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

Sebastian Hirsch's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 2015 Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 1,899 posts (2,249 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 9 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,899 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The Terrible Zodin wrote:
Avatar-1 wrote:
Even with those restrictions, you'd likely find every second player would take the feat.

Living Arcanis allowed the feat. In the 4 or 5 years it was available to PCs I only saw 2 people take it.

LA also had the advantage that if your PC died, you could continue playing the cohort as a full PC at whatever level the cohort was.

Still,only saw it twice.

Without doing more research on that campaign, other than what wikipedia has, it seems like the campaign had a narrative focus, in PFS we already have players/classes that tend to break scenarios, this option might broaden the gap between the various levels of system mastery.

That said, assuming the would decide to test your option, I would assume that the pregen would count as a player when it comes to things like 4 player adjustments. Other players (especially those playing pregens with the same level as your cohort) might not appreciate you increasing the difficulty of the scenario.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
JonathonWilder wrote:
What I would like to see is Paizo coming out with a revision of Leadership that could be used in PFS, it is a feat with great roleplaying potential.

Almost everybody has a laundry list it items, they would like fixed (I am quite interested in the new Summoner myself), and while the Leadership feat has some roleplaying potential, it really works best in a home campaign, where the GM has all the freedom to toy with it.

In an organized play campaign, where players and GMs can switch every week, that really does not work. Players are expected to adapt to the scenario, not vice versa.

The leadership (not unlike the Summoner) has the nasty effect, of making one player take up more time "in the spotlight"/in combat that the other players. Marginalizing the contribution of some of the players already happens way to often, maybe you could make this some kind of alternative to a mount/animal companion, but it would likely require much more investment than just one feat slot.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Andreas Forster wrote:


Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
And one of the bigger reasons, you are actually a kind of follower yourself, you are a Pathfinder agent, and your agency is quite limited, you don't have a base of operations, the society does.

That's actually not a good point. PCs can have followers, but only those from the Field Guide, who don't have a character sheet but obly grant a certain bonus. But they're followers nontheless. Second, PCs can have a base of operations. They can own a farmstead, an Absalom Townhouse, a ship, a shop, or even a private island.

Fair enough, I just though that Pathfinders lack the agency required of a leader, after all they player characters are basically soldiers and experts in something like a military organisation.

They seem to lack any real choice, in the kind of missions they receive (of course they have a element of choice within those missions).

Of course since the leadership has a much worse chance to be introduces into the campaign, than all the previously banned options...

Andreas Forster wrote:


An idea that comes to mind could be this:

Leadership

Choose a character class you don't have levels in. You get one class ability available to characters of that class with a class level equal to your total character level -2. Your effective class level for the purpose of using that class ability is your total character level -2. If you ever gain levels in that class, you must choose a new class and class ability for this feat.
In addition, choose one skill you have ranks in. You get a +2 bonus on skill checks with that chosen skill.

(This basically represents an NPC using one of his class abilities and aiding the PC with one skill, but otherwise being non-existent.)

Note: I'm not saying that should be considered in any way. It's just a wild idea that just popped out of my mind, based on a home game I run myself. One of the characters in that game has the Leadership feat, and since I'm just too lazy to keep record of an actual character...

Seems like a nightmare to balance, but you could base it on the eldrtich heritage line of feats. Some class features like "spellscasting" and sneak attack would be almost impossible to balance, especially considering that sneak attack generally stacks and we have plenty of classes with that particular class feature.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lormyr wrote:
Andrew Shumate wrote:
There's absolutely no reason to let somebody add a PC-strength entity to the board for a mere feat.
In my experience, those pregens are nowhere near PC strength. Not even in the same universe. YMMV.

Take a look at the ACG pregens, they are better than a number of badly optimized characters, I have seen played.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DrakeRoberts wrote:
The FAQ for PFS states that poisons are only "always available" (a select list of them, that is), for those with Poison Use. The Grenadier archetype loses that class feature. I'm assuming this means that they can't buy poisons unless they come from a chronicle sheet? Also, alchemists are noted to be able to use their craft(alchemy) to craft poisons. Is it true that they could only craft poisons that are "always available" and thus a grenadier could not craft the poisons either?

I think that is the intention, but those FAQs often don't deal with the specifics of certain archetypes. In any case, even with the poison use class feature, you would only be allowed to craft the poisons mentioned in the FAQ.

And btw if you have a specific question regarding certain FAQ entries, it is generally a good idea to provide a link.

How can alchemists craft in Pathfinder Society Organized Play?.

How do poisons work in Pathfinder Society Organized Play?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ascalaphus wrote:
It would be cool if a bit more flavor was released for these races. As is, wayangs have about three pages worth of information on them and just a single picture. For a PFS-legal race, it would be sweet if there was a bit more than that.

Yeah but the PFS guys are already quite busy, and writing lore really does fall more into the area of their creative director and others.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Leadership ( I dare the THE most banned feat in home campaigns) is as written just way to good, for the cost of a feat getting a familiar type creature is really as much as you can reasonably expect.

We already have rules concerning combat pets etc. with this a character could have an eidolon, summons and a cohort. That takes up way to much time.

The Leadership feat also has a couple of factors that would be pretty hard to track in an organized play campaign.

Leadership as written kinda expects you to outfit your cohort, that would be pretty much impossible if you use the pregens.

Depending on your level, another player in the very same scenario might actually be playing one of those pregens (if not the same one), that would marginalize that character even more.

And one of the bigger reasons, you are actually a kind of follower yourself, you are a Pathfinder agent, and your agency is quite limited, you don't have a base of operations, the society does.

No sorry, but this really doesn't work either from a narrative point of view, or from a mechanics based approach. Leadership is just way to cheap and even if you were to allow that feat, the cohort is a very special Npc, the GM has a lot of control over it... which would lead to mountains of table variation, especially once the GMs start checking your previous chronicle sheets for ways to reduce your fame.....

I seriously doubt, that the campaign leadership would force this kind of headache on themselves (and I am pretty sure that plenty of GMs would complain).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It might be a long shot, but some PFS hoodies would be greatly appreciated, even if you keep it simple (black) with the PFS logo on it.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

That room looks amazing.... I wanted to post a picture, but now I have several drives to Ikea ahead of me ^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
claudekennilol wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
Yeah, if the only reason is so that players can't choose to play fast/slow to mitigate "low reward" scenarios, then all that player is going to do is simply not play that scenario with that character. I don't see how that's a valid reason.
Or if the party gets halfway through and runs away , that drops their treasure so someone might say "yeah, we'll take this one slow..."
Say it up front. Write it down on the sign-in sheet. Even if people meta-game it that much, more people want xp more than "treasure" anyways. Most pathfinders (if not all) are above the WBL curve anyways.

That solution might not work for a situation where the PCs justifiably expect 3 XP and get 1.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
Yeah, if the only reason is so that players can't choose to play fast/slow to mitigate "low reward" scenarios, then all that player is going to do is simply not play that scenario with that character. I don't see how that's a valid reason.
Or if the party gets halfway through and runs away , that drops their treasure so someone might say "yeah, we'll take this one slow..."

I hope that my suggestion solves that particular issue, since you can never change the XP track of your current chronicle. But yeah, that seems like a good reason for the existence of the current rule.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Auke Teeninga wrote:

If a party gets less XP, then that whole party has the same problem right? It really shouldn't be difficult to get a few sessions in for those same people to get things back onto track.

If it's just you, then you can run a 1-5 at tier 1-2 and apply it to your character at tier 4-5.

Even if your suggestion is accepted it won't be implemented till GenCon (end of July), so don't hold your breath.

Concerning boons, I'm 99% certain Mike Brock will grant boons if your VO asks for them. Mike knows that in Europe PFS participation is growing, but not nearly near American numbers. I don't think a boon would be a good solution for your problem though.

I apologize for the late answer, I am somewhat busy with birthday celebrations, just turned 30 today... the rot is apparently starting to set it. #fishingforcompliments ^^

In your argument you make the assumption, that every player is on the same starting XP, something that seems to be rather rare, especially once the GMs are let out to play.
Sceduling sessions for the affected players can be a bit hard, especially if you have to plan your games weeks in advance.

Just GMing something would be lovely, but finding players is not easy for everybody, it really depends on your location, and when you need to play the character in another planned module/scenario.

Since this can happen in every normal scenario and module (players having to leave early, party having to retreat etc. ) it would be nice to have a solution for the long run.

I have heard reasons for the existence of the current rule, but I feel that a change would be a good thing for PFS, and create less scheduling conflicts.

So yeah, I am not holding my breath, but I see little reason to keep a rule in its current state, if it could be better (of course not necessarily my suggestion).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
John Francis wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
I bought the biggest one, it is about one or two inches smaller than two flip mats together

That's not the biggest one - there's one over three times the size of that.

Two flip-mats (24" x 30") put together cover a 48" x 30" area, which is a bit smaller than the 48" x 34.5" of the Chessex Megamat (but a bit larger than the printed portion of that mat).

It would take more than six flip-mats to cover just the printed area of the biggest Chessex mat.

That seems excessive, but the idea to hold an entire Game Day at one giant table seems like a nice idea, once a slot is over just rotate the players and GMs clockwise^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I bought the biggest one, it is about one or two inches smaller than two flip mats together^^ It is pretty much a gamer friendly Table cloth you can scribble on with wet erase pens ^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
trollbill wrote:
Jessex wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
trollbill wrote:
Just remember, they are ready to play as soon as they stop putting the dice in their mouth.
Nonsense. A Heimlich is a perfectly valid dice rolling method.
Only if they have their own dice and place to roll them.
They make large foam dice that are also useful for teething.

Foam or cloth dice are a great idea, I wonder what growing up with the goblins from the paizo store (the cloth ones).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ms. Pleiades wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

@MS.Pleiades: Actually minge is a pretty damn gut description, unless the players know about that special feature and metagame their racial choices.

@Paz: Yeah... apparently many replayable modules really do hate players.

Was that "gut" meant to be "good"?

If so,

** spoiler omitted **

And for etymologies of minge, I'm in Canada, so I'm going with the biting insect meaning, goodness knows we've got a lot of those in the summer. Also, given that alternate meaning for Bender, the term "Straight" suddenly makes a lot more sense.

Yeah sorry about that, German typo ^^

The things you mentioned aren't all that bad, mostly just annoying (though these tend to make magic missile better). A level draining creature in a level 1-2 is just plain nasty.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well good luck, nice to see someone take the issue of recruiting new players seriously ^^

Best wishes to you and your family.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jack of Nothing wrote:
My main worry would be acquiring what sounds like a ton of materials. Although I do think I could do a teeny bit better than my current GMs I play with at making it the adventure feel more idk engrossing. Very little in character talk and such. I feel like all my fun pitches for "Hey this is what my character is like" are all wasted efforts.

What you need:

- a map with 1 inch squares (can even be paper), the basic flip map works very well (especially if you have the time to prepare it ahead of time), if you can transport it, the chessex gaming mats are quite popular too (you might not want to purchase the biggest one though).

- something to represent your enemies and the players. Coins, Dice and similar things work well, but the Bestiary Box is a good investment, especially since you can make your own "wrappers" for your existing pawns.

You should already own pretty much everything else, there are plenty of optional items, that can make the experience better, but they are after all optional.
If you search for it, you can find pretty nice free printable GM screens out there too.

EDIT: 1+ wet erase markers are pretty essential too.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
WiseWolfOfYoitsu wrote:


Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
However GMing requires a certain amount of preparation (bringing the chronicle sheets is pretty much the most important part) so you might want to devote some time to your preparation...... ..... .... is this a bad time to mention that I arrived at the last convention with no less than 4 bags (one of them on wheels)?
Not a bad time, but 4 bags seems excessive to me. I have a 3" Player Binder, a 3" GM Binder, a backpack full of all my GM supplies, a Pathfinder Society Messenger Bag for my player binder and electronics, and a tackle box of minis. So about a bag and a half plus a tackle box of minis for me.

Well, Flip Maps, Pawns, Miniatures, seven chronicles sheets, shared prep document printouts and a couple of other things for the first 12 levels of Emerald Spire did help considerably.

If and once you have/want to prepare for several scenarios, the chronicle sheets, handouts, maps (ideally the rights pawns).. well I might have overprepaired a bit (and need a couple of larger bags.

I have a pretty much everything listed above on my tablet, but since this can slow down the game, I decided against it in this instance.
And I forced myself to bring my CRB.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well the easiest way to go forward would be to retrain the cleric class into something else (Oracle or Shaman could work).

I think there are a couple of other drinking archetypes out there, maybe just dip into brawler to get your fix, with a multiclass character it seems already unlikely that you want to abuse drunken ki.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Paz wrote:
Ms. Pleiades wrote:
it's got a real minge of a penalty imposed on most PCs.
Wow, that word has a different meaning over here...

There is a non-vulgar meaning for that word? The last time I have heard the term was in the Zero Punctuation video to Tomodachi Life.

Comming from that perspective of someone who has recently played and GMed the module in question, I think most of my players would agree.

The fact that the same word has two very different meanings just tends to happen sometimes e.g. the in the US "going on a bender" usually means a drinking spree, in the UK it used to have a different meaning..

bender

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@MS.Pleiades: Actually minge is a pretty damn gut description, unless the players know about that special feature and metagame their racial choices.

@Paz: Yeah... apparently many replayable modules really do hate players.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Your players might desire to hit me for the suggestion, but Emerald Spire level one, gives that amount of XP (to be honest levels 1 and 2 are pretty hard, levels 3 and 4 can be a walk in the park).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If you can retrain the additional traits feat, and even retrain a couple of other things for sometimes INSANE amounts of PP, I haven't read a good reason not to get a ruling at one point.

sandbagr wrote:

I have a Level 5 Warpriest (Archer) of Shelyn who would like to redevote to Erastil, give up Fate's Favored, and take Deadeye Bowman trait.

I think, from what I have read and been told, this is impossible. Also, it appears I would lose the Blessing I took that's luck based, and be unable to replace it.
I would not lsoe Fate's Favored Trait just from the change, as its not deity specific, just a Faith trait, but I would want to give it up to take Deadeye Bowman.

So from what I gather, all this is not really possible and now that I am not happy with the choices I made I am stuck with a character i now feel is sub par and I am disappointed in.
Isn't this the reason there is Retraining at all? I read somewhere the reason it's not in there is they don't want to introduce too many new rules. I get that, but I would rather have a new rule to accommodate everyone than to have Divine Casters the only ones stuck with poor choices.

Yeah, Deadeye Bowman is amazing, but losing Tate's Favored for it seems like a hard trade to work. As others have mentioned, these traits are in two different categories, so additional traits works.

Inner Sea Gods - which you apparently own - has an Erastil themed bow that should be perfect for your Warpriest.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TetsujinOni wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

@Jack: While it is always nice to see players willing to GM boons are a pretty rare thing, and I really would strongly advise against starting to GM at a convention.

Talk to your VL or your VC, they should be able to help you.

Just to be a contrary voice: If you want to GM and think you can run a fun table that rolls with the players and shows people a good time, and there's a con that wants GMs - go for it.

(I started my 3.x GMing career by running an APL 10 game in Living Greyhawk in one of the high-crunch regions. Nothing much that PCs come up with these days seems shocking...)

I guess this is one of those YMMV situations, when I think of conventions it's usually in the terms of large rooms with a lot of tables in them. Other loud tables are certainly an issue.

That said PFS only events should be far better than convention tables, where some or all of your players have limited/no experience with the D20 system and just want to try it.

---

Oh and before I forget it, in the last 10 years of visiting conventions I had some awfully terrible games and GMs. To badly paraphrase Order of the Stick "A cup of really terrible coffee makes you remember all the times you actually drank good coffee. Your Brain is pretty much trying to remember everything that is not the "coffee" you are currently drinking".

So yeah, even if you come to the conclusion, that your first GM experience was a complete and utter fail... there will still be plenty of worse GMs out there ^^

However GMing requires a certain amount of preparation (bringing the chronicle sheets is pretty much the most important part) so you might want to devote some time to your preparation...... ..... .... is this a bad time to mention that I arrived at the last convention with no less than 4 bags (one of them on wheels)?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@Jack: While it is always nice to see players willing to GM boons are a pretty rare thing, and I really would strongly advise against starting to GM at a convention.

Talk to your VL or your VC, they should be able to help you.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

IIRC one of the Shattered Star AP volumes had an article about her, and the stats for her herald.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
BartonOliver wrote:


Players: If you are running a weekly game, you have at least 3 people, probably more generally not the same players every week in most places. (Enough for 5 tables with some planning, yes you are going to have to plan for a weekend where people don't have other commitments, and want to invest this kind of time, but it is by no means impossible. Generally a tree day weekend works the best for this.)

GM: You have at least 1 (probably more, again could run 5 tables, with some planning, but again this is hard)

Now you have to find a way to fill the other 10 tables. That's where using your resources comes into play. Is there another play group in a nearby town? Probably, you could get another couple here. Do you or anyone else have some other people who might be interested or are only interested occasionally? Probably enough to get at least a...

Getting a number of nerds into the same room at the same time is already a bit like herding cats (or being a Raid leader, same thing really) one PFS comes into play it becomes that much harder.

You need at least your GMs to commit way ahead of time, and find a day that works for everyone (ideally have 1 or 2 spare GMs).
You need to offer enough scenarios, in the right combination, so people actually want to come to your convention.

The replayables are a nice emergency solution, but people will quite likely not drive to a convention to play The Confirmation for the 7th time.

And frankly there are plenty of gaming groups that have absolutely zero interest of going to a convention, my own home group consists of 15 + year RPG veterans and I seriously doubt that I could make them even attend a convention (planning one is out of the question).
Conventions are a pretty loud and busy affair, and some people just don't want to participate (or have been burned by terrible GMs).

The chance to find enough non-regular PFS players, who are willing to commit to an event weeks or months in the future is pretty slim, and even in that case you are likely to lose a percentage to emergencies and similar occurrences.

At our last yearly PFS convention we had about 30-40 people, and that one had people from all over the country (Germany). While I am quite committed to increasing that number substantially, I am still not confident, that we have a 100 % chance to get Con support for this years convention.

I agree that it can be done, but at some point you have to look at the time investment by the organizers and decide if it is still worth the time.

Oh and some areas seem to be quite GM starved, it is not a problem in my area, but some people will never GM and there is nothing you can do about it.

EDIT: I do appreciate the fact that this discussion keeps the topic on the front page, it seems that the topic ob boons is ripe with a certain amount of desire and entitlement issues.

Personally I would prefer an option that improves the growth of PFS in player starved areas (like giving each new VL a stack of boons to encourage regular game day attendance/ rewarding players/GMs who volunteer their time to run newbie friendly scenarios/help with character creation). Of course the fact that Paizo wants PFS to be present at many conventions to build brand recognition ends up helping us in the long run.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
claudekennilol wrote:
Ok, I see what you're saying. I thought you were saying that Hunter ACs could just natively do skirmisher tricks without being taught/pushed because of the line "I would assume that you get to use everyone".

Well the half had + wis mod limit is already quite an effective limitation, we will see what ends up in the errata (I think it is pretty likely that the new version is already at the printer and they just wait for it to become available. Not a huge fan of Paizo in that area).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
WiseWolfOfYoitsu wrote:
Terek wrote:

I warned the group we are doing Emerald spire with that they need whatever character they take in to Emerald Spire to have exactly enough exp to level, with no extra scenarios if they want the same character to participate in every emerald spire level.

We haven't had a problem, but only because the players at my table knew about the potential problem beforehand.

Terek,

** spoiler omitted **

Godhome Spoiler:

I recently GMed this for a couple of players at a local convention, among them my VO. We discussed how to deal with the level, maybe make them play it with pregens (could not convice them), make them knock everybody unconscious (could not convince them etc.). I ended up using Zarta Dralneen to go them a clear exterminate order with some vague pointers that something didn't seem right.
At the end after about 20 minutes of senseless slaughter (I started filling out the chronicles at the very start of the level... ) they managed to deactivate the godbox, and all the dead scaly guys started to melt into some white chemical looking paste (I have no regrets of shame after stealing this from Dr Who).

And even with this ending, it is a very very boring level, and giving 3 XP for that seems pretty much like free XP.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
claudekennilol wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Derwalt wrote:
I just thought of something... If skirmisher tricks can be taught to the companion - can you then "push" the companion to do skirmisher tricks it does not know?
You are making the assumption that you actually have/can teach them to your companion. Since they have no listed handle animal DC, I would assume that you get to use everyone.

I hope you're being flippant because it's abundantly clear that this is definitely not the case.

PRD, Hunter wrote:
A hunter may teach her companion hunter's tricks from the skirmisher ranger archetype instead of standard tricks
Maybe I just misunderstood what you meant, but it looks like you meant that you can just use them without pushing/teaching or taking up any trick slots.

No actually I was not flippant at all, but let my explain myself.

You are currently mixing the current version of the text with the unfinished version of the Errata, at this point in time we don't know which text this will replace (if any).

We really want to avoid the situation where a hunter can actually push his animal companion to do a skirmisher trick.

Every regular trick requires a handle animal DC to teach it to your animal companion, the skirmisher tricks do not have a listed DC.

As written in the current version of the ACG, you might not be able to sucessfully teach those tricks without succedding on a handle animal check... and since we have no listed DC.... well expect table variation.

I don't actually mind using trick slots for things like the skirmisher tricks, but my reading of the situation would sidestep the "teaching your companion a trick" part of the problem.

The whole situation really seems like an editing mistake/last minute addition to me, thus the confusion for the last couple of months.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Zak Glade wrote:
I've thought it would be nice to have a boon that would allow a character to switch to or from slow track at a whole-numbered amount of experience.

I and a lot of other players don't really have reliable access to boons of this nature, so I am not a huge fan of the idea.

This seems mostly a scheduling problem, and removing those usually seems like a beneficial idea.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Damanta wrote:
Or you could just do 1 or 2 extra scenario's to catch up if you don't manage to get the necesary XP from that certain level of the Emerald Spire.

Depending on your Situation, this might not be possible within a reasonable time frame. This solution requires that the GMs in your area actually offer scenarios in the right level range, that those games actually happen (lack of players etc.) and that the player in question hasn't played it yet.

Auke Teeninga wrote:
Damanta wrote:
Or you could just do 1 or 2 extra scenarios to catch up if you don't manage to get the necesary XP from that certain level of the Emerald Spire.
Or run one or two games and use the GM credit.

While it would be nice to see more people take the GM seat, it isn't all that easy. To get a chronicle for the right level, the GM often has to run a higher level adventure. Finding enough players to run that adventure might not be an easy task, considering that we sometimes have a mixed group of players (the old guard that has played everything, and the new guys ) in the same area.

And Core really only helps when the character in question is already Core.

---

I talking about it with my VL and he mentioned that one of the reasons why we have this rule, is to stop players from reducing the negative impact, by going slow track when they are about to get a chronicle with less than the maximum number of XP/Gold.

While asking the players before the game starts could work, but even then they might try to game the system based on the players present and the characters they want to play.

I hope that my proposed change sidesteps that problem, since you would always have to decide directly after getting a chronicle, that will force you to level up.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jack of Nothing wrote:
Oh btw the ridiculous kind of darkness that light didn't permeate through was the effect of an artifact affecting the structure. Just throwing that out there.

Yeah, quite a number of us know what "thing" you are referring to, I have played and GMed it recently, and it is pretty annoying (and as the others mentioned, the level of darkvision in your party is quite relevant).

Please note , that that level and many other PFS legal scenarios take place on the same amount of area (a flip mat), thus any kind or battle (even with the range penalties for Perception checks) usually informs the whole level that the players have arrived.

Stealth only really works in those situations, where the whole group is at least supportive of the tactic.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You can invest in ways to make the whole party stealthy, but other than that, if your group even has one character with a seriously negative stealth modifier.. it might not be an option.

Of course it all starts with talking to your party, if they are unwilling to take the risks involved, there is frankly very little you can do. And even if you can sneak ahead, the chances of of successfully eliminating an enemy on your own are remote.

I would try not to be a "lone" stealth character, with spells like vanish you can be invisible at the start of combat and move into an advantageous position (flankying, being in place for a full attack), but your party really has to be on board, otherwise you might get hit by the occasional fireball.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hi everybody, I recently had a problematic experience GMing Emerald Spire and would like to offer a solution to my problem.

Currently when a character is playing modules, she will usually earn 3 XP every time, but it that character for one reason or another earns only 1 XP / 1/2 XP it becomes effectively impossible for that character to switch from from slow track to fast track of vice versa.

I assume the rule is intended to avoid situations where a character would with 2 XP, earning XP in the Module would like to switch to low track, thus resulting in math (calculating XP rewards based on the new XP).

Thus I would propose the following addition to the rules text regarding this issue:

"Whenever a character earns more XP than necessary to reach the next level, he can then decide to switch from fast to slow progression or vice versa for any XP gained after that level".

To give a concrete example on how I assume this could work:

A character on fast track with 5 XP earns 3 XP through a chronicle, since this would level that character to level 4 she now has the choice to go on slow track. She receives all the relevant rewards on that current chronicle with her current (fast ) XP track, but for the remaining time playing on level 4 (only 1 XP ) she is on slow track.
Should she decide to do so, and play another module she would gain 1.5 XP, get all the relevant rewards on that chronicle for slow track and get the choice to chose slow track or fast track again, in effect deciding how she wants to earn the next 2.5 XP.

I apologize if the example or my suggestion isn't properly formatted (or sane ^^) but I am unfortunately late for my regular PFS game.
I just wanted the idea out there, personally I don't see grounds for abuse, but since my experience with PFS is still quite limited it seems fair to assume that there are some potential problems.

I hope that this could potentially work as a quality of life change for PFS players and GMs, since it has the potential to make scheduling a bit easier.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Sinistrad wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Sinistrad wrote:

A demon's teleport is not exactly the same as the spell. It's a spell-like ability with slightly modified rules. Further, tactics in scenarios do not always reflect RAW and I have seen stuff hand-waved that explicitly contradicts RAW. This is intended as far as I can tell. They like to throw knowledgeable players curve balls or bend/break RAW for flavor purposes or to create enemies with unique abilities.

So you can't really cite how a demon's tactics and spell-like ability work in a scenario to determine how a PC's teleport spell should work.

The problem with teleporting out of tanglefoot goo is that once the item has hit the target, it is no longer an "object." It's a condition on the player from a strict rules perspective. It's no longer targetable as an object any more than catching on fire is. You cannot teleport to put out fire, and so you cannot teleport to escape a tanglefoot bag. Both catching on fire and tanglefoot bags have rules for interacting with the effect, outside of what's explicitly stated it cannot really be interacted with unless another spell/effect somewhere explicitly says it removes that condition (like Freedom of Movement).

I feel this is already going in a weird direction, but I can't help myself.

A spell like ability differs from the spell a wizard can cast in exactly the same ways as all spell like abilities (+the limit).

But for the sake of argument, the wizard with strength drain, while wearing a breastplate wants to teleport, the breastplate and abouple of other things are heaver than his maximum load.. .what happens?

And regarding the "can no longer be targeted..." you can very much "target it" with the various number of solvements.

Of course we will not get a hard and fast rule on this any time soon, and as I mentioned teleport is a high level spell, you might as well just use it to get out of combat, the tangelfoot only lasts 2d4 rounds..

It's a condition, not an object. It cannot...

Well if you are done with the discussion, you are done so no reason for me to continue it. Frankly I see little reason to argue about the wording in the CRB, even after all those years we have plenty of unclear issues.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Patfhinder 2 would require a pretty epic beta test, and I suspect, that players would only be willing to adapt, if enough of their personal bugbears are slain.

Pathfinder Unchained will be a nice test.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@DM Beckett: I think noone actually objects to a tigher language in the next edition of the guide.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Sinistrad wrote:

A demon's teleport is not exactly the same as the spell. It's a spell-like ability with slightly modified rules. Further, tactics in scenarios do not always reflect RAW and I have seen stuff hand-waved that explicitly contradicts RAW. This is intended as far as I can tell. They like to throw knowledgeable players curve balls or bend/break RAW for flavor purposes or to create enemies with unique abilities.

So you can't really cite how a demon's tactics and spell-like ability work in a scenario to determine how a PC's teleport spell should work.

The problem with teleporting out of tanglefoot goo is that once the item has hit the target, it is no longer an "object." It's a condition on the player from a strict rules perspective. It's no longer targetable as an object any more than catching on fire is. You cannot teleport to put out fire, and so you cannot teleport to escape a tanglefoot bag. Both catching on fire and tanglefoot bags have rules for interacting with the effect, outside of what's explicitly stated it cannot really be interacted with unless another spell/effect somewhere explicitly says it removes that condition (like Freedom of Movement).

I feel this is already going in a weird direction, but I can't help myself.

A spell like ability differs from the spell a wizard can cast in exactly the same ways as all spell like abilities (+the limit).

But for the sake of argument, the wizard with strength drain, while wearing a breastplate wants to teleport, the breastplate and abouple of other things are heaver than his maximum load.. .what happens?

And regarding the "can no longer be targeted..." you can very much "target it" with the various number of solvements.

Of course we will not get a hard and fast rule on this any time soon, and as I mentioned teleport is a high level spell, you might as well just use it to get out of combat, the tangelfoot only lasts 2d4 rounds..

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Yeah the alchemical solvement isn't great, but might be a reasonable solution when someone else applies it to you.

You can teleport out of your chains and handcuffs, I would argue, that giving the players the benefit of the doubt, would allow them to leave behind the tangefoot stuff too. Of course we are already talking about serious magic against a cheap alchemical item....

That stuff is attached to you. I understand you want to help the player out, but it is not really working within the rules. As for teleporting out of handcuffs, I don't know about that either, anymore than you can teleport out of your pants.

I actually remembered the source of that thing, a large (or huge?) marilith in a certain AP, has it in her tactics, that when the teleports aways, she has to leave her breastplate behind (a large breastplate is heaver than the weight limit on demon teleportation allows.

Since for some spells and circumstances clothing counts as having a n armor bonus of +0 I see no good reason to allow the fighter to leave his plate armor behind.

Or to follow this line of reasoning, you can teleport out of the clutches of a grapplying monsters, let's say giant frog, so why should you not be able to teleport out of a spiders web or out of a normal (weapon) net?

I can see a certain amount of table variation here, but it is worth mentioning, that this is still pretty much using cannons to shot at sparrows.

Oh and the tangelshot bag doesn't work underwater, so you could argue that sufficient water could block or remove it, but even that is a grey are.

What AP is this? If you remember let me know. That weight limit is on carried things, not things she is wearing, so the author messed the rules up if they did it that way, twice. I don't have time now to fine it, but some multiclasses outsider would lose a lot of gear if that was the rules, and I am sure there is at least one specced out officially.

Found it, it is in WotR book 5 Herald of the

Ivory Labyrinth page 60,

WotR wrote:


If (redacted) is forced to use greater teleport, she must leave
her breastplate behind. When not wearing it, she always
allocates all of her swords’ defensive bonuses to her AC.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DM Beckett wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
(Please note, common sense and GM discretion has no place in PFS)

Strongly disagree, without those two bits PFS can't really work, and GMs quite often have to use their own discretion when players wander outside the description of the adventure or use unusual tactics.

Without common sense a pretty big number of builds are almost unworkable and the rules do expect a certain degree of common sense from the players and GMs.

Because then you will have things where one PFS DM okays something which they are okay with, and then the play takes it to another game and that DM smacks it down. One of the biggest selling points of organized play is being able to take your legal character and jump into any game anywhere that has PFS going on.

I can say that based on common sense, the Undead Lord Archetype is perfectly fine, but it's still illegal.

Rules should be clear, but so often they are not. While I wish it to be different, quite often the GM has to make the call when an ability is badly worded.

Whenever I have to mention " expect table variation", well I am not particularly happy about that.
I hope, that one day Paizo will be able to give us clarifications in a shorter timeframe.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Are you happy with the way the ACG turned out? Personally I love the new classes, but I wonder how the ACG classes changed the situation from your point of view.

Does the existence of a class like the Swashbuckler actually change the kind of stories you can tell within the adventures?

Do designers like to be able to use new classes/feats etc. to keep things fresh?

Do you take some of the new class abilities into account when you develop a new adventure, and/or is giving players class specific loot (like a weapons that improves opportune parry and riposte) every an option?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DM Beckett wrote:
(Please note, common sense and GM discretion has no place in PFS)

Strongly disagree, without those two bits PFS can't really work, and GMs quite often have to use their own discretion when players wander outside the description of the adventure or use unusual tactics.

Without common sense a pretty big number of builds are almost unworkable and the rules do expect a certain degree of common sense from the players and GMs.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Since Psiphyre already mentioned the talented Stjepan Sejic, his other comic Death Vigil is something I can recommend to absolutely everybody, especially if you like "high magic" settings, without too much gritty realism.
Of course it really shows that he has been drawing quite a bit of Witchblade (but the black and white stuff is amazing, I have already made builds for these - well the "cheesy sorc" just ended up mythic.

ady-pendragon, cheesy sorc (the details on those items look amazing).

It would be amazing to see his work in pathfinder products, and I am quite curious about the reaction from James Jacobs, especially since the protagonists include a T-Rex (kinda), and it features huge awesome monsters.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Yeah the alchemical solvement isn't great, but might be a reasonable solution when someone else applies it to you.

You can teleport out of your chains and handcuffs, I would argue, that giving the players the benefit of the doubt, would allow them to leave behind the tangefoot stuff too. Of course we are already talking about serious magic against a cheap alchemical item....

That stuff is attached to you. I understand you want to help the player out, but it is not really working within the rules. As for teleporting out of handcuffs, I don't know about that either, anymore than you can teleport out of your pants.

I actually remembered the source of that thing, a large (or huge?) marilith in a certain AP, has it in her tactics, that when the teleports aways, she has to leave her breastplate behind (a large breastplate is heaver than the weight limit on demon teleportation allows.

Since for some spells and circumstances clothing counts as having a n armor bonus of +0 I see no good reason to allow the fighter to leave his plate armor behind.

Or to follow this line of reasoning, you can teleport out of the clutches of a grapplying monsters, let's say giant frog, so why should you not be able to teleport out of a spiders web or out of a normal (weapon) net?

I can see a certain amount of table variation here, but it is worth mentioning, that this is still pretty much using cannons to shot at sparrows.

Oh and the tangelshot bag doesn't work underwater, so you could argue that sufficient water could block or remove it, but even that is a grey are.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeah the alchemical solvement isn't great, but might be a reasonable solution when someone else applies it to you.

You can teleport out of your chains and handcuffs, I would argue, that giving the players the benefit of the doubt, would allow them to leave behind the tangefoot stuff too. Of course we are already talking about serious magic against a cheap alchemical item....

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I never considered this fact, but the fact that the entangled condition increases the DC 17 - the same the DC as the Strength check, which seems to fit a bit too well.

That said, I tend to use a lot ob tangleshot arrows, and the englangled condition is already pretty damn effective/annoying for the GM (especially since, unless you are already unterwater, the only things that seems to be able to remove the condition are

Alchemical Solvent wrote:

Price 20 gp; Weight 1/2 lb.

This bubbling purple gel eats through adhesives. Each vial can cover a single 5-foot square. It destroys most normal adhesives (such as tar, tree sap, or glue) in a single round but takes 1d4+1 rounds to deal with more powerful adhesives (alchemical glue, tanglefoot bags, spider webbing, and so on). It has no affect on fully magical adhesives, such as sovereign glue.

Create: Craft (alchemy) DC 20

and

Universal Solvent wrote:


Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd

Slot —; Price 50 gp; Weight —

Description
This substance has the unique property of being able to dissolve sovereign glue, tanglefoot bags, and all other adhesives. Applying the solvent is a standard action.

Construction Requirements
Craft Wondrous Item, acid arrow; Cost 25 gp

As a GM (even in PFS frankly) I would allow alternative options like teleporting, jumping in a pool of lava or moving through the earth to remove it too.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:


5) At this point I'm pretty down on Mythic. A few folks in particular on these boards really wore me down and made me really frustrated and unhappy wiht how Wrath turned out. A classic case of the vocal minority having a STRONG influence on things, as it were. I suspect we'll continue to use mythic on monsters now and then, but at this point, I'm like 98% convinced those rules belong to the GM and not to the players. That, and the fact that there really wasn't a lot of thought put in during the playtest about how mythic impacts high level play, which was PRECISELY what I wanted it for, was frustrating. Yeah, I am indeed bitter about it.

Yeah sorry about that, I and a couple of other players really fell in love with the idea of mythic, and they way it was executed (as an additional system that can be added to low and/or high level play).

Unfortunately this (IMO) made it pretty hard to balance, since it ended up working as a kind of multiplier, it worked fine for groups with a moderate amount of system masters, but could spiral out of control when players had high system mastery. I guess that is just the nature of the beast, one size fits all doesn't really work (of course reducing point buy, XP and mythic tiers is always an option).

As written mythic definitely works for monsters and can help GMs like me to create memorable encounters.

It is also a very nice option to replace high level options for those GMs/players who don't think that those high level spells fit their particular game.

With a bit of hindsight (I haven looked in that corner of the forum in quite some time, and I have discovered PFS several months ago and could not be happier) I think that WotR is thematically one of my favorite adventure paths, and I can recommend part 1 without hesitation (the writing and the NPCs really work for me). The other parts do benefit from some tweaking, but that is true for almost all things including my own cooking and similar epic enterprises.

Mythic adventures (a book I ended up buying several times for my players) is a good tool, but isn't all that easy to use, and could use some fine tuning. Since I create all the characters for my home group with my players, this really was not an issue for me, and I have always felt empowered to limit options and make rulings when things are unclear.
Giving the choice of mythic to the GM certainly will works for some groups.

If you ever find yourself in a situation where you and a couple of designers find yourself with a couple of days of free time (after developing a books went exceedingly smooth and quick), we would certainly appreciated something like a 2-3 page pdf to attempt to balance the exploding numbers a bit.

I really liked the implementation of mythic in Iron Gods, and I am looking forward to trying the PFS scenarios with it.

---

I feel the need to apologize again, for all the drama in the WotR area, and hope, that you can find some solace in the fact, that the only reason that this exploded in the way that it did, is the fact that this meant a lot to a large number of people. The ability to make people care so much, shows that Paizo has a way to tell some very compelling stories, and create fun rules material.

My previous WotR group is on permanent hiatus (has nothing to do with mythic, I can't just get that group to play often enough) but I am actually still willing to give this another try.

Sometimes system work and sometimes they don't and I appreciate the fact, that Paizo is still willing to try even if it doesn't end up working perfectly every time. I feel that this was a learning experience for everybody involved, and that current products are already benefiting from the lessions learned.

---

So just keep up the good work, I have to go back to preparing Emerald Spire. I will be running it as a kind of Dungeon Run at a local convention this weekend, and while it is unlikely that they will reach your level... I prefer to be ready ^^

EDIT:PS I love the pawns, I recently managed to use PFS as a reason to buy all the Bestiary Boxes, the NPC box and the Inner Sea Box (love the fact, that I now have the ACG pregens as proper pawns, in my experience pawns have a very positive effect on new players).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lou Diamond wrote:

Feral, I think you are missing my main point. PFS is a marketing tool for Paizo to get new players into the game and. To market its products to stablished gamers. If Mike and John piss off established gamers that sped $100 or more a month by banning good things from new material it will hurt the bottom line of Pazio's revenue stream. I do not want to see that happen as I like Pazio's high quality new material.

I do get miffed when I buy a product to use inPFS and things are banned before they are even tested. SLA's were banned for a good reason people were gaming the system with them to get into PRC's early.

Bears should start at medium and at 7th get a size advancement. No druid, ranger or hunter would take a cub adventuring AC's are not throw away meat shields and pc's who use them as such should be punished in game by their gods for doing so.

Might I suggest not buying material before you know how much of it will be PFS legal?

Some books will have only a very little material for players, and considering that this books is mostly about orcs, it could have ended up as an orc only option. And not even half-orcs can take those IIRC.

To end this with a constructive note, I think it would be reasonable to add the warcat to the number of animal companions unlocked by this feat (and allow hunters to use it, but that is another issue):

Monstrous Mount wrote:

You have learned how to tame and ride exotic beasts.

Prerequisite(s): Handle Animal 4 ranks; Ride 4 ranks; divine bond (mount), hunter's bond (animal companion), or mount class feature with an effective druid level of 4.

Benefit(s): You can select an exotic beast from the list of monstrous mounts to serve as your animal companion or special mount. You acquire and advance this creature in the same way as the mount or animal companion detailed in the class feature used as a prerequisite for this feat. You can also dismiss the creature as dictated by your class feature.

You must meet additional prerequisites to choose a creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher, as described in each creature's entry

The warcat is compairable to the

Griffon wrote:

Prerequisite(s): Diplomacy, Intimidate, or Handle Animal 5 ranks; Ride 5 ranks.

Starting Statistics

Size Large; Speed 30 ft., fly 40 ft. (average; unable to carry a rider while flying); AC +4 natural armor; Attack bite (1d6); Ability Scores Str 16, Dex 15, Con 16, Int 5, Wis 13, Cha 8; Languages Common (cannot speak); Special Qualities darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision, scent.

7th-Level Advancement

Speed 40 ft., fly 80 ft. (average; unable to carry a rider while flying); AC +2 natural armor; Attack bite (1d6), 2 talons (1d6); Ability Scores Str +2, Con +2; Special Attacks pounce, rake (1d6).

Actually I would not mind seeing adding a couple of other creatures to the feat, and it would be pretty easy. Just add

"The Warcat of Rull is only available to characters with the Monstrous Mount Feat"

1 to 50 of 1,899 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.