|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
This alchemical gel comes in a large
vial with a brush built into the stopper.
It’s used to coat the surface of objects,
protecting them from a specific type
of energy damage. Though elemental
proofing is not harmful to the objects it coats, it acts as a
contact poison to living creatures. Touching elemental proofing
directly causes 1d4 points of damage and 1d4 rounds of
sickness (a DC 14 Fortitude save negates the latter effect).
Creatures immune to poison are likewise immune to the
effects of contacting elemental proofing but gain no benefits
from its application. When applied to weapons or armor,
elemental proofing confers resistances to the coated object,
but none to the wearer.
Each vial of elemental proofing contains enough gel to coat
Does this mean I can use a vial of Elemental Proofing as a thrown weapon?
Rather, I would like to see some expanded tactics sections in the scenario. Like, if the party rolled over the first two combats, apply the advanced template to this monster, or if the party is struggling, don't use Glitterdust or Cause Fear, even though the monster knows them.
Those sort of things would allow the GM to tweak the difficulty slightly to match the strength of the party he is running for.
This is a good theory in general, but for it to actually work it needs to be cheap enough and easy enough for Paizo to justify funding/doing. Some thoughts:
1 Star: This is really easy to get and can be done in a relatively short time frame. Having a reward for this level is really just silliness. Bragging rights for your first star should be enough.
2 Stars: Ok, this takes a little effort and perhaps organizing some game days. It requires some commitment over time, but also can be achieved in less than a year fairly easily. The reward for this needs to be small. A Boon is a good idea, but it would be really hard to regulate because it would need to be transferred digitally. I like the idea of having something open up for purchase to GMs of this level and higher.
3 Stars: Now you are getting into some real commitment to the Society. I think one Paizo d20 would be a great idea for GMs who reach this level.
4 Stars: Ok, now we are getting serious. They already get access to that special scenario. I'm not sure what else to do at this level. But a little something else would be nice.
5 Stars: The big leagues. The idea of having your face be immortalized in villain form is awesome. I would love to see that, and it would be one more reason for striving for the top.
Dennis Baker wrote:
I was refering to a Subtier 6-7 game, so the assumtion was APL 7.
From more of a numbers stand point, a season 4 scenario with an APL 7 party runs up against a CR 9 (Hard) combat followed up with a CR 11 (Epic+) combat. Both were surprises and both times the players were at a disadvantage that should probably add another CR to the encounter.
This is excessive no mater how well your character is built. I am all for having varied challenges in a scenario, that’s one of the things that makes them fun, but there is a fine line between challenging and deadly to the point of being ridiculous. I think we have crossed it.
I would expect that there will be missions for more than 1 faction in any given scenario, and there may also be a way for characters to gain a 2nd PP who are not in the primary factions. I saw that stated somewhere.
I actually like the idea. Pasted on Missions are lame and break the flow of the game. SO I applaud the push to make them relevant and scenario focused. Also, I kind of like the idea of knowign which of my characters should try to play a mission. It gives me some direction as I have a lot of characters to choose from.
There have been some ideas in this thread that are untenable because they are complicated. The solution needs to be simple and straight forward.
The adjustment of XP for playing up/down is really the only viable alternative option that I see. But the impacts of that change may reach farther than expected.
I really think that the option stated in the podcast can work well and is the best choice out there currently provided the staff do a couple little things to support it. First, we need to have published pregens of all of the Iconic characters at levels 1,4,7. Second, a player needs to have the option of choosing to apply the credit from playing a pregen when his character reaches the tier the game was played at. This will mean that a player who grabs a level 4 pregen to play up in a 1-5 can wait to get any rewards until his character reaches level 4. This would be marked on the chronicle by the GM.
In this way, playing a pregen character will not be as bad. You will have more options and will not loose out on the rewards from the tier you actually play.
In the spirit of cooperation, players need to be willing to play a pregen once in a while. If you are unwilling to do so, then you are disregarding one of the core tenants of the Society. Veteran players really should have lower level characters they can pull out when needed. If they don’t, that is largely a choice they have made and they need to be willing to whip out a pregen and apply the credit to a new character.
Season 0 was still under the D&D 3.5 rules. I would reccomend starting at season 1 for your purchases. Actually, if you are new and your friends are new to PFS as well, I would start with Season 3 since it has all of the current factions in it.
Look at reviews and the level ranges of the scenarios you are buying. Not much point in buying Tier 7-11 scenarios until you have characters who can play them.
There have been a few recent threads along a similar vein. Posters, please don't let this one disintegrate like the others have.
No, this is not Legal when playing PFS. Talk to the GM about it. If he refuses to listen then talk to your local Venture Captain/Lieutenant. If nothing changes after that, just refuse to play under that GM.
I have an Aasimar character who worships an Empyreal Lord. A major part of her backstory is that she was deceived by a daemon to worship a Deamon Lord. She greatly resents this and fights to rid the world of Deamon kind. This Daemon Hunter trait is a perfect fit for her. I don't like the idea of being banned from taking a trait for character reasons just because I don't worship an evil deity.
Andrew Christian wrote:
As a GM, I do that anyways.
Right, but if you didn’t need to do that it would save time at the table to get into the story. And you would not be boring the players that already know it all.
Also, I would not count you in the class of ‘Average GMs’. You have more world information and society background than the majority of GMs. Sometimes GMs don’t know the information themselves, or they don’t think to bring it up unless a player asks for it. Many players would not know to ask, or may not want to speak up about it.
Indeed, I’m not talking about giving specific information that would replace a Knowledge check. I would not support that. I’m talking about information to set the stage. This VC has a reputation for such-and–such. The country you are going to allows slavery and primarily worships (god’s name). This time of year is the rainy season in (country). The current relationship between the society and the Aspis, in general. What the Tapestry is and how we got it, because every Pathfinder should know that, even if you have a 7 Int.
Nothing that would take away an in-game advantage for your Int based characters, just something that gives new players the knowledge and background that their character are assumed to have.
I also like Serisan’s suggestion.
In my experience, sessions have been a mixed bag. Some have been excellent and a lot of fun to play/run. Some have been run of the mill, not particularly memorable. Some have been disappointing. I read reviews and discussion threads before I buy. I really try to select the scenarios I think will be enjoyable.
Question: Who is responsible for the scenario being memorable, the Author or GM?
The author needs to provide a scenario with plot hooks and opportunities for creativity. Then the GM needs to run with it to enhance and give life to the experience. Blakros Matrimony is a great example. With a prepared GM, it can really shine, but it is also possible to turn the social interactions into a mechanical dice fest and blow through the first half of the scenario. I played in Gods Market Gamble. I recognize it as a well written scenario and I am looking forward to running it myself. However, the GM I played under did a couple of things that left a bad taste in my mouth. A good scenario, but a bad GM can ruin it.
On the flip side there is just so much the average GM can do with a scenario that gives him nothing to run with. With a boring scenario the GM needs to do extra preparation and go over the top to make it memorable. It requires a lot of extra work that the average GM just does not have the time/world knowledge to do.
Thought: The impression I get from some of the scenarios is that the author turned in their product, and it was published weather it was good or not. IMO, the folks in charge of PFS need to review the content of a scenario, not just do editing and layout. Then if it’s not a decent scenario, go back to the author and say “This is not good enough here, and here. Redo it.” If you are responsible for what PFS puts out, then be responsible for the quality of the story you are telling as well. Admittedly, I don’t know how the actual writing/editing process works, and I know there is a hard time line laid out for publication so doing this may be more difficult that I make it sound.
Idea: What if we add a Player Handout to all new scenarios called “Things Pathfinders Know”? This can be handed out to players to add to the setting and background of the things they experience. It could briefly give a history of the area and a couple points about culture. It could give a couple things about the VC you are working for. It could mention important points about organizations or well known items you will be dealing with, like the Aspis or the Tapestry. This would be a great way to get new players rolling quickly, and then you don’t have to have the GM or the VC explain things like everyone is a new recruit. I always thought that seemed a little out of character for the VCs when they explain stuff that everyone they are talking to should already know.
Race Boon: Kobolds
A limited release, like the Goblins were last year.
Weapon Training Tian Xia
Gain Proficiency in one weapon listed in Ultimate Combat.
Society Trait Boon
Your character receives a bonus trait form the Society Traits listed in the Pathfinder Chronicles: Faction Guide. Could be a random one or a selected one, however Mike wants it.
I’m currently considering writing up an article detailing an abandoned underground settlement, and a Side Trek. My idea is that these two articles will be complete in themselves, but written in a way where they fit nicely together. If a GM wants to adventure in the settlement, he also has a ready made encounter for the setting.
Of course, this is assuming they both get in, which is not assured. I will write them to stand on their own merits.
Hello! I just found out about Wayfinder, and it just so happens I was thinking about getting my writing feet wet. This sounds great!
Is an article on options for underground race players ok? Kind of an expansion on the stuff from the ARG.
If I submit an article here, is the content forever locked into Wayfinder, or could I use some if it in a different writing project, like PFS Quests or RPG Superstar?
There are several Climb checks that are DC 10. This means that you can Take 10 on them even if your Climb mod is only +0. If your mod is negative, things get difficult.
Archers can still wear armor. If you want light armor for the movement options, Mythral Chain Shirt is your best option as soon as you can afford 1100 Gp.
Another piece of advice, after you earn your first 2 Prestige Points you can spend them to get a Masterwork Darkwood Composite Longbow with up to a +3 Strength rating. It's the easiest and best way to up your damage early. It's the only bow you will ever need to get, hopefully.