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

TwilightKnight's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Pawns, Tales Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes. 4,987 posts (5,067 including aliases). 15 reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 21 Pathfinder Society characters. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 1,112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paul Jackson wrote:
I thought we were supposed to run as written. That strikes me as a possibly reasonable house rule that has absolutely NO place in Society play.

Depends a lot on the situation. I was not suggesting a poor roll to identify a lich is gonna get you, "its a dragon!" At the same time, roll poorly against a skeletal champion and you might get, "it looks like a skeleton" or botch a roll vs a bebilith, you might get, "it looks like a huge spider, but there's something unusual about it that you cannot put your finger on." Those are perfectly reasonable descriptions and not the same as "its a [redacted]."

The fact that I cannot recall any GMs doing this means this is all hypothetical anyway. I've flubbed a check to identify creatures before and the GM simply said I had no idea what it was. That a d6 was being used as a pawn didn't help visualization and prevented any guessing based on its appearance whatsoever. If I see a skeletal creature, I am may not determine its an actual skeleton or some more powerful variant, but if it has any damage reduction, its a good bet its overcome with bludgeoning (at least). That's a reasonable assumption.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you are not getting any rewards outside of what exists on the chronicle sheet and all the players/GM are familiar with each other and okay with it knowing the potential consequences, who's gonna complain? No one other than those at the table will know what happened anyway. Though the official answer is, the GM must run the scenario as written with some fiat allowed when tactics are invalidated.

Alternately, why not take on the challenge of building characters that aren't min/max'd so they won't require a "hard mode" to challenge them? This would allow you to play those same characters in games with casual players or people you don't know without needing to "hold back" on their abilities to avoid dominating the table.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have personally experienced this twice in PFS and once in a home game. IMO if you don’t want to pay attention, that’s on you, but don’t expect me/us to accommodate it. Meaning if combat starts and you don’t know what’s going on, don’t expect us to catch you up. I try to enforce the aid another rules in that someone needs to declare being the primary skill user and the rest declaring their aid actions BEFORE the primary roll and deciding it needs help. If you had your nose in Candy Crush or whatever and missed the chance, don’t cry to us about it.
In one case I had to insist the cell phone be stored or I would not allow them to play and that applied to the player at future tables as well. In another case, I was forced to kick the. From the table for repeated occurances and warnings. That seemed to do the trick as the player did not demonstrate that behavior at future tables. Sometimes a little tough love is all it takes

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Not allowing the check unless the player role-plays is a bit too hard a line to take. I have had a player, when prompted by a social encounter, simply say [paraphrasing], "I am not a social role-player, however my orator with a diplomacy of 20+, [feat], and [trait] is a master of it. So...[rolls dice] with a 37, he knows precisely what to say and how to say it."
Surely its not ideal and I would choose not to play with that person in my home games, but in organized play at a convention I have to acquiesce to his action.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Micheal Smith wrote:
If there is then I will beyond pissed. I hate the whole concept of raffles, pay to win. I hate how booms are distributed this way. A lot of people can’t afford to do that. Myself being one.

But the point of the boon is to say "Thank you" to those who donate to the charity. Are you saying everyone should get the boon whether or not they donate? Not that I am saying I agree with them being distributed using a raffle or not, but wondering how to reconcile that someone who cannot afford to buy a raffle ticket and therefore cannot afford to donate to the charity should get the incentive for doing so.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I love both the Pathfinder line of products and the society specific material, but I do not want the standard line to limit itself to support only PFS specific material. That the APs are more encompassing is a reason why they are so successful. I think Starfinder AP could be the same, but not if they throttle the product to force it to work 100% within the limitations of SFS. If we have to have compatibility documents, so be it. I would rather the AP be completely free to explore anything and everything in the universe even if said material is not appropriate for SFS. One of the reasons I (and many people) play APs is to distance myself from the limitations of organize play.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm hoping that Hats is still around and at least a roadie for SMC, if not their road manager

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Just some friendly advice, before trading boons with someone online, do your research. We have encountered a few people trading altered and/or photocopied boons using questionable accounts. Meaning they are creating new accounts just to have a "clean" avenue through which to trade. If you are trading with someone you do not know personally, be very careful, especially if you are giving them a "valuable" boon in return.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

3 people marked this as a favorite.
isdestroyer wrote:
Spellslinger Boon

As some have already indicated, this is not a convention reward boon like most of the other boon sheets. This is a reward boon for certain in-game decisions made during play. Its part of the chronicle sheet earned for playing a certain scenario. Sorry, but I won't spoil which one. It is not a tradable boon, but if you play (or GM) the scenario, you can earn one for yourself, no trade required.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Winter War schedule is up on Warhorn so you can start considering what to play. I am forwarding the schedule to the convention, but open registration will not open for another month or so.

If you want to GM, please read the instructions on the Warhorn page. Thanks

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Thurston Hillman wrote:
Grippli. They taste delicious when consumed by festrogs

Oh, that's evil. I hear there are players in therapy after your torture of their PCs at SkalCon last year.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

3 people marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:
SciFiCity

It simply means that if you are trading with someone who claims to be SciFiCity or affiliated with them, be wary as we have confirmed said person is neither of those things and the boons they offer may be invalid.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.
GM Eazy-Earl wrote:
If the players barrel through a scenario, but everyone got to do their cool thing and have fun doing it, does it matter to me if the NPCs and monsters I'm running get shut down?

I agree and have had that philosophy for a long time, but someone finally presented this to me in such a way that that I finally said, hmmm maybe?!? Dunno!?!!

So, if a player does something clever or just uses their character's abilities optimally to quickly and efficiently curb-stomp an encounter, we usually applaud them for their ingenuity, and generally encourage said behavior, except in the rare case when they are doing it to an extreme stealing all the action from the other players. However, if a GM uses the same methodology of clever tactics or optimized abilities, we cry "badwrongfun" and call them an adversarial GM. We seem to expect GMs to only play bad guys well enough to inconvenience the players without actually killing them. Now, I'm not saying I disagree with that, but some would say it is unfair to expect experienced players to turn off their tactics/rules mastery whenever they are GMing.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

5 people marked this as a favorite.

The best thing to do is for you and all players from the table go in and review the scenario on its product page. Paizo staff look at those reviews closely to get feedback on what is/not working in scenarios to improve future production.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Pawns, Tales Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Has anyone spoken directly to Paizo customer service or any staffers about the issue of the grid being off? I mean technically speaking, the cover says, "24"x30" mat...1" squares on each side." Well, we have already established the 1" squares is inaccurate. I would think that Paizo would honor replacements whenever a corrected version of the map is released.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
Last time I did french toast

There fixed it for ya :-D

Sorry, my previous attempt as humor has apparently been seized by numerous people who have decided that the activity of reviewing a character's records for the purposes of understanding the build and/or finding errors will forever now be referred to as a Western European breakfast treat. So, please pass the maple syrup.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Stop focusing on the word "audit" and what that means. Focus on the point of the endevour. Call it a "scan." Call it an "audit." Call it "french toast." Who cares. The point is the intent which is to try and make sure both the player and the GM are informed as to what the character can/not do, how, and from what source while also, helping to verify that the player has properly applied the appropriate bonus/penalty to their final modifiers. This could mean a single question as posed above, it could mean a scheduled session to dissect each and every aspect of the character, or something in between. Really this discussion is starting to sound like that ridiculous argument over what the definition of "is" is.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:
Is there a procedure for when the judge gives you back the wrong CR and you need to track someone down to return theirs?

Come on now. simply do one person at a time. No one is telling you to review all the sheets for all the characters of all the players at the same time.

Look, the process is simple and if every GM did it every time, we would not have near the audit issues we have. Generally speaking you will be reviewing three pieces of paper, character sheet, ITS, and most recent chronicle. If the chronicle is completed, the ITS shows recent purchases, and a quick skim of the character sheet does not show any unusually large or out of the ordinary modifiers, pieces of equipment, or abilities, then its probable fine, even if there are some minor errors in math pro or con. This level of review can be done in less than 2 minutes per person, even fast at lower levels. And if someone has an illegible character sheet or an incomplete document then it is simple, their character is not prepared to play and they can grab a pregen. That is not meant to be mean, it is called personal responsibility. We all assumed it when we chose to play this campaign.

Unless something questionable comes up during play, assume they are fine. We are not necessarily trying to catch cheaters cause if they are any good at it, only a complete very detailed review is likely to catch any of it anyway. And if they are shorting themselves, which seems to be the case more often than not, you are actually a "hero" for helping their character be better.

Too many people think of audits as an arduous and punitive experience. It is only that way if we allow it to be that way. Simply make it part of the campaign expectations. You'll find that the most accurately maintained characters by players who take the time to complete their paperwork are the most accurate. Its the people who haven't completed a chronicle in many levels or bothered to update their ITS that tend to be rife with errors and become the most vocal when called on it.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:
...audits...

Actually if GMs simply reviewed the most recent chronicle sheet at the start of every session, the issue of intensive, lengthy audits would be largely moot

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
simulationist...immersionist...gamist...

Why is there soo much hate? ;-)

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We believe there is something wrong with the database as the frequency with which missing data is being reported is well in excess of the occasional missed or forgotten report. Paizo is looking into that. Likewise, 9-00 and season 4 of ACG is not available to report. Both of these issues will make for a lengthy delay in reported material populating. It could be many months before it is corrected depending on Paizo's schedule and workload.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Pops head in
"Expect table variation"
pops back out

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wouldn't that be considered a relatively rare even unique boss and therefore an outlier to the typical effectiveness of a fighter build? I hear about fighters being comparatively weak, but IMO anecdotal experience, they are just as effective (and often moreso) than other melee builds. Now, there might be a disparity in the long-term effectiveness of melee vs arcane or spellcasters in general, but I've never seen a measurable disparity between fighters and other melee. Or maybe I'm missing the point of your commentary.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, its the "case-by-case" where a lot of these arguments stem from. Course history has also shown that there are a lot of misinterpretations when it comes to how skill checks work, often involving Take10/20 and there is plenty of evidence to show a lot of those GMs were just wrong.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In most cases of restrictions being imposed on skill checks at the table the GM is misinterpreting rules or just plain getting them wrong. From how Take10/20 works to when/how you can aid another, etc. the rules often seem to be quite different than what the GM thinks they say or how they are remembered. However, in this case, as Pete quoted above there actually is a rule that to some extent restricts using aid another on knowledge checks. If you are trained and you are out of combat where actions matter, it should not be an issue to pool your thoughts for a combined knowledge check. But, if you are not trained, it is unlikely you can succeed at the check on your own and therefore would not be qualified to aid someone who is.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
...will drive away players

So will doing things that disappoint/aggravate the Paizo/OPF leadership causing them to reconsider deciding difficult cases in favor of the players. Ye old observation of "this is why we can't have nice things." Maybe one of the reasons the final disposition of the Lore Warden issue isn't yet resolved is because of things like the abusive speedruns that happened when the aasimar/tiefling issue was resolved. You call it how you see and I will call it how I see it. You see demonizing, I see loophole exploitation.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

meh, you just have both listed on the same card. As a GM/organizer of all three system, I don't want to have to keep 2-3 different cards on me. One card is sufficient to display the status of all three campaigns. Maybe we just have a check box so the individual can select which ones to display on their card.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

9 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
How was the Lore Warden unbalanced?

I don't really think this is a relevant question anymore. Some say it was, some say it wasn't. Either way, the design/development team decided to make some changes to it and did so. Generally speaking, PFS follows the rules as published really only deviating when a game mechanic is not compatible with the logistics of OP. In this case, the compatibility of Lorewarden has nothing to do with it. The fact it changed just means we have to deal with the effect. That Paizo has not finalized how we are going to deal with it yet seems to show they are concerned with making the best decision possible for our community and that decision seems to be extremely hard to arrive at. In the end, some people are going to be unhappy. IMO that is unavoidable. I kinda wish they would just make a ruling, post to the AR and be done with it. The sooner we peel off the band-aide the sooner we can heal the wound and move on.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Just because "speedruns" happen and are technically legal per RAW does not mean they are in the spirit of healthy gameplay or RAI. In fact, I would posit they run contrary to it. If one of my local locations scheduled a "speedrun" with the intention of simply farming a 3XP chronicle for those involved in the quickest possible time window, I would consider putting a stop to it. That is not the community I wish to see operating and not the way the game is played. Do something productive for those 3 XP. GM a mod or some scenarios for players who don't ordinarily get the play those events. Offer GM101/201 and teach some new GMs who will help spell you from time to time while earning those XP. Etc. I don't like/want to play 1st level PCs either, but I don't bastardize the system exploiting loopholes to get rewards either. Its just not healthy for the campaign.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Since the ID# is the same, there is no reason for a different card. Though the current one should be updated. Probably the OPF logo perhaps with PFS, ACG, and SFS logos smaller in support of it. Dunno, but IMO it would be counter-productive to have the ID card be focused on only one aspect of the OPF.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Blackros museum is a beloved locale in the PFS and even if they don't have a particularly good reason for a space version to exist, I think the setting would be lacking something without it. I love the idea of either Nigel still being around due to maybe some age-defying magic, or perhaps his conscious was transferred into an android body or AI computer. Could be his reward for decades of loyal service to the family.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Of the GMs scheduled, 8.9% identified as female.

Anecdotally speaking, PFS generally has a heavy ratio of male to female. Also, since according to the Department of Education nearly 80% of non-university educators are female and Gen Con's late date left most of our regular volunteers in the field of education not able to attend, the ratio of male to female GM was higher than normal.

And not to minimize the efforts of our non-traditional volunteers, our GMs who did not identify specifically as either male or female were 2.6%, up slightly from the previous year.

1 to 50 of 1,112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, 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.