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

TetsujinOni's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,062 posts (1,074 including aliases). 3 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 17 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,062 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Yeah, entirely broken in the hands of a swashbuckler. If the Swashbuckler version read "If a swashbuckler wearing the cloak of feinting performs the superior feint deed and uses one of this cape's charges..." instead, it'd be amazing but not banhammer land.

Sigh.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

My recollection is that it was scheduled long before the faction slide dance off was...

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
thistledown wrote:
What book is planned to include the vanities for the new factions? Anyone know?

Guide to Organized Play v 6.0 at Page 18 says to use the old vanities for now. Nothing on the schedule includes something which seems likely to feature PFS faction vanities. Some non-PFS fluff for the new factions could be a cool book, I think, but I'm not sure on the sell rate of such.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Check out the Guide to Organized Play v6 page 18 - Scarab Sages can still take the Risen vanity.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Sorting banners was on last years gripe list. This year's too. Its a place we can improve but it will require a bigger Tuesday working party or borrowing warehouse's time to unroll reroll and repack with ordering tags on the banner containers.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Could be a combo of the dropbox client having stalled on the computer they prepped the chronicles on, and it not having pushed into the cloud yet. (I sync five computers across dropbox, it's rare that this happens, but it's also bloody silent.... "Why isn't that updated? it's right here, why isn't it there...."

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Actually, I think there's now three or four people working through the stack of events (thanks to the new Delegated Reporting facility for events)

There are around 1500 tables to enter data for. I know my GM records have all but 3 of my events already, so they're WAY ahead of last year's input rate for Tueday after the show.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Also: no, mass combat is not a normal initiative round. It's better to be able to choose where the murderball happens than it is to try to rush to get there in time, due to the order of operations in mass combat being movement, then all combats.

We've GOT a PDF in Paizo's hands that has that map scaled for PC mini bases, as well as a 4-up version that fits in staples print-to-store and includes a double set of the bunker map rebuilt. $20 sets up 4 GMs for a local convention with two needing to handle the bunker map themselves...

But we're still waiting for Chris the Robot to get the approvals to get the stuff posted.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
thistledown wrote:
I've got my own set of Stonelord statblocks done up in herolab, but I haven't updated for final draft yet.

I used herolab, but I didn't strip unused sources and push the portfolios, just did a HTML => Word => PDF production chain and posted my results.

These two threads are no longer useful as they reference the prerelease version.

http://pfsprep.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?382
http://pfsprep.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?317

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

I will miss some of the tier 10-11 encounters from the PaizoCon special - one of them was a lot of fun and made my table work! (With two pounce eidolon builds, that was a definite change).

That said - I *love* this, I am just worried about the noise level for part 5.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
Just an FYI, the 1-2 stat blocks for Stonelords was not the final version. She used the playtest, so they are not complete

I have also uploaded my prep of all the stat blocks, because I said I would, so they're all there.

Rob, if you could kill the incorrect one, that'd be great....

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
TetsujinOni wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:

I think this is a fantastic idea, but I would like to make one request.

If you are going to help with Stonelords since you have the PaizoCon/PaizConUK version now, and wont bother updating it with the Gencon version, dont bother doing it at all.

I say this as a GM who ended up using incorrect stats for monsters in last years special, because whoever made the document didnt update it. This surely sounds like Im complaining about the quality of free stuff, but when neveryone is supposed to be playing the same thing, YES, it does matter.

That said, despite that I am only running one scenario during the whole con, and it isnt one of those listed above, I appreciate all the help people give by doing this.

I will probably just generate new tier-specific portfolios because I haven't heard an update from Lone Wolf about a fix for my large portfolio export-statblock buffer clipping problem.

I had an email exchange with Lone Wolf about this bug report. It's going to be Significant Effort to fix, but there's a workaround that I can use to generate the stat block PDFs. They will be in nominal PFRPG stat block format - not the HL character sheet style.

I'll be working on that as soon as the update drops.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

City or state laws that he doesn't want to have to deal with brushing up against limits on would be the first thing that comes to mind.

Cheliax ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
hxcmike wrote:
Tim Statler wrote:

Wow hxcmike, by Sunday I doubt it will still be Assault. By then It will be battery.

yeah, variety would be nice, since i only get a character credit for it once, but at the same time I'm glad to be able to cut down prep time. I just hope by Sunday, I'm still filling a table for this scenario

HXCMike, I did a pretty extensive batch of sheets that expands the handout that players get into a more manageable set of unit cards. It's on the PFSPrep site.

There's also a sized-to-fit-PC-minis version of the hex map that I've gotten into Paizo's hands that can be printed at Staples, or I will bring mine with me if I can get it back from you by the end of the con...

Have fun with Assault, it's fun if you get into it.

Cheliax

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

npc codex Iconics section link is missing from both the main page and the sidebar navigation index.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

about the only way I can see to get good use out of the uprooters (though they also have sniper, so they can melee AND shoot, iirc)

Cheliax ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Potentially dangerous tactic to PC armies in the second engagement is to have the dretch armies in the murderball take Disengage checks (which only require checks against the armies engaging them), and then focus ranged on a single PC army until burnt to a crisp.

There's SOME subtlety in the ruleset for tactically minded folks. I didn't have as much trouble presenting it in-line with the game and keeping it moving.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Precomputation tables of "dice results, numbers, done" are entirely achievable.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
Seth Gipson wrote:

I think this is a fantastic idea, but I would like to make one request.

If you are going to help with Stonelords since you have the PaizoCon/PaizConUK version now, and wont bother updating it with the Gencon version, dont bother doing it at all.

I say this as a GM who ended up using incorrect stats for monsters in last years special, because whoever made the document didnt update it. This surely sounds like Im complaining about the quality of free stuff, but when neveryone is supposed to be playing the same thing, YES, it does matter.

That said, despite that I am only running one scenario during the whole con, and it isnt one of those listed above, I appreciate all the help people give by doing this.

I will probably just generate new tier-specific portfolios because I haven't heard an update from Lone Wolf about a fix for my large portfolio export-statblock buffer clipping problem.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

I have a herolab portfolio with all of the Legacy statblocks. I found that there's a bug in the stat block exporter when it goes over a certain number of characters in the output buffer....

but I should be able to work around that to get all of Legacy's tiers posted.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
Andrew Christian wrote:
Pirate Rob wrote:

Probably a slight misunderstanding of:

CRB wrote:
Friend: You can move through a square occupied by a friendly character, unless you are charging. When you move through a square occupied by a friendly character, that character doesn't provide you with cover.

No. My understanding of the rule of soft cover, is that it only provides an AC bonus vs ranged attacks. That it otherwise does not act as cover and thus does not stop an AoO.

Otherwise a wizard could stand in the 5' square behind his 2 fighter friends and not have to make concentration checks to cast defensively against an Ogre.

Oddly, I think that's exactly why his fighter friends would stand there instead of flanking Mr. Ogre.

You think that's a design flaw, I think that's the intended design...

Cheliax ****

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

I would wish to remove the class of players who call for the removal of character classes from PFS.

Looking at the repetitive posts decrying the non-open races, or non-open archetypes, and wondering why we would ever contemplate adding non-open Paizo base/core classes.... No.

Just no.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Be sure to bring a character you want to play in a leadership scenario.

I would ABSOLUTELY accept photocopies as long as they are on the right PFS#. No different than printing the scanned and emailed online chronicles, or scanning and stashing your chronicles where you can recover them if your traveling binder(s) get destroyed.

Come on people. Photocopies of chronicles, including boon chronicles, including the damn signatures, shouldn't be an issue in 2014.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

not gridding that up, Chris?

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
Rerednaw wrote:


Not a big deal I did this as a volunteer when asked by others to ensure folks were having a good time. I did ask that I report the sessions myself when I was at the con in order to reduce their workload and was firmly instructed that the organizers would have it taken care of.

They need your events included in their reporting totals so that they can continue getting the con exclusives and con support shipments for prizes, boons, etc.

Definitely seems like an issue if they're still having problems reporting your tables, though.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
redward wrote:
TetsujinOni wrote:
redward wrote:

To further muddy the waters, I'm not sure the creature could move, grapple, and then move with the familiar back into the cloud.

Even with Flyby Attack, you only get a move and a standard. Once the creature uses its standard to grapple the familiar, it gains the grappled condition and can't move. On a subsequent turn, it could make a grapple check to continue the grapple and then move "as part of the standard action spent to maintain the grapple".

So unless that all happened over the course of two turns, it probably shouldn't have gone down that way.

If there's grab (haven't checked teh block), it could take the -20....
No Grab, just a +11 CMB (which against the Centipede's CMD of 8 is plenty).

without grab, once you initiate a grapple successfully, both the grapple-controller and the grapple target have the Grappled condition and cannot move without making a grapple check, irrespective of things like a full attack of natural attacks, etc. The dragon could grapple & drop but couldn't continue flyby attack without doign so....

Right Rogue Eidolon?

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Well, natural 20s DO happen...

... and then there's still nothing to do besides get ripped apart next round. can't escape the grapple and expect to succeed at flying out of the room...

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
Thurston Hillman wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Keep in mind pinning is not a sufficient condition for a coup de grace. The monk would also need to tie the enemy up (possible on the same round though with Greater Grapple).
I assume you just search for any posts with Grapple and come in to educate people! :D

though I do have to admit.... there isn't much point in playing the initiative further from a mechanics standpoint from that position. Switching to narrative mode at that point strikes me as the thing to do....

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

All of my PCs except my protege have done Pathfinder Basic. The protege went from the worldwound to MotFF after becoming a protege.

Cheliax ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

I've run this four times, LPM; it's had everything from "PCs snuck in" to "BBEG has full prep and choice of where to stand".

I disagree fundamentally about the fight. Depending on how smart the PCs have been, it perfectly models the spectrum of "successful hit team takes out the big bad general by surprise" to "epic fight that splits the party".

Master of Swords and Warmaster Marcos Farabellus must have been damn glad to see your tetori there to send after a casty.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
redward wrote:

To further muddy the waters, I'm not sure the creature could move, grapple, and then move with the familiar back into the cloud.

Even with Flyby Attack, you only get a move and a standard. Once the creature uses its standard to grapple the familiar, it gains the grappled condition and can't move. On a subsequent turn, it could make a grapple check to continue the grapple and then move "as part of the standard action spent to maintain the grapple".

So unless that all happened over the course of two turns, it probably shouldn't have gone down that way.

If there's grab (haven't checked teh block), it could take the -20....

Cheliax ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
gbonehead wrote:


So I stand by my statements. If it's so horribly scenario-breaking that you absolutely cannot stop from saying something, sure, say something. But how often is that actually the case, and how often would it be better to approach the player afterwards and say "hey, I noticed you did X. Did you actually realize it works like ..."

Frankly, I view the proper response to "well, I did it in front of the VO, and they didn't say anything about it" to be "I'm sorry they didn't notice that time, but I'm afraid that's how it actually works."

Anyways, that's still my two cents :)

I largely agree with where you're coming from, save that I'm the sort of rules wonk that Eric is speaking of in his post.

"That doesn't work that way" should be addressed at the time, not afterwards. At the end of the slot, people scatter, leave the con, run to catch their transportation, whatever. Quick and simple callouts of the issue, with deferment to the table GM (including dropping it if they prefer you do so) is the guideline I've used for a while now; it seems to be smoother than smothering it and trying to find the person and maybe not seeing them for a year...

Cheliax ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
Drogon wrote:

Color me impressed with all of this. I'm thrilled to see things changing and adapting based on feedback from your players and coordinators (and GMs, I suppose).

Now, if you'd just start publishing three scenarios per month and always have a new 1-5 every month, things would be so dynamic with this campaign I might not know how to proceed. (-;

Sure you would - sell more PFRPG, run more events, drink coffee, profit!

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

I share Chris's definitions.

If I've EVER prepped it, I can probably pick it back up, refresh myself, and work from either the PRD on my phone/tablet/laptop (depends on the venue), docs in my dropbox or on pfsprep to cover the S4+ stat blocks issue. 20 minutes and access to a printer makes re-preparing while I refresh my memory a case of "I might not remember the cool characterizations I came up with, but I can remember what's supposed to happen here well enough to be fun..."

Rather than run cold, I will offer to run something else I've prepped in the past. I agree entirely on the rather not run a game that won't be up to my personal standards of what I can offer to make it a fun experience for the players - I internalized that desire from Dave Christ's standards for RPGA judges before I ever had the opportunity to judge for him. I think it's a standard that we could usefully move toward embracing in PFS.

I've been tossed into running cold in the past to run Cultist's Kiss. That went surprisingly well, but pacing and timing were major issues.

There's a lot of games that we can play, but each only once (mostly) - making it the best experience for the players is more fun as the GM, IMO.

So my advice is: don't ask forewarned GMs who don't prep to GM again. Try to match up GM rearrangements with people who will rerun things they've prepped before.

As a convention organizer if I was getting reports that my GMs were unprepared for their tables, they wouldn't be on my list of invited GMs for next event, and would get bumped from the comp schedule in favor of known reliable GMs. It never came up as an issue that was brought to my attention when I was organizing, though.

Cheliax ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

I describe scouting and scrying reports from the Army of the Open Road as things go on. Narrating more is the key to making mass combat interesting for everyone!

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
John Francis wrote:
You mean people organise conventions without having GMs doing that?
The specific argument was made that we didn't want to reward game day games because they might be run cold. I think if we apply that logic fairly we shouldn't reward con games, so that argument doesn't hold.

In the convention environment, there's more interaction and more chance to prevent cold-running by more organizing.

I hate cold runs. I won't do them, I won't ask someone to do them until out of all other options, because I think they're terrible for the campaign.

They will still happen, even on my watch, because sometimes you're out of Gms and swamped with new players. The failure of some cons to police themselves is another topic; the con organizer should be organizing better.

There is no oversight organizer for a local gameday was my point, and we can't tell which behavior is which. A perennially unprepared con GM will run out of cons to GM for eventually.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Anyone who could normally attempt such a check, because it is a trained-only skill.

Follow the tactical advice - stack up. Stack attacks. False Retreat is terrible unless you're in a large fight. Focus fire on the Unique units and flavor the battle with the dirty tricks / reckless cultists / dretches / etc pursuing their natural enemies with fervor....

Ham up the descriptions, whatever is happening.

Expect that the troop IS a beating, and let them work out creative solutions to entry on the final phase if they come up with some.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:

The chief incentive for con GMs is quite simple; they get to play. This is a community-based activity, and is supposed to be supported by contributions from the community.

There are between four and eight people at a table. That means that, on average, you should be GMing somewhere between once a con and once every couple of cons if you're going to do your fair share of the work.

There is a reward for this; you get a chronicle for GMing a session. While this isn't a big deal for some folks, I know more than a few GMs who will only offer to run a table if it's for a scenario they haven't run before. So obviously the existing incentive/reward system does seem to be working. There are also the GM star levels, which offer additional minor benefits.

Getting enough people together to talk about how awesome the con was generates a significantly higher amount of spillover word of mouth advertising compared to single-store gamedays. Destination events have spillover allure which is hard to quantify but apparently useful to encouraging participation.

And both are valuable. Cons, however, generally do require a larger to much larger investment from their GMs. They correspondingly want to have a tool to cover the HUNDREDS of slots of GMing they need to adequately staff a con like PaizoCon or GenCon where there's dozens to hundreds of tables a slot. The complexities of con organization are NOT linear scaling of the complexities of game day organizing, so I'm going to just flatly state that improved incentives are a good thing.

Scaling boon, 6 month window, separate from the Con GM boons and can be earned simultaneously. Hardcore GMs being hardcore and pushing PFRPG by running well-prepared slots of the same game five to ten times in a weekend is a behavior to reward, where cold-running a game at a store every week for a year isn't doing nearly as much to advance the hobby or Paizo's sales - and we can't tell the difference between the cases without a more nosey oversight system.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Nope, Prethen, go read the Community Use Policy quoted upthread.

Recreating a similar map is kosher, though. Lamplighter and my wife have both done some work on that front. (Bonekeep 1 looks a lot different for some of us, or Feast of Sigils :D)

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Tier 10-11 was wonderful for my party of 2 pounce eidolons with summoner attendants, a paladin, and an inquisitor....

Cheliax

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Caster level checks are not attack rolls.

Automatic failures are specifically enumerated and the roll of a natural 1 on the die merely results in adding 1 to the static part of any check other than those called out.

Flagged to move to the general rules forum as this is unrelated to PFS.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

There were no 4 player adjustments in the playtest version.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

I like Wakedown's tiered race proposal a lot; it needs some tweaking (scenario doesn't matter, event organizer signoff might be a thing... or might not).

Glad to see a solid idea knocking around, that's based on current-season boon tech!

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

There's the everyone-gets-this $10 thanks for PaizoConning gift certificate; GMs also get $10 credit per slot at PaizoCon and GenCon.

I suspect it's the latter which is glitching - mgcady was having a similar problem. Email customer service, sm or Sharaya or someone will look into it, I'm sure.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Hey, I remembered to pick up the boon before HQ closed this year! I completely flubbed that remember check last year....

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

So far I've run it as you attempt to break contact and exit the battle, and if you win initiative CAN exit the hex to attempt the "run far enough to fall back on allied position" (because that feels 'right' in terms of the abstraction that's in use for movement and making for player agency in the story).

Movement Initiative is rolled each day as presented, as far as I can tell.

Big thing is that the intent of the system is to provide a more nuanced coin toss in how the massive battles are being fought around the PCs and adjust the briefing that is used to introduce the PC mission. It's very much an epic, players-control-units-for-their-toss-of-the-dice-at-prestige, cut scene.

If I got parts of the rules screwed up, I hope Thursty or someone comes along to correct my memory ;)

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

We ended up at Pho Tai in Barien, IIRC - It's conveniently between the Staples where they were trying to get the colors right on the Worldwound strategic maps, and a Safeway.... (and a bunch of ingress portals, one of which wound up in the "whyis this a portal? report!" queue...)

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Wakedown: Taldor's payoff Golden Moment scenario seems to be 5-24. And that may be a very bad payoff for some players, and an amazing payoff for others.

I love that they made it the way they turned Thursty loose to do; I'm worried that it won't appeal to enough Taldor PC's *players* because of its unusual (unique in PFS) mechanics...

(I've only run it 4 times so far...)

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

flying pouncing eidolons made for hilarity in the BBEG fight, even though they COULD have murderated him....

if they could remember who to murderate.

It's always fun watching the table scrambling to protect themselves from the twin pounce eidolon builds.

They DID eventually murderate the priest, but it was much less of a trivial thing.

10-11. FOUR PLAYER. But two pounce eidolons meant damage was easy to accomplish.

Note that running the geists as the follow-on to the forge shrine is verrry flavorful and makes for a goood combined challenge...

I liked it a lot, both the purely player-agency triggering of game progress and the way the variable encounter structure was handled. Looking forward to what's behind Door Number What?!!!? when GenCon prep goes up.

other note from the playtest run: No printed save DCs on the blasphemous flames (which I grabbed an answer from Mr Compton at the show of 10+ APL*1.5)

Good times so far...

Cheliax ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

It's actually very similar to last year's PaizoCon GM boon, I think they liked having a "cool but not super jealousy inducing" boon out there... that makes for REALLY unusual characters.

1 to 50 of 1,062 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.