Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter, 8 Season Star Voter. Pathfinder Society GM. 1,530 posts (1,874 including aliases). 3 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 77 Organized Play characters. 3 aliases.
Male Oread Inquisitor 6 | HP 51/51 | Move 20 | AC 20 T 13 FF 18, CMD 22 | F+7 R+5 W+9 | Init +5 DV 60ft Per +12
Knowledge-Planes:1d20 + 7 ⇒ (2) + 7 = 9 Well, that won't do it...
Krakos stands, mace still extended for a few moments under the whirl of colors before dropping to his knees, a look of quiet awe on his craggy face.
Ayrzul is with me. Wind is stilled by earth.
He looks around for a moment as if just then remembering he is not alone.
One moment.
He steps outside onto the ledge and screams into the whirling wind in Terran, exulting the supremacy of Ayrzul. He pauses, then sets the holy symbol of Ayrzul on one side of the doorway and a small pile of stones on the other before returning to the others.
Apologies. What now?
note for the GM:
I set one of the sacred gems amongst the other stones
Male Halfling Oracle (Pei-Zin: Life/Legalistic) 3.0 | HP 27/27 | Move 15 | AC 19 T 13 FF 17 , CMD 13 | F+5 R+5 W+5 | Init +2 Per +2 | Healer's Way 4/5, Level 1 Spells 6/6, Channel Energy 3/5
Chance pushes himself to his feet as the cat-like creature moves away, twisting his wrist to cause his spring-loaded wrist sheath to deposit a wand in his hand as he does so. He mutters a short halfling phrase containing the command word, releasing the healing energy of the wand into his body.
Halfling:
Few days exist solely for profit, but the wise can find a way to profit in every day.
wand of cure light wounds:1d8 + 1 + 2 ⇒ (8) + 1 + 2 = 11
Move: stand from prone
Swift: activate spring-loaded wrist sheath
Standard: activate wand
Oh, that's much better. Get it, Stuinvolk! You've got this vowel-challenged cat-thing!
Male Halfling Oracle (Pei-Zin: Life/Legalistic) 3.0 | HP 27/27 | Move 15 | AC 19 T 13 FF 17 , CMD 13 | F+5 R+5 W+5 | Init +2 Per +2 | Healer's Way 4/5, Level 1 Spells 6/6, Channel Energy 3/5
Chance grimaces with a half smile as the familiar sensation of transferred pain washes over him.
5hp of Naevys' damage transfers due to life link.
Everyone trusts the wizards about magics, and the fighters about melee, but when the healer assesses the most likely to get mauled some folks argue until the fates show the healer sometimes DOES know best.
Free action - shift grip on spear to 1-h
Swift action - activate spring-loaded wrist sheath to get wand of CLW handy
Standard action - activate wand of clw on Naevys
wand of clw activation:1d8 + 1 ⇒ (5) + 1 = 6
Five-foot step back.
So total of 11hp of healing to Naevys from Chance this round
Male Oread Inquisitor 6 | HP 51/51 | Move 20 | AC 20 T 13 FF 18, CMD 22 | F+7 R+5 W+9 | Init +5 DV 60ft Per +12
untrained profession-sailor for lingo:1d20 + 3 ⇒ (1) + 3 = 4 Boats, especially air-boats are not a thing to be happy, much less jolly, about. Is possible serious issue.
Male Halfling Oracle (Pei-Zin: Life/Legalistic) 3.0 | HP 27/27 | Move 15 | AC 19 T 13 FF 17 , CMD 13 | F+5 R+5 W+5 | Init +2 Per +2 | Healer's Way 4/5, Level 1 Spells 6/6, Channel Energy 3/5
I'm assuming that we can't aid for Naevys' Diplomacy roll, because if we could and it's not mutually exclusive, I'd auto-assist and give a +4 for being such a helpful halfling.
I don't care which way we go, as long as we're going. :) Also, I think that was basically a delay or ready until after Zzorn's action - so I probably lost a round there.
I'm not sure what sort of mirror-universe I've stumbled into, but I agree with Tallow on this...
Do-do-do-do, do-do-do-do, "You are about to enter another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land of imagination."
I actually had Golden Earring going through my head, but yeah...
Figured I'd get the ball rolling on the GM thread for this as I did not see one already out there.
This looks like it's going to be great fun, but there are a few hiccups I'm finding:
There are two encounters described in this module (A1 and D) which both mention having creatures which normally do not have the ability to verbally communicate engaging in verbal communication. For a non-PFS game, for A1, I'd probably just increase the Int to 5 or 6 and give it a rank or two of Linguistics and the ability to understand Common and Varisian and do something similar for D, but I'm not sure what to do for this for a PFS game day.
For Encounter F, the speed penalty from the breath weapon is specified as cumulative and can result in a 0 speed. I am not seeing any way to free a trapped creature. Again, for home games this wouldn't be an issue, I'd probably just treat it as a slightly more resilient tanglefoot bag, but this is for PFS.
Finally, can we advise the players about the conditions for the 2nd point of prestige so that they can make an intelligent choice about which character to apply this to, or is that too reminiscent of "chronicle fishing"?
Doing my "prep" for this for Saturday and just want to say that this may be the most fun and wacky WBG mod yet (especially the understated, but hilarious hijinks potential of "A3").
Many congrats, especially to HMM (who is probably the most positive person on these boards and makes the Paizo site much less toxic just by her presence) and Simon (whose PFS tracker is the best thing for PFS I've seen since my involvement in the campaign began).
The timing for bringing this up on the forums conceivably couldn't be worse.
The decision, whatever it reasoning / validity, is immediately affecting PFS players and apparently stores in the the removed VO's region.
Much like complaints about when things blow up right before GenCon because PFS leadership implements a change then, the timing is not driven by those who have issues with the decision - it's the timing of the decision itself.
This is also where the "praise in public / criticize in private" aspect falls through as "trust us, it's being handled" only works for so long as things pile up and volunteers find other things to do with their time / resources.
From the POV of someone in the region, but not the state, I've just assumed that the RVC has carte blanche unless they do something that would result in jail time. Maybe that's a good thing. I'm less certain now than ever.
I love that flip-mat / map-pack sheet!
I've been using it for awhile now, it's been one of the best "additional additional" resources for PF I've found.
I had put together something similar a few years ago that I had in a file called "the infamy campaign" with characters going from 2nd to 14th L.
If I were to do it now, I'd probably also mix in some of the Seven Fingers' tomb scenarios as well.
Infamy Campaign Progression:
lvl start - lvl end
2nd - 3rd: Skull and Shackles: The Wormwood Mutiny
3rd - 4th: Plunder & Peril: Rum Punch
4th - 5th: Plunder & Peril: Dark Waters
5th - 6th: Serpent's Skull: Racing to Ruin
6th - 7th: Skull and Shackles: Raiders of the Fever Sea
7th - 8th: Plunder & Peril: Black Coral Cove
8th - 9th: Plunder & Peril: Bonus Chronicle
9th - 10th: Skull and Shackles: Tempest Rising
10th - 11th: Serpent's Skull: City of Seven Spears
11th - 12th: Skull and Shackles: The Island of Empty Eyes
12th - 13th: Skull and Shackles: The Price of Infamy
13th - 14th: Skull and Shackles: From Hell's Heart
Focusing on paladins using poison seems odd when the real gem in the Code change is the removal of the "you WILL cause party conflict" clause about cooperation with evil from the 1E Paladin code.
I'm also hoping the "casting an evil spell" is removed as I can see the "will you use the wand of infernal healing on the dying infant?" conundrum for the next round of "paladin falls" drinking games.
I would very much like to see a table reduction for specials, especially after 2.0 launches and it becomes even more challenging to schedule the specials.
RE: Boon / scenario requirements - I would recommend a sheet similar to the "secondary successes" sheet be generated to convert them and avail as a download containing the affected specials.
Also, let us remember that organized play is a marketing platform for Paizo. It would surprise me if they wanted PFS1 to continue any longer than it naturally will. They are unlikely to make significant rules changes to artificially force it to continue. It is not likely to bring much if any revenue since they won't be producing new content for 1E.
Counter-point to that is that I'm pretty sure Paizo wants to sell through their remaining PF 1.0 product and with the "must own" restrictions, PFS is probably their only way to do so after 2.0 launches.
RE: factional First Steps quests - I like that thought, but would also like to see something specific with differing VCs and for both "newly confirmed" pathfinders and "Seekers", especially to emphasize that differences in how those characters might be viewed by the Society as a whole and bring in some differences in missions from the different VCs / faction heads, etc. (ie "you've learned from you interactions with Drengle Dreng - you may cross this boon off of your chronicle sheet to recover from the effects of fatigue from lack of sleep" type of thing)
No, I saw it. I spend unhealthy amounts of time on Paizo, though less now that 2E has been announced.
As we're discussing something that was historically based on physical regions, the comment was based on if that trend would continue, which would make online somewhat anomalous in that someone would be effectively able to be in two regions at once.
Bob J. - concur, but as usual ... bug vs. feature. :)
The most positive thing I can say about the aasimar/ tiefling mistake is at least it wasn't the "we are going to penalize you for GM'ing instead of playing" that the APG Summoner mistake was.
Its the individuals fault for paying money for PFS specifically without first consulting the Guide, a VO, a GM, another player, the PFS specific message boards, etc. Im glad it worked out for you.
... or they checked, made sure it was legal, real life interfered and when they came to play that character found out that they now can't play those characters.
I'd like to see a mix of the options and think that Hmm's "Option 5" should just be implemented in general with the caveat that I also think that some other scenarios should be explored for open replay as well (Murder on the Throaty Mermaid, to be specific - but any other scenarios that may be different each time the scenario is run, if there are any others).
I am not a supporter of true unlimited replay, however, I think that a mixture of "enhanced GM stars", a cool-down period of 2-4 years for PC chronicle sheet, and an option for "generic chronicles" to help in assisting organizers make tables would be the optimal solution.
While I understand that Paizo is not intending to support 1E via scenarios beyond GenCon 2019, I would also request that the faction sheets for season 11+ (assuming that faction sheets continue) would be pertinent to both 1E & 2E or that some other solution be put in place to allow for the faction sheets to continue for the 1E campaign.
Chronicle Cool Down & Generic Chronicle Sheets:
Cool Down: For the cool down period, I would suggest implementing a policy that any player can request to sit at a table to play and receive credit for a scenario that they have already played so long as they have not played that scenario in the last 2+ years (I'm thinking 2, but could see up to 4). The GM should have the option to NOT sit a player at a their table, per normal for "replay" / "I've GM'd this" players, but for organizer sanity the GM should probably advise if they have more extreme views for this type of replay than they do for "I've GM'd this" players.
Generic Chronicle Sheets: One of the issues I can see arising (especially for smaller lodges) is having issues seating tables. To that end, I would suggest a "generic chronicle sheet" be created that would allow a table GM to incentivize players who may have already played a game to fill a table, while preventing "chronicle farming" that was apparently prevalent in other org play campaigns. In my head, this would look like one of the "specials" sheets or one of the more recent "all quests" with a break-down of levels for slow & normal track. The chronicle would need to be completed by the GM to note the name and number of the scenario and the chronicle would either offer nothing but gold at generic-by-level rates or offer have an option similar to the quests where the GM would note the character completed a scenario and the level the character completed it at and the PC would have the option to "build up to" reward tiers on the sheet by making tables, much as the recent quests have done, in order to get a secondary reward (nothing huge, something like bonus prestige point[s] that won't go over max, ability to purchase one item as if fame were increased, discounted spell casting services, a free wayfinder upgrade, or maybe the ability to purchase some consumables at higher than base casting level).
As a bonus (and if the Paizo folks would want to do this) it could also be expanded to allow generic chronicles to be done back and forth between 1E & 2E for pre-gen play credit, which might be particularly useful as 2E is just taking off as well as CORE & Standard 1E campaigns, but might require a bit more formatting finesse.
To answer this one, in case the OP or others stumble upon it and Paizo staff doesn't have a chance to answer it amongst all the others: yes, new maps and maps are: burnt-out crypt under the city of Magnimar, a ruined temple in the demon-infested Worldwound, a remote wizard's tower beside a mountain pool, and an arcanist astronomer's subterranean workshop.
I'd like to see a callback to Eyes of the Ten part III.
In similar vein, I'd like to see some follow-up on information that may have been acquired from a certain general in 07-00 about far away Azlanti colonies.
Also, since the whole 1.0 campaign is ending, I'd like to see First Steps II & III re-opened since the factions will have relatively little impact after S10 closes and would like to have the "removed, but edited for PaizoCon (or other Con) scenarios" opened up more as Paizo moves away from 1.0 (even if putting a star limit on them due to editing issues).
My foremost wish would be to see a level 19-20 capstone series written like Eyes was (multi-part with the expectation that at least one scenario will be more than a 4-hour slot) with an opportunity to actually play at 20th. I'd prefer this as something that does not require a large # of tables, particularly since with the death of 1.0 it's going to be VERY hard to get enough tables together at cons in the future to be able to play Race, the only current option to be able to get PCs to 20 so I would prefer there be an option that can be accomplished a bit more easily for those that won't have the ability to attend the cons with their groups.
Any chance of a bit more information about sanctioning other content (such as the last few APs) for 1E? - even just a confirmation that it is or isn't a goal might help manage expectations.
Interesting feedback.
I was actually only inquiring if the plan was to continue as is or look examine the current model to see if changes would be implemented - not suggesting implementing a "one V* per campaign" model. Regarding the one V per venue, I know of at least one venue that has more than one organizer and is the best-organized and arguably most successful venue in our state, so obviously different regions have had different rates of success in organizing in differing manners. This is also part of the reason we continue to have store coordinators rather than VA's, however, as the VA model doesn't work equally well in all areas (some people are better GMs than organizers and vice versa).
Tonya responded indicating that no changes are anticipated in the model, so that answered the actual question if the model would be looked at for change.
Also, I believe this marks the very first 2.0 paladin thread.
I'm confused. Do we do the mandatory shots now or when the playtest launches? - it's a bit of a grey area in the "paladin on the PF boards drinking game".
I was trying to figure out how these issues hadn't arisen for me when I realized the root of the problem: both the druid and the summoner are gnomes. As I don't waste toner on printing gnome pre-gens it's never occurred in games I've organized or GM'd.
Conclusion: as usual, it's the gnomes' fault.
This message brought to you by the Hope for a gnome-free Society foundation. We're tired of all of these so-called First World problems™.]
I love how we have 213 posts arguing about a rule on a thread that specifically asks for a clarification of the rules because we already know we can't agree on it.
Probably because "clarification" is really just "nerf" for almost every "clarification" Paizo has given and some of us are just tired of nerfs. When I first read this thread all I thought was "great another 'please nerf this' thread" and trying to remember if "paladins must all fall in PFS" was the next thread in the cycle or if it was "I'm too lazy to read the other threads, but we need unlimited replays, yo" that was next.
Yeah, I'm solidly in the "no" for a campaign clarification.
If we have to petition for more campaign clarifications, how about we make crappy things better rather than good things useless for once*?
We're never going to get a defining consensus on "wielding" as the nerf that was implemented to nuke slashing & fencing grace is mutually exclusive with the ruling of "wielding" that was required to prevent defending armor spikes and shields from being always on. It's OOTS "levels" without the humor.
(Does the mean you are going to name the Donkey "Meat"?
Too late. I have a dwarf who calls his mule "ER" (Emergency Rations) and another character (who is a bit biased against house Thrune) with one named "Her Infernal Mulitrix Cabbagegail, Sixth of her name".
Any options to jump into the new faction (even a reduced PP cost)? I have a sky druid sylph that is screaming out to jump ship across. If not then i have some maths to start on....
John Compton via Paizo Blog wrote:
As has been the case with the introduction of other factions, characters will have the option to switch to the Concordance without spending any Prestige Points.
I'd still support it if only to try to pull back in the players who have lost their stuff due to RL issues over the years and don't want to expend the effort to try to recreate everything.
Edit: missed Nosig's familiar-sounding post the first pass-through. Seems like it is that time again.
First they took Shadow Lodge from me, but that was ok, I was fairly new and joined Osirian.
Then they took Osirian from me, but that was mostly ok, because the Scarab Sages seemed like an interesting long-term commitment...
...and now... I'd protest, but I'm a tiefling, so it's not like we have the numbers for a vote even if we were like Liberty's Edge.
... this must be my karma for the use of the misfortune hex
If these become PFS legal, I may have to buy this AP volume... and if I have to buy this one volume, I may as well buy the others... the legacy of the Wallet-bane lives on at Paizo, it seems...
i do a weeks worth of research b4 i make any character no matter the level so taking a single day to build one high level character is nothing
You take weeks to build the encounters for your group?
I've been known to (especially the "board game" encounter where I modified the chase rules and put in some pre-determined "random" encounters from CRs 8 - 16) on the board that both the PCs and NPCs they were chasing might encounter over a multi-hour chase with multiple groups all attempting to either catch a fleeing NPC, the chasing group, or a red herring decoy that was sent out).
Ambitious encounters don't always pay off the same return, but sometimes they're still awesome.
Yep. You don't know gritty until you are a commoner with 3 hp, a +1 to hit, 1d3+1 damage, and have an AC of 11.
Having played 1E & 2E wizards with a single hitpoint at max and only the ability to throw darts after they used their only spell for the day, I'd say the commoner who can do d3+1 damage would have had a distinct advantage.
DeathlessOne wrote:
I used to DM a Rolemaster campaign.
Heh. I've been known to offer to GM mash-ups of Rolemaster & Traveler to those who complain about the complexity of PF. "It would be like a Rolemaster system, but with the Tech Levels of Traveler to make everything fit better...".
My problem stems from how despite there being no reason for parity to exist in Pathfinder we are still going through several years of mechanically ruined characters, tens to hundreds of dollars of books purchases being invalidated, and can't take steps to making changes more palatable.
Those purchases aren't invalidated. They are still perfectly good for virtually every other game of Pathfinder, with the exception of PFS. These books are written for PFRPG. Campaign Leadership finds ways to incorporate them. Sometimes those ways later become problematic.
But to say those purchases are invalidated is a canard. Let's try to avoid such hyperbole, please.
PFS is one of the only types of Pathfinder that requires purchase of a product in order to use its rules element for a character (the only other type I can think of would be the newer online games which have the plug-ins for it). Every home game I've heard of allows players to use web resources.
Just because you may purchase (or as you are showing as a VC, get for free, I guess) PF product for reasons other than PFS it doesn't mean the rest of us do. Some of us ONLY make PF purchases for PFS.
I bought a LOT of Pathfiner product before I ever became a Venture-Officer, and will continue to do when I'm no longer one. The books have more use than just PFS.
EDIT: never mind - we're proving the internet arguing meme here.
My problem stems from how despite there being no reason for parity to exist in Pathfinder we are still going through several years of mechanically ruined characters, tens to hundreds of dollars of books purchases being invalidated, and can't take steps to making changes more palatable.
Those purchases aren't invalidated. They are still perfectly good for virtually every other game of Pathfinder, with the exception of PFS. These books are written for PFRPG. Campaign Leadership finds ways to incorporate them. Sometimes those ways later become problematic.
But to say those purchases are invalidated is a canard. Let's try to avoid such hyperbole, please.
PFS is one of the only types of Pathfinder that requires purchase of a product in order to use its rules element for a character (the only other type I can think of would be the newer online games which have the plug-ins for it). Every home game I've heard of allows players to use web resources.
Just because you may purchase (or as you are showing as a VC, get for free, I guess) PF product for reasons other than PFS it doesn't mean the rest of us do. Some of us ONLY make PF purchases for PFS.
A good example of this was the Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier. Did the item need to be rebalanced? I believe that it did. But to rebalance they could have made a change to either the luck bonus or the once per day crit-cancelling effect. Changing both crippled the item. Who will ever spend five thousand on one now?
First: terms like "crippled" aren't really a polite way to address changes you disagree with. It's still hyperbolic and reactionary, just targeting the Design Team (who appear to be generally considered exempt from expectations of polite treatment).
Except it's not and that's part of the problem - once emotions get engaged we've now moved from a criticism of a specific example (the Jingasa change) to the person or people who made / make the decision and somehow this is seen as attacking the team rather than one of their decisions.
Again, we can criticize a decision and still respect the person who made that decision (though I'm glad I don't know who wrote the original Prone Shooter feat, as that might be a bit more of a stretch).
