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

Serisan's page

FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 2,729 posts (2,742 including aliases). 3 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 14 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,729 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Serisan wrote:
I wanted to bust in with "All the Psychic Ladies," but I lack the patience and artistry to do it justice.
How about "Divine Dudes" and "Psychic Androgynes?"

But then there's no Beyonce reference.


I wanted to bust in with "All the Psychic Ladies," but I lack the patience and artistry to do it justice.

***

First off, I'm writing this during a preliminary read-through. Wow. This is absolutely amazing. Great work, Thurston.

PFS Prep users: I have uploaded Hero Lab portfolio files to the site for both Kaarim and Imlathre in subtier 12-13. Modifying them for 14-15 shouldn't be that difficult, but they are a slight bit messy looking for validation errors. The numbers should all be right or very close to it and assume the written Before Combat tactics occur.

Some questions:

Pg 12: Does the Enhanced Magic trait replace the normal effects (+2 CL on select spells) with the Quickened effect, or is it supplemented?

Pg 12: For the subjective directional gravity, are players assumed to default to down = land upon unwilling entry?

subjective directional gravity:
Subjective Directional Gravity: The strength of gravity on a plane with this trait is the same as on the Material Plane, but each individual chooses the direction of gravity's pull. Such a plane has no gravity for unattended objects and nonsentient creatures. This sort of environment can be very disorienting to the newcomer, but it is common on "weightless" planes.

Characters on a plane with subjective directional gravity can move normally along a solid surface by imagining "down" near their feet. If suspended in midair, a character "flies" by merely choosing a "down" direction and "falling" that way. Under such a procedure, an individual "falls" 150 feet in the first round and 300 feet in each succeeding round. Movement is straight-line only. In order to stop, one has to slow one's movement by changing the designated "down" direction (again, moving 150 feet in the new direction in the first round and 300 feet per round thereafter).

It takes a DC 16 Wisdom check to set a new direction of gravity as a free action; this check can be made once per round. Any character who fails this Wisdom check in successive rounds receives a +6 bonus on subsequent checks until he or she succeeds.

Pg 19: Magic Vestment is not prepared or listed as a scroll/oil. Is Kaarim's armor just magical, as suggested by the Other Gear?


Boon Companion wrote:

Benefit: The abilities of your animal companion or familiar are calculated as though your class were 4 levels higher, to a maximum effective druid level equal to your character level. If you have more than one animal companion or familiar, choose one to receive this benefit. If you lose or dismiss an animal companion or familiar that has received this benefit, you may apply this feat to the replacement creature.

Special: You may select this feat more than once. The effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a different animal companion or familiar.

That bold wording is critical. It's not that the companion is boosted by up to 4 CL. Your Courtly Hunter level is treated as 4 higher. VERY big difference.

***

I would be totally ok with this as a GM or fellow player at your table. It's a great way to drive engagement in the events of the scenario.


As a player, if I found out that the method of destruction was overly complicated, I would simply follow ye olde 2500gp solution: buy a bag of holding, put the horn in it, and rupture the sucker.

Quote:
If a bag of holding is overloaded, or if sharp objects pierce it (from inside or outside), the bag immediately ruptures and is ruined, and all contents are lost forever.

Problem solved...at least for my lifetime. That's the glory of nondimensional spaces, as well as extradimensional spaces.


Press the GM to allow you to make Knowledge (local) or Diplomacy checks to gather information so you can find out their names from other sources. The DCs might be kind of high at lower level, but as characters become higher level, the DCs should go down as they gain notoriety. Once you find out the name (or what people have been referring to them as), start using that in-character.

If nobody knows the PCs names, then clearly they should have a reputation as being murderers and would be known by some alias. PCs don't exist in a vacuum, after all.

***

Pirate Rob wrote:
Fame does not limit Always Available items.

In fact, if they were limited by Fame, they wouldn't be Always Available.

***

andreww wrote:
Can you tell us if the new seeker content has a hard mode? I thought I read a rumour which suggested that was the case.

The fact that it has a 14-15 subtier isn't hard mode enough? Sure, players have a lot of capacity in that subtier, but you can do some fun things in a monster budget with that.

***

Thurston Hillman wrote:
Serisan wrote:
I'm totally stoked to start prepping 7-20. Running it on May 7th for a table in the MN lodge. I look forward to devouring those sweet, sweet digital pages.
The pages look forward to devouring your player's characters.

A fact that I'm sure Jolene also finds SO VERY EXCITING.

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm totally stoked to start prepping 7-20. Running it on May 7th for a table in the MN lodge. I look forward to devouring those sweet, sweet digital pages.

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's all the information you'll ever need about animal companions in PFS.

***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


It's 'Always available (+1, legit special material)' but when I went to buy it with my gold piled up(5400 gold), I was told I could only buy the mithril breastplate (4400 gold) due to Fame restrictions, by a 5-star GM. So I had to buy the breastplate one scenario and then add the +1 the next...

Interesting. I've been told many times that the Fame requirement is based on total value of the item, not the upgrade cost. So you'd have to wait for total fame to meet the total value of the item.

Anyway, yes, completely confusing. Please Separate the methods of purchase so it's very clear what can be purchased with what.

The issue here is that none of the things mentioned should require any Fame. Everything is on the Always Available list.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

See, I just use Profession to make inappropriate jokes at the table. Why yes, my Lamashtan Cleric has ranks in Profession: Childcare.

***

Indeed! Who would not want to be part of this? Though perhaps even bigger this year! I still have fond memories of our high-tier table for that special silencing the entire room to see if there were any Caydenites with Create Ale handy.

"WE NEED A BEER!"

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Mystic Mickey wrote:

So uh...hey guys. Mystic Mickey with the Sick Sticky Icky here. I'm happy to report that the Society now considers me a Seeker after handing out some FAT blunts to some giants in the Land of the Linnorm Kings.

Mystic Mickey - Human Psychic 12, psychedelia discipline

:)

For reference, Flayleaf is 20gp for 2 lbs. There is no reference for what a dose entails. I was making .5 lbs joints for these giants.

***

Something I'd like to see clarified:

Pg 25 - Spellcasting Services
Are spells purchased as described in the relevant CRB entries restricted to the Fame cap? The Fame and Prestige section nebulously refers to resources from the faction, then items you can purchase with gold. If I want to stop at the local temple and purchase a Remove Disease casting (not scroll or potion) for 150gp, can I do that with 4 or fewer Fame?

There are other restrictions placed on spellcasting services in the entry, but it doesn't address Fame at all, despite being on the same page as the Fame purchase limit chart. My inclination is that it is not restricted to Fame, but a clarifying sentence would be appreciated.

***

Hmm wrote:

Being a librarian, I looked up 'virility'. It's a complicated word with a complicated history. If you leave off the troublesome implications of gender and fertility (as I intend to do so as a female GM from this Lodge) it's also a word associated with such positive ideas as vigor, health, sturdiness and constitution.

I do like the concept of describing the Minnesota lodge by its combined vigor. We have a lot of positive energy, and we not only enjoy having fun, but we like to give back to the community at large.

So let's take our feet out of our collective mouths (because really, it would violate health code regulations) and concentrate on what makes this convention wonderful.

This is Skål Con 2016! We promise you pirates! We promise you excellent food! We promise you a big-hearted energetic community of gamers who will run a well-organized event, and raise money for charity at the same time.

Come join us, one and all!

Hmm

That'd be the spirit under which my comment was intended.

***

John Compton wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Isn't that what this Game is about? Diceyness?
There's diceyness, and then there's diceyness. This conversation is veering into territory (i.e. the intimate prowess of anyone—Paizo staff or otherwise) that is irrelevant to convention planning and doesn't really belong on our messageboards.

My apologies for the offense. It was not intended.

***

jon dehning wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

One of Clinton's two retired scenarios will be available.

We hope any way. It will depend on how well the cornering of one Mr. John Compton goes at Paizo Con.

I think there is no man or woman alive who can stand up to the combined virility of the MN lodge.


The only thing you'd be missing here is that the Improved Familiar feat has never been modified from the original Core printing and requires an Arcane Caster Level for any selections. There are, to my knowledge, no errata, FAQs, or developer posts that indicate that your effective wizard level for the familiar counts towards the requirement on Improved Familiar.


Honestly, Kifaru, I figured you'd be done abusing teamwork feats with the retirement of King.


Kifaru wrote:

Isn't there a class that allows you to teach your team members a feat by practicing with them for ten minutes, or something like that.

I can't find it now, so maybe my memory is deceiving me.

Drill Instructor, from a cavalier archetype called Strategist. That ability is 4 levels deep and pretty terrible, honestly, unless you can expect every encounter to be in a short distance from each other. You spend 10 minutes prepping, then it lasts for 10 + 1/2 cavalier level minutes for the cost of a Challenge, as well as breaking if you go around a corner because it requires both being seen and heard.

***

Jack Brown wrote:
Considering that's the weekend of my fiftieth birthday, I will just go with "old"

Will you be sporting the ol' Ambrus Valsin facial hair again? I suppose that we won't know until after Gen Con, huh?

***

I was at the Radisson last year and it was a pleasant experience. My only experiences with RRI are via reports from others of bad experiences or news stories about drug busts/murders.

Honestly, the Radisson is just as close, but there's a divider wall instead of a street.

***

Will there be a re-balding or some other enticement? You know how we like enticements.


Hmm wrote:

I have to admit that I was looking at the Dandy, the Courtly Hunter, and Fey Speaker Druid. The Dandy's favored nation bonus is so narrow I'm not sure it will see much use. So, I'm now looking more strongly at the Courtly Hunter and the Fey Speaker Druid. I was disappointed that the Courtly Hunter does not get a shift to Charisma-based casting along with all the other shifts, and the loss of teamwork feats is a bit daunting. Serisan, would you be willing to talk about how you would build / play one? Because I'd love to do a more diplomatic hunter type!

Hmm

Nothing terribly surprising, really. No dips, maybe use an aasimar boon so Celestial Servant is an option for the companion. I'd probably play similar to Zara/Pumpkin - animal for attacking, character for talking/casting - but still able to bring the critter into places without using Carry Companion. I'd probably do a stat array close to 8/10/12/14/16/14 before racial modifiers.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The easiest way to address this, in my experience, is for the GM to hand out notecards at the beginning of the session, ask the players to pre-roll the secret rolls, and record them on the cards. Just say "I need you each to give me 20d20 on this card." Also have the players provide a couple modifiers - perception, sense motive, etc. on the card for reference. As rolls are utilized, the GM just crosses them off in order.

I understand where your GM is coming from. Some players tend to metagame the hell out of some rolls and Perception is the biggest offender, by far. That said, the downside here is that you have to trust your GM enough to not "dramatically" pick the garbage rolls out of order. Sometimes, that's a big problem for a group. It all depends.


And here I thought this was just going to be about the highly suggestive writing of the archetype.

You might consider the Courtly Hunter as another option that will better meld with most PFS scenarios for the bulk of its class features. The main difference would be that you wouldn't get the slow Bard progression of spells that the Dandy gets, but you'd still have a lot of the social benefits, though they're more likely to be impactful as the Courtly Hunter.


Played this in a PFS group yesterday in a 10 hour marathon session. Excellent module, tons of fun to be had. I'd love to see more content from Mike in the future.

A couple of the encounters seemed like throw-ins that didn't really contribute much to the plot. Overall, we had some incredible melee synergy with reach that negated a number of issues and trivialized those encounters. Most combat bent towards Good-aligned resolutions, which was highly satisfying.

***

Pirate Rob wrote:
Carla the Profane wrote:
Pirate Rob wrote:
Carla the Profane wrote:
I really like how 3 people so far mentioned profession (Midwife)... I hope there will be an opportunity to use my day job in a scenario some day!
There totally is.
:O What! Which one?
** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
Actually, it's part 3. Part 2 is "I'm on a boat." I don't think there's anything a PC with that profession could contribute to that issue, though.
***

Thank you, Tonya

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Torgerud wrote:
We are very passionate for our games and for each other.

AWWWWWWW YISSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.

You forgot to include the beer, though.

***

Slow/normal track is determined on a per-scenario basis now, so yes.


They effectively did decide not to pursue it further, which is a shame. For the problems within the optional rules, they were still more balanced and interesting than standard casting. Notably, it had a SIGNIFICANT impact in differentiating the sorceror and wizard classes.

I would have loved to see more content here, but unfortunately it was an optional system that didn't get the same traction as the Stamina system.

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh, the stories of my Lamashtan cleric with Profession: Childcare...

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jolene Danner wrote:

This doesn't just make me sad. It also makes me angry. I work 2 jobs, organize a game day of 4-5 tables every Saturday, Moderate for 2 large Twitch channels and find the time with 6 other people to organize our 2 major and multiple minor conventions in MN every year. One of those conventions that I put my precious little time into is now a game day?

It's a game day because instead of renting a hotel space and making people spend $300 for the weekend on a room plus con fees we worked with one of our local stores and rented the Event Center attached to their retail space from them.

To make sure we get support, since after estimating the numbers in the region we're in it's only about 4% of the game days every 1/4 that get upgraded to Game Days, we'd have to leave the Event Center at the game store that you're worried about making angry and move to a hotel space or Somewhere else that doesn't sell Products?

This seems counter productive.

//

Us: We'd like to reserve this space again this year because you guys were so awesome last year and people had fun! We raised $3700+ for our charity and everyone felt good about what we did!

Store: Yeah come back you guys are the best!!

*new convention policy*

Us: Oh hey sorry store we can't be a convention there now so we need to take our rental fee and all that money we made you in food/drink/product sales last year elsewhere to make sure we get convention status so our GM's and players get boons for all the work they do. Paizo said this isn't a convention anymore.

Store: RAWR WHAT?!?!

Us: Sorry, bye bye. Uh we can still play here for game days right? I mean...

//

We need more options than just no cons in retail space. Nothing is ever as black and white as it appears and cookie cutter-ing this isn't the right answer.

Let's not forget the fact that the store in question has a better event space for PFS conventions than most hotels. I'm not convinced that I should go back to CotN as a local convention, but I definitely want to go back to Skal Con. CotN was hidden away from conference amenities in a cramped space. It was a subpar experience as an attendee because we were a sliver of the convention action. On top of that, from everything I've heard, it's significantly more arduous work for our organizers.

Skal Con was a smashing success because a lot of the problems that come up from being part of some other event weren't there. PFS was the star of the show, so we had a convention room in a store to ourselves. The kitchen was scarcely 100 feet away and served more than frozen pizza and hot dogs - it's a friggin' gourmet kitchen! People traveled from other regions to play and GM. We had special access to a retired scenario run by its author. We could hear our GMs and players at each table without making them shout over the entire room.

This is not a game day. This is a convention. Compare that to this and tell me if you can tell the difference.


Use an extended Object Possession, Greater on an Adamantine Golem.

*cough*


A couple notes from someone who has GM'd the entire dungeon:

Underground is most appropriate. Most levels are urban, but not all. All levels are underground after the first.

As Imbicatus mentioned, the loophole is closed for Favored Terrain so the rogue talent is worthless. That said, you can still get plenty of mileage out of a more standard build of Horizon Walker with a modest Favored Terrain bonus.

You will not get much mileage out of FE: Evil Outsider...at all. Your best choice is Construct. There is a construct on virtually every floor.

***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think I could possibly stay mad at that pup.

***

You can certainly bring a portable altar for Hierophant. I recommend the darkwood masterwork version (Demon Hunter's Handbook).


You might also consider the Metamorph Alchemist from Ultimate Intrigue. Hour/lvl Alter Self at level 1 that scales into the Monstrous Physique and Giant Form chains as you level, replacing alchemy. You still get Mutagen.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Pathfinder is definitely imbalanced, always has been. I think the basis of this has been well hashed out in this thread thus far. I do not expect this to change unless there is a significant business need to do so. The game is held back by legacy concerns, absolutely atrociously written early material, and design staff that are seemingly not interested in moving on to more modern "RPG technology." Addressing these items is a significant risk to the platform and market position.

I think the legacy concerns are self-evident. This thread has significantly covered the imbalances in the CRB. Core spells are among the least balanced in the entire system and frequently the most ambiguously powerful. Consider the fact that Ultimate Intrigue has several pages devoted to "Spells of Intrigue" that clarifies CRB spells almost exclusively. Other elements of the game have also been addressed in later releases with limited success. Pathfinder Unchained introduced replacement subsystems to address perceived holes in game design, including the Stamina subsystem to allow martials to do more with their feats. In both cases, these were effectively errata and FAQs masquerading as new content, filling holes that have been known since 3.5's heyday.

This brings me to point 2: the CRB is the worst-written book in Pathfinder. To be fair, this was at a point when Paizo simply did not have the resources that they have today. Paizo is a fundamentally different company today than they were when the CRB came out in 2009. I cannot stress that point enough. Still, there are significant grievances to be had with the CRB. Needless variation in language muddles important concepts. Entire sections of rules were left out. Because of the need at release to maintain ties with 3.5 content, incredibly little was done to address concerns other than slapping a couple extra things on classes (i.e. feats more frequently, prohibited schools to opposition, etc.). As releases became successful, the quality of the writing increased dramatically. None of that, though, makes up for the fact that the system is running on bandages and duct tape.

What this all circles back to, though, is a design team where there are new, interesting ideas from some and old, tired ideas from others. There is no more perfect example of this than the Psychic class. I say this as someone with a level 11 Psychic in PFS. The Psychic is the pinnacle of lazy design. It is a phoned-in Sorceror with the serial number filed off. It's a "good" class for two reasons only: (1) it's a 9-level caster that (2) has a lot of CRB spells on its list. This is to say that it's a "good" class for the same reasons that Sorcerors, Wizards, Clerics, and Druids are "good" - it's imbalanced. It's a continuation of the same bad design choices made before Pathfinder was written. When you compare that to the Kineticist, which has riskier gambits within the game's framework, it's pretty clear that there's a divide between original design concepts and "stay safe to the core" design. This is a fundamental problem frequently caused by clique formation and echo chambers of ideas.

With all that said, though, there's little reason for Paizo to stop doing what they're doing. The game is, in some aspects, imbalanced in all the wrong ways, but the appeal of the game remains marketable. There is insufficient fiscal inducement to change the game address these issues. I still open my wallet to them, after all, and so do thousands of other people. As long as Paizo remains profitable and growing (or even profitable and stable), I wouldn't expect the lingering issues to be properly addressed.

tl;dr: It's not the new stuff that's broken. It's the old stuff and old people.

***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Serisan wrote:
why would you ever give Amiri over Crowe?
Because maximum optimization is not the end-all, be-all of character design

Is your goal to allow the new player to feel like they're contributing? I find that is typically key to a fun experience. How about minimizing the amount of math they have to do, which intimidates a lot of players?

Amiri is flavorful and interesting. So is Crowe. The difference, especially for first level, is that Crowe is also easier to use and generally more effective. Crowe doesn't scare people away from the game. As Keith pointed out, as well, later iterations of Crowe also introduce additional concepts in bite-sized portions, which is appropriate for a new player. Crowe's design is the equivalent of Mario 1-1 as a tutorial.

***

UndeadMitch wrote:
Serisan wrote:


UndeadMitch wrote:
I oppose any change that would make scenarios more of a stamp it out cookie cutter format, including uniform gold for scenarios / subtiers.
Is your feeling that the RGG needs to be updated to remove the "requirement" of reviewing player math by the GM?

My feeling is that this is another non-issue being stirred up because why not? Different areas will do things differently, and that is okay.

Edit: Tried to make post less accusatory.

Have you ever met a GM who follows steps 9 and 10 as written? That's my entire point in bringing this up.

Organized play is predicated on everyone following the rules. This specific section of rules is one that I've seen universally ignored. It is my opinion that players and GMs are more likely to follow the rules in this case if some sort of process accommodation is made. I think the rules here make sense and should be followed if possible.

***

BigNorseWolf wrote:

I don't think this works because you can't assume that you won't miss something or get full gold.

Step 9 refers to a part of the chronicle sheet that no longer exists. If that isn't a clear sign that that part of the rules is an apendix they forgot to take out I don't know what is.

I'm looking at the diagram right now. Step 9 references I, M-O, and S-T. Those correspond to Experience Final Total (I), Prestige Spent, Prestige, and Fame (M-O), then Gold Spent and Total (S-T). Not sure what you're referring to here.

UndeadMitch wrote:
I oppose any change that would make scenarios more of a stamp it out cookie cutter format, including uniform gold for scenarios / subtiers.

Is your feeling that the RGG needs to be updated to remove the "requirement" of reviewing player math by the GM?

***

Fromper wrote:
Agreed with Jason S. Let's update the published procedure to match the reality of what 99.9% of PFS players and GMs currently do.

I agree that, generally speaking, rules and actions should match. My interpretation here is that the rule is fine, but the processes surrounding it are not. Given that this is organized play, it makes sense to have "mini-audits" on a chronicle basis to ensure everyone is on a level playing field. The problem is that the process is onerous - players cannot reasonably anticipate their purchases and most players won't want to immediately make their purchases at the table, which is what the current rules require.

For the record, I absolutely hate the "reduce gold by x" sections in scenarios. In my mind, we're getting paychecks rather than selling the gear. I understand the logic there, too, but that creates some pretty big headaches.

Yuri Sarreth wrote:
And lets not forget Fame limits guys.. You need the 300 gold for your next neat toy and 2 fame to buy that level.. oops you only got 1 fame this time.. Guess you have to wait..

I have no sympathy for players on Fame limits, especially since you can rapidly reach a point where you're completely neglecting your other gear slots if you're bumping up against the Fame limit, even on the assumption of 3/4 Prestige earned. The only time that Fame stood in my way past 22 was the race to 40 Fame for Staff of the Master. That is to say that Fame, for many characters, is not a limitation on purchases past level 5. For many of my characters, it's not a concern past 9 Fame.

Sure, there are going to be screwballs thrown at players in the course of adventures that may alter their purchases. Maybe you need a Raise Dead or you diminished a critical stock of consumables that just have to be replaced immediately. Still, you'd at least know what you need to do then and have an idea of what you're looking at when the chronicles are being handed out.

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is a silly frustration, but a frustration nonetheless.

Roleplaying Guild Guide, pgs 37-38 wrote:

Step 9: Have the player finish the calculations on the righthand

side of the Chronicle sheet (sections I, M–O and S–T).
Step 10: Review the completed Chronicle sheet and check
the player’s math. Ensure that the character has access to any
items bought and that the correct costs were paid. Verifying
this information now helps prevent errors from going
unnoticed on future Chronicle sheets. Once you’re satisfied
with the information on the Chronicle sheet, fill in the gray
box at the bottom of the sheet and sign (W).

Of note, sections S and T refer to the Gold Spent and Total boxes. Thus, according to the RGG, a GM should not sign a chronicle until the player has made all their purchases associated with the chronicle. There are two ways to address this as written:

  • Scenario 1: The player knows in advance what they're purchasing, deducts the appropriate gold and notes it on their ITS, and the GM signs off. I know literally zero GMs or players who do this.
  • Scenario 2: The player fills in S and T including only purchases and sales made during the scenario, then determines purchases after the session and records it on their ITS to the next chronicle. Again, I know literally zero players who do this.

So, if Step 9 and Step 10 are written as intended, which they seem to have very rational explanations included for requiring (i.e. session to session auditing), it would seem that the only logical thing to do would be to provide a more streamlined expectation set so that players know what they will buy in advance.

And so, the suggestion:
Have a set, non-varied gold value for each subtier.

This doesn't resolve every problem, mind you. Out-of-subtier play, for example, is still slightly messy, but if I know that my level 1 character will get either exactly 500gp or exactly 1000gp, I can confidently plan purchases in advance. I also don't have to worry about "trap chronicles" with gold values significantly lower than average. The net result of this is a greater likelihood of Scenario 1 above actually happening meaning that, even at conventions, I could actually follow the rules in the RGG for filling out chronicles.

Example of a trap chronicle:
0-16 To Scale the Dragon, which has less gold at the 8-9 subtier (lolol 3531gp) than the out of subtier total for more recent 5-9 scenarios (as mentioned in the next spoiler, one example has 3971gp for out of subtier in a 5-9).

What do I mean by non-varied gold? (Spoiler for 7-13 Captive in Crystal):
Looking at 7-13 Captive in Crystal, the gold tiers are 2534, 3971, and 5408. Why not instead say that a 5-6 subtier scenario is worth 2500gp, an 8-9 is worth 5500gp, and out-of-subtier characters receive 4000gp? This could then be templated across all scenarios in that level bracket.

Ultimately, this isn't a request for OMG MOAR GOLD, but instead more predictable gold that allows players and GMs to follow the expectations of the Roleplaying Guild Guide.

***

I am currently sitting on a few blobs, myself, and recently spun one up to a real character. My tendency is to have a character shell in Hero Lab that I enter the chronicles on as I GM, but wait to make purchases until the final GM chronicle. It makes the math easier. As Jeff said, though, I thus limit myself to one prestige purchase.

1 to 50 of 2,729 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.