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

Shisumo's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 4,184 posts (12,293 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters. 21 aliases.


1 to 50 of 391 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rob Godfrey wrote:
can a Rondelero Swashbuckler use slashing grace? I mean does the buckler 'occupy the hand'? If so it seems a twf focused archetype would suffer.

Bucklers do not, in fact, "occupy the hand" for the purposes of Slashing Grace.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Child of AnA is the "arcane paladin" people have asked for off and on since before Pathfinder even came out.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The penalties from both Rapid Shot and spell combat apply to all your attacks in a given round. So any series of attacks that involve both Rapid Shot and spell combat will be at +6 across the board.

You can't get more than one attack on a turn where you use ranged spellstrike without also using spell combat, so there's no way to only use Rapid Shot and ranged spellstrike just by themselves.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm really not talking about Rule 0, no matter how much you might want to keep throwing up that strawman.

It comes down to one extremely simple point:

There are no rules for how NPCs gain levels or classes (outside of Leadership). None. No matter what method is involved, it is a house rule. Moreover, retraining is solely for PCs. (The retraining rules are written in the second person. NPCs are always referred to in the third person. PCs are always referred to in the second. That's a fundamental style guide rule.) You cannot point to "hard rules" for how easy or difficult it is to gain levels in any class for any non-cohort NPC, because they simply do not exist.

The only characters that have a chance to "break" a tech-level setting in a given campaign are the PCs, unless the GM decides that one or more NPCs are going to, and then they are going to do it regardless.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Heretek wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
Though I've not heard anybody claim that it's always better than a regual Investigator (unlike some other classes and archtypes).
It is though.

I'll go even further, actually. I think you need a pretty good and specific reason to make an investigator who is not an empiricist.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:


You're making the incorrect assumption that a wizard has to know WHY it works. Nope. He has to know HOW. If he knows HOW...he can cast.

The failure in this argument, Ael, is that you're also making an assumption here. The rules are completely silent on what is actually involved with learning to cast. They don't stipulate whether one could (as you suggested earlier) just rote-learn a single cantrip or if a thorough groundwork of magical theory is in fact required to cast even a 0-level spell. Easy or hard, it's GM fiat either way, because the rules are silent on the matter.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Krensky wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
On the bright side, none of them have turned you to crumbly stone stuff either.
They wouldn't.

Yeah, Bobbi expositioned that the human-petrifying metal was insoluble and sank to the bottom, while the Terrigen compound dissolved in the water and was absorbed by the sealife.

Krensky wrote:

Well...

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
Does anyone feel like going back through the last couple of Season 2 episodes to figure out who was in the room with it when it turned liquid before?
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
The SCOTUS made an admittedly unpopular decision, but that's their job, and one of the basic principles for the past two hundred years in the United States is that when a court, especially the SCOTUS, makes a decision you disagree with, the decision is still made and still binding.

See also: Bush vs Gore, Citizens United vs FEC.

Everyone remember the armed mob that stormed the White House to throw Bush out after the SCOTUS overreach in 2000? No?

You do realize that this is an argument for MORE mob decision making right? :)

No. It's really really not.

It's an argument for recognizing that the system is more than the individual acts of the current government or sitting justices. That the system, however flawed and imperfect it is or can be made to be, still remains just about the best version of a government we as a species have managed to put together - and that to try to toss it aside because one instance of it did something you don't approve of is to be fundamentally, even treasonously un-American.

In the short term, American republican democracy can be volatile, can be petty and cruel and deeply unfair. But in the long term, it has repeatedly proven itself capable of recognizing and addressing those flaws, as well as trying to build in safeguards against them happening again. But that only works if you give it time to work, for the consensus to build against those flaws. Once it does, though, it sticks... and we're generally a better people for it.

Toss that aside, and we lose the system. The real reason the American system of government survived the Revolution without becoming, say, 1790s France was that we had a rather miraculous collection of elites who believed in the system long enough to let it work, for the consensus to build around the system itself. Without that, you get guillotines. Or Ft Sumter.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
The SCOTUS made an admittedly unpopular decision, but that's their job, and one of the basic principles for the past two hundred years in the United States is that when a court, especially the SCOTUS, makes a decision you disagree with, the decision is still made and still binding.

See also: Bush vs Gore, Citizens United vs FEC.

Everyone remember the armed mob that stormed the White House to throw Bush out after the SCOTUS overreach in 2000? No?

Liberty's Edge

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Two issues here:

First of all, assuming she did in fact take the oath of office as described in the Kentucky constitution (a fun read - makes you wonder why everyone was busy shooting one another back then), she has already violated an oath she swore to God - i.e., to faithfully execute her office "according to law." Her "Heaven or Hell" choice has already passed.

Second of all, the paperwork she's supposed to sign does not endorse or even permit any marriage to take place. It merely certifies that the couple in question has met the legal requirements of Kentucky law to become married. So her "religious freedom" is not being burdened - she is not required to endorse the marriage in any way. It's not compelled speech, and she's not saying she likes it; she's checking a box that basically says, "old enough, not already married, paid the fee." That's it. The reason her First Amendment defenses keep getting shot down is that they simply don't apply here.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm trying to figure out how to say this gently, Rynjin.

They did.

Weapon cords now offer precisely the effect they were originally intended to at a cost that is in line with the benefit they offer.

I get that you don't like that. It's still a fact.

[EDIT: And no, this is not me kissing Paizo's ass. I've actually thought it was the right call for awhile.]

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The same logic that requires only things called out as ranged "weapons" would mean that we literally cannot calculate the attack bonus for any ranged attack that is not labeled as a ranged "weapon," because the rule for calculating that attack bonus uses the same language:

The PRD wrote:

With a ranged weapon, your attack bonus is the following:

Base attack bonus + Dexterity modifier + size modifier + range penalty

So I think we're over-parsing here as far as distinctions between what is and is not a a ranged weapon.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Dervish Dance is significantly less restrictive about the off-hand than Slashing Grace is. There's no reasonable way to get from "carrying a weapon or a shield" to spell combat.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DM Beckett wrote:
Its also worth noting that a Buckler works fine for Dervish Dance.

That's an awful lot of wiggling you're trying to fit through the word "carrying." I wouldn't expect that interpretation to fly at most tables.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am also very pleased to have gotten this for free. Your customer service and class remain top-notch.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Could just switch to fighter and start accumulating static bonuses to overcome the damage loss.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
everyone just vomits up answers pretending to be experts.

You do realize this is the internet, right? ;)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I was more hoping one of us was going to have to wear a dress for a disguise, on account of tactics, and have the opportunity to tell the pig guys, "Leave us alone or I swear by my pretty floral bonnet I will end you."

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Samy wrote:
Lemoncherry Candyapple wrote:
Awhile ago, I read a post here about a woman who was a new player to gaming, and so her concept was that she was a woman who was always told the whole 'barefoot and pregnant is all you are good for' shtick, but that she fought hard and rose above it to be an adventurer. The GM was like "uhh... that won't work... Golarion isn't like that"

This is an interesting sidetrack to me personally, because (*for me*) one of the most empowering ways to feel social justice is to combat injustice. But when that injustice doesn't exist, at least on-screen, it's sort of anticlimactic. I mean it's cool and all to have a world where everyone is equal, but at times, I'd like scenes where the bad guy is like, "woman, shut up!" and I shoot them in the head.

Of course, ultimately it comes down to what is fun for your table, and I usually give up on my desires to feel those sorts of scenes so the other people at the table can feel more comfortable.

You're right, those sorts of scenes should be built at the table level, where the GM knows his/her group and knows what they've come to do. For some groups, "I have a broadsword and a serious beef with the patriarchy" is exactly the escapism they're looking for; for others, it's more like "I have to put up with this **** all day in my 9-to-5, the last thing I want to deal with is the same thing in my fantasy." YMMV.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Really like the look of all four races. :D And I was already thinking about a tretharri monk before I even knew what the tretharri were...!

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mr. Bubbles wrote:
Liz Courts wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
How does one show identification as a man for a stereotypically male dominated profession like an adventurer where acting like "just one of the boys" is almost the norm?
Why are you making the assumption that adventuring is a male-dominated profession?
Why are you assuming it isn't?

...she's not. That would involve saying something like, "Adventuring is not a male-dominated profession."

Liberty's Edge **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Meligaster's PFS pregen is N, even though he's actually NE. Bumping Seltyiel "up" a notch the same way would just be following precedent.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

One of my friends and I were discussing whether there needed to be a PC-level "noble" class, sort of an upgraded aristocrat. My position was no, because we already had one. Charismatic, widely educated on many topics, capable of giving inspiring speeches to his allies, trained in swordplay, and with a smattering of useful magics he learned at the well-heeled academy he attended? Yeah, we can do that. Just cross out the word "bard" at the top of the page, write "noble" in its place, and bingo! All done.

Liberty's Edge **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The iconics for OA were specifically designed to showcase a wider range of humanity than they have typically done before, which is why we have a young human, an elderly human and an overweight human among them this time.

Liberty's Edge **

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

#thanksalain

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Flame Effigy wrote:

Hi there, just read through everything posted so far regarding new information and I have a couple of questions.

Does the Witch get anything? (Besides the leyline archetype)
Or at the very least, are there any Witch /related/ things?

Two new patrons: ethereal and mind. There's also a "voodoo doll" type magic item called a ganji doll that's got a very witch-y feel to it.

Flame Effigy wrote:
Are there any new options for familiars/intelligent magical items for old classes?

Not that I have seen.

Liberty's Edge **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

FWIW, Weapon Finesse and ancestral arms (EWP: Aldori dueling sword) make Seltyiel's listed statline make a whole lot more sense - and make his artwork a little more reasonable too...

Liberty's Edge **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
kinevon wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Alrighty. How's this?
It's nicely done. But PFS Judges still need to remember that the only pregens they are allowed to give out to players, are the official Paizo ones.

That is incorrect, and that argument has been done to death.

Up thread, Mike Brock even wrote:
First level characters and their builds are fine since we have rebuild rules in place
GMs and players have been handing newbies scraps of paper with scribbles on them for years. This is just a fancier version of a hastily scribbled 1st level character.
Then I have to say that campaign management has been giving us mixed signals. There was a document on the late and lamented PathfinderDB site that had 100 pregens of multiple mixes of race and character class. We would print out that document and let players pick out sheets for use as pregens until we were told to stop and stick to the official pregens.

And, as Mike mentioned, they are not pregens. They were prebuilt or sample characters, not PFS pregens.

And, IIRC, they had some issues, including illegal-for-PFS pieces in them. Add that they were hosted by a for-profit site, and things can get ugly.

Add-in that many of us, myself for one, couldn't get the section with the sample PCs to actually load up....

While I don't mean to distract the topic from Nefreet's excellent work here, I'd like to note that, as the guy who made those pregens, to the best of my knowledge they did not and do not include anything not PFS legal, and did have the Community Use boilerplate on the title page. They may well have had a few other issues - I've found a couple math errors over the years - but by and large there shouldn't be any reason those characters can't be used or distributed in the manner LazarX suggested. (They aren't pregens in the PFS sense of the term, though, as Mike notes, and are not presented as such in the document.)

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't even own any 5E books, but when I realized I could get the entire AP in 5E format for only $35 more than I was already paying for the PF one, I really couldn't see any reason not to do the upgrade. More gaming is best gaming!

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Do you really have enough stalkers to require an entire thread to put them in?

Does your SO know about this problem?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Vic Wertz wrote:
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
I MUST make a gnome or halfling Medium who escaped from prison.
Because Small Medium at Large?
Winner winner chicken dinner!
If the iconic medium ends up as a WizKids mini, he could be a Medium rare medium....

I don't suppose he's actually a multiclassed Medium rare commoner/medium?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TheAntiElite wrote:
Salazzar Slaan wrote:
Erasmus is channeling some serious Dr. Strange in that picture (possibly literally).

I was going to make a complicated math pun to tie all of this to the one and only Dr. Orpheus in an homage to the powers of the dead and spirited performance, with a dash of XKCD for good measure, but that would have been...

Too derivative.

Watch it, my friend. There are limits.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sara Marie wrote:
About to begin the initial launch of July's order spawning for non-pick up orders.

vibrating

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yeah, but you're cheating by being in the same narrative space.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
KahnyaGnorc wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

There really isn't a GOOD reason :P

Plenty of legitimate reasons, but none I'd classify as good.

"They don't fit with the story I want to tell" is about as good as they come.
Depends on the fluff wrapping around the mechanics, really.

Having to rewrite the fluff of a system to make it work with the story you want to tell is basically indistinguishable from "it doesn't work with the story I want to tell" for my purposes.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:

There really isn't a GOOD reason :P

Plenty of legitimate reasons, but none I'd classify as good.

"They don't fit with the story I want to tell" is about as good as they come.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You went there.

Boo, Erik. Boo.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

(To clarify: this story is smurfing amazing and it does absolutely nothing to curtail my need for a fully-fledged Vudra sourcebook - pretty much exactly the opposite, really)

Liberty's Edge

17 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

WHERE IS OUR VUDRA BOOK

GIVE IT TO MEEEEEE

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

As a guy playing someone with a masked identity (masked avenger swashbuckler) in Iron Gods right now, I can say with some authority that it neither requires taking over the campaign nor foisting an alternate identity on the rest of the group. It requires a certain amount of flexibility on the part of the player and some thought beforehand on why the PC would be interested in traveling with the rest of the party, but that's a good thing to do with any character, so I don't feel like it's demanding too much.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Legend lore tells us that characters of level 11 or above are "legendary," which is generally the point at which I start allowing Knowledge (local) rolls to know "specifics" of character's build (class, approximate level, noteworthy class abilities); this requires a roll against a DC of 15 ("particularly rare" creature) + CR, which is usually class level for PCs and class level -1 for NPCs, with better rolls granting more info as usual. Characters below that level can be recognized in their home communities with a Knowledge (local) roll, DC 15 + the community's Society modifier, but success grants only a name and a basic rep, nothing more.

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I often make a point of not avoiding them, if the opponent in question has no reason to know how the PC fights. I think it adds to the verisimilitude, if bad guys waste actions or attacks sometimes, the same way PCs sometimes do. (And do they ever... I remember once running a game for several players I didn't know very well. They were ambushed by two sorcerers, one of whom was an elf. One of the PCs, playing a slumber witch, announced she would use her hex on the elf. I stared, then finally asked, "Are you sure?" And she said yes, and the elf of course ignored the hex because it was an elf. Players, man, I tell ya...) If PCs sometimes get overconfident, make mistakes or simply take reasonable-seeming actions that turn out to be bad ideas because of things they couldn't know, I don't see why NPCs wouldn't do the same things sometimes.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

"In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is."

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

...Epic.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Alexander Augunas wrote:

Is it crazy enough to work? And if so, what should my vigilante identity's name be?

I kinda think you're obligated to go with El Zorro, man.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Awesome. Redemption stories are my favorite.

Liberty's Edge **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
GM Lamplighter wrote:

The idea that it rarely causes problems is frankly GM bias. Say a player delays - something that happens in almost every game I've ever been involved in. By moving all the goblins (or whatever) first and then rolling all of their attacks, you prevent the player from being able to come off delay after a goblin's attack or to react to the situation, which is what delay is for in the first place.

That's a completely different issue. If the monsters start to move and there's a delaying player, then ignoring that player's desire to step in is definitely a problem - but not one caused by grouping monsters together. That's a GM who's not paying attention to her players, and has nothing to do with the initiative issue; it'd be a problem regardless.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Deadkitten wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Barachiel Shina wrote:
They could simply have it where if you use an ability in social mode there is a chance of being found out. It could be a skill check against a DC by the viewer that rises higher as the Vigilante levels up, making it clear the character is gaining better experience at hiding it or misleading others. Success wouldn't mean you are found out, just that the viewer will have reason to believe there's more to you, and possibly a connection, to the "alter ego."
Yeah, this is one of the ideas we've been bandying around. We have several exciting potential ideas moving forward, but this is one of my favorites.
I'm just gonna go ahead and say, you should not have a class feature that is HARDER to use as you increase in level. If anything you should be getting better at it.

I think Barachiel is saying that it gets harder for others to ID you, not for you to hide.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Chess Pwn's got it. We're making sure we can't break (brake?) the combat side of the class, so they've only given us the combat pieces to work on.

That said, I think it would incredibly cool if each talent choice actually gave you two talent choices - one social, one vigilante - that switch off as you swap personas. There's no sign of that in the playtest at the moment (and why would there be, since we have no social talents to playtest) but I think that might make the identity make a great deal more impact on the character.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:

So the Vigilante by its very nature forces:

-The campaign to be a heavily social campaign

...which is why it's in the social campaign sourcebook.

Rynjin wrote:
-The campaign to be primarily set in a single city.

Not in the slightest. In the worst case scenario - a highly-mobile campaign, where the PCs rarely stop anywhere for more than a day or two - he loses one of his class features. Otherwise, when he's got time, he can move his renown around while the wizard is crafting.

Rynjin wrote:
-The campaign to almost never have social situations devolve into...anything else.

...because he's suddenly without his martial weapon proficiency and BAB? His light or medium armor?

Are fighters not allowed to get ambushed at night unless they have a way to sleep in armor?

Rynjin wrote:

But wait! Now we have a choice:

-The rest of the characters in the party to hang around the Vigilante's social persona in everything he does.

or

-The Vigilante to be in his own little solo game apart from everyone else.

Setting aside the issue that "social encounters" tend to be solo encounters for the party face regardless, how the party handles their vigilante companion is likely to vary significantly from vigilante to vigilante; it's certainly not something that the game forces on us. Even beyond the false dilemma, the idea that the vigilante persona and the social persona know each other and associate with the same set of people is actually incredibly common in the source material (is Seoni in love with Miles Castle, the wealthy patron of the party, or with the dashing avenger Whiplash who leads their dungeon explorations? Oh, if only she knew they were the same man!), so I don't really understand why "the partying [hanging] around the vigilante's social persona" is such a terrible thing.

Rynjin wrote:

And you don't see anything wrong with this?

...Not so far, no.

1 to 50 of 391 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 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.