower devoted to magical research. I'm planning on having eight rooms, one for each school of magic, with an appropriately-themed encounter inside of it. I've got one for the most of the schools, but I'm having trouble coming up with one for Divination and Enchantment rooms. The party is currently level 5.

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Be sure to wash them in warm soapy water (and a quick scrub with an old toothbrush doesn't hurt) to remove the mold-release material from the minis, otherwise the paint will have a harder time sticking to the miniature.

Huh. Is that why I've been having so much trouble painting my Bones? Good to know. I'll have to do that in the future...

Derek Poppink wrote:
The banquet ticket is yours, Sean!

Thank you very much!

I already have a con ticket, but I would love a chance to attend the banquet.


Robert A Matthews wrote:

1. Correct

2. All of that is correct, if you have at least one Wizard level. There are no rules for spontaneous casters being able to copy a spell into a spellbook that I am aware of.

3. You would have to pay half what it would cost you to scribe the spells you already have in your spellbook.

It doesn't look like the rules support any way for a spontaneous caster to maintain a spellbook. I would almost say it's better to use scrolls anyway. Since Mnemonic Vestment doesn't consume the written version, you have a bunch of scrolls that you can expend if you need another use of a spell. With a spellbook you would have to wait a day.

25 GP for a level 1 spell scroll vs
15GP to copy a level 1 spell into a spellbook

Sure you pay more, but you get more.

At earlier levels yes, but later on the prices shift dramatically.

To scribe a 4th level scroll such as D. Door, it costs 240gp.
To buy a scroll of D. Door, it costs 700 gp.

You can scribe 3 4th-level spells for the price of 1 4th-level scroll.


Sidney Kuhn wrote:
Sean H wrote:
Doug Miles wrote:

This suggestion was made two weeks earlier.

Another thread in the same vein.

Ah, I wasn't aware. A cursory search turned up nothing.

Even reading through those threads, I still don't see any reason why credit shouldn't be given for running multiple times; rather, several reasons were put forward why re-running scenarios is a good idea, yet re-running scenarios is currently decentivized due to a lack of tangible progression when doing so.

As is, I have 5 characters, 4 of which are mid-to-high level. Would it really have a negative impact if 2 of them had a GM chronicle from Jester's Fraud rather than just 1?

You do get credit towards more stars.

Stars are completely pointless in my opinion. They're a small image that shows up in a restricted part of the forums(I spend far more time in Advice than in the PFS forums) and don't really differentiate anything other than 'this guy has been around longer'.


Andrew Christian wrote:

Its a short term solution to a long term problem. And once the short term satisfaction has run its course, the long term sustainability is still an issue.

Hmm. I definitely see your point here. Maybe allowing re-run credit isn't the best way to solve the GM problem. At the same time, when you're planning on having three tables on Friday night and enough players show up for four, someone who was not prepared will need to step up and run. Maybe that GM was planning on playing that night, but because he saw the need to sacrificed his slot and brought out an old scenario the newbies hadn't yet played.

He did this because he couldn't bear to send those players home because there was a lack of GMs, but even though he would have done it regardless, wouldn't it be nice if he got to keep one of those chronicle sheets as a 'Thank You' for stepping up in a time of need?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Christian wrote:

I have enough play opportunities left, I could get another 2 or 3 characters to level 12 just on what I can still play.

GM Credit is not all its cracked up to be, and asking for unlimited GM credit will just detract from your ability to actually play your characters.

At my lodge there is a shortage of GMs available. I would be willing to GM more, but I have a need to get a certain amount of credit in a limited timeframe, which actively disincentives me from GMing. In a system where GM availability is limited, is a system which further reduces this availability a good one?

Andrew Christian wrote:

The more GM credit we offer into the field of characters, the more we dilute the actual playability of those characters.

I had trouble adjusting to both my Alchemist/Cavalier I noted above. This was a very complicated build, and it took me a level or two to get the hang of the character. By 12th level, he was pretty impressive, but I had to learn how to play him when I should already have known. Because I did not organically grow with him and learn him as I gained the XP.

I also had a two or three scenario learning curve with Sssstryxsss, my Saurian Shaman Druid. He was 5th level before I played him.

The point being, the more GM credit you offer into the pool, the more likely you are going to be sitting at a table with someone who doesn't really understand their character, and thus the better chance of a character death (not necessarily theirs) or a TPK. This is actually worse than a newby with a level 7 pregen.

Wouldn't allowing credit for rerunning scenarios actually help fix this very problem?

Lets say that you're GMing 9 times. If you run 9 different scenarios, all 9 scenarios are likely to go on a single character, giving you a 4th-level character you have never played. However, if you run 3 different scenarios 3 times, you will end up with 3 2nd-level characters that you have never played.

Re-run credit would actually push players to play their characters more than GM them, because they can't apply the same chronicle to a character twice.

Andrew Christian wrote:

There may be other, hidden reasons, that none of us have thought of, that make unlimited GM credit a bad idea.

This is true. There may be reasons we are yet unaware of which make allowing re-run credit a bad idea, but is it really worth it to shy away from a making a change which has clear, concise benefits of which we are aware, all because of a potential unknown?

Additionally, if we want to be cautious we can always roll out changes like this slowly. We certainly do not need unlimited GM credit. It would not be difficult to start off by only allowing 2 GM credits per scenario, just to see what impact it has on the game. If one of those potential unknowns does rear it's head and has a negative impact on the game, we can always roll back the changes.


So he wants a special dispensation to get GM credit a second time so that he can play this specific character at Paizo Con in the scenarios he's signed up for.

He wants it to be a new rule, for his immediate convenience, without looking at the long term ramifications for both himself and others.

If he really wants those 4 scenario credits, why can't he find another GM to run the 4 scenarios for him, instead of needing them to be GM credits?

I apologize if my OP came off this way, but I did not intend to ask for special dispensation. I did not have my immediate convenience in mind when I made the OP, and I certainly didn't suggest this change without considering the long-term ramifications of Organized Play. I love Pathfinder Society, and would never suggest a change I felt would harm PFS as a whole, even if it benefited me personally.

Rather, I believe that allowing GM credit for re-running scenarios would have a positive impact on the society as a whole for all players, as the benefits we could gain would outweigh the of downsides of this change.


Doug Miles wrote:

This suggestion was made two weeks earlier.

Another thread in the same vein.

Ah, I wasn't aware. A cursory search turned up nothing.

Even reading through those threads, I still don't see any reason why credit shouldn't be given for running multiple times; rather, several reasons were put forward why re-running scenarios is a good idea, yet re-running scenarios is currently decentivized due to a lack of tangible progression when doing so.

As is, I have 5 characters, 4 of which are mid-to-high level. Would it really have a negative impact if 2 of them had a GM chronicle from Jester's Fraud rather than just 1?


Jester's Fraud and the Heresy of Man series are perhaps some of my favorite scenarios ever, even after running them over 4 months ago. A new group of PFS players has just reached the 5-9 tier at my local PFS lodge, and I was contemplating sharing these excellent scenarios with the new players, but actually found myself held back by the upcomming PaizoCon, as I have a level 5.2 character that I need to get to level 7.0 in a limited number of sessions in order to play in the 7-11 scenarios I want to at PaizoCon.

Granted, I understand why Paizo wants to incentivize GMs to run their new scenarios, but unfortunately my work has been really busy recently and I don't have time to run through and prep a brand-new scenario. Would it really hurt that much to give credit for running a scenario multiple times, as long as it was several months apart?

So even if it was a creature with Shocking Grasp as a Spell-like ability, he couldn't do that? I thought he could, given:

Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name.

1 to 50 of 460 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.