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

Vic Wertz's page

Chief Technical Officer. 20,172 posts. 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 20,172 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

We will be offering digital-only subs through paizo.com, but probably not until a couple of installments into Mummy's Mask.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Though I'd say if you're recreating a map from a specific adventure, creating a thread in the forum most appropriate for that adventure will let the most interested people find it the most easily.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Are you talking about the recursion thing? It's still under consideration.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

NyteJKL wrote:

Thanks zeroth_hour.

That really needs to be clarified in the next version. I understand these are rules on top of the base game rules, but the way it is worded makes it seem that the process is different and this guide takes precedent. I also understand I may be "holy over-parsing", but since OP has to be by the rules, you can't not help over parse.

The rules you're talking about are from the "New Character" section. Don't apply them to anything other than new characters.

We don't explicitly talk about it for characters that aren't new because the standard rules
are in effect.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

It will be made so.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Tanis says the reward for this scenario (and only this scenario) should be "Each character chooses an ally that has an adventure deck number of 5 or lower from the box." We'll get that updated.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

WesWagner wrote:

IMO, and I know I am repeating myself, theme is important in a game like this and given the artwork and name of the spell, and the implication that the weapon you are summoning is not actually real, it would make much more thematic sense if the power on the card stated that you should add the divine and magic traits to your check.

Rulebook wrote:
Allow for Abstractions. Sometimes the story you imagine can get in the way of playing the game. Despite their aquatic nature, Bunyips can be encountered in the Manor House. Caltrop Bead works against Skeletons, even if they don’t have flesh on their feet. Don’t force the cards to fit your story; let the cards tell you their stories.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Theryon Stormrune wrote:

zh, I think the wording is used to separate the checks:

Succeed at a Intelligence/Knowledge 14 check (1)
OR
the check (2) to defeat has the Fire or Force trait

add 5 to the check (2) to defeat.

If you simply say add 5 to it, are you saying you add 5 to the Intelligence/Knowledge check or the check to defeat? (Most of us would understand this but still.) So they are stating specifically that you add 5 to the check to defeat. And I didn't see it say increase so it is in your benefit.

100% correct.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

TFGenesis wrote:
And let Mike have a Necromancer deck. I know they'd all be wizards or sorcerers or some-such but we'd all know they are really Necros.

In Pathfinder RPG terms, "necromancer" specifically refers to a wizard that specializes in necromancy magic. (Other specialist wizards includes abjurer, conjurer, diviner, enchanter, evoker, illusionist, and transmuter.) If we wanted to have non-wizards who deal with undead magics, we would probably choose a different word than "necromancer."

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Same as before—it'll happen, but it's not done yet.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Lucky Pips wrote:
Are each of our votes agnostic to any other votes we have made, or does each voter add as much data as possible by also ranking items relative to other items you have already voted on? Also wondering, how you ensure voters don't submit logical paradoxes if it recalls your previous votes? Just curious.

I no longer have that information stored in my head, as I haven't had to think about it for a couple years. About all I can tell you is we're using a modified version of the Schulze Method. And the most important thing is the number of voters who prefer A to B or A to C or B to C; whether you personally prefer A to B to C isn't a factor.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Andrew Betts wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:
Big Finish will continue to offer their own subs as well. (They do their subs a bit differently—you subscribe for a full AP for a fixed price, meaning no matter when you start, it begins with #1 and ends with #6.)
They also have digital only subs, which is what I prefer for this as I just don't have a place to keep CDs anymore.

We will be adding digital subs later (unfortunately, probably not until we're at least a couple volumes into MM.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
cmastah wrote:
I really think Kylo's sword saber looks silly....Darth Maul's lightsaber could be USED as a staff saber, how is Kylo going to use the hilt?

You are very late to this party, my friend. Ask Stephen Colbert.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

JJ Jordan wrote:
Do the previous upvotes count after each cull? Or do they cull and then start from scratch to see how things shake out? Just curious. I don't think it changes the philosophy much either way.

Our selection algorithm thrives on data—the more the better—and relative rankings of the surviving items were just as valid at the start of the voting period as they are now. So the data is not cleared.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vic Wertz wrote:
*Playing* is legal—our *reporting* ducks just aren't lined up yet. They should become reportable later in the week.

Paladin is reportable now.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

You should have them now.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

It doesn't actually release until next Wednesday, but some of our subscribers have it.

You might want to read this blog post and its discussion thread.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Big Finish will continue to offer their own subs as well. (They do their subs a bit differently—you subscribe for a full AP for a fixed price, meaning no matter when you start, it begins with #1 and ends with #6.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Vic Wertz wrote:
Chris Marsh wrote:
FINALLY! So my follow up question is, when can I subscribe to the Legends line?
Stay tuned.

...and subs are live.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Sorry—Carrion Golem says "You may not play spells that have the Attack trait." And since Sacred Weapon is a spell that has the Attack trait, you can't play it.

However, Wand of Sacred Weapon from Wrath 2 is an item, so even though it also has the Attack trait, you can play it against the Carrion Golem.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Encountering a villain happens in this order (from the handy reference on the back of the rulebook):

• Attempt to temporarily close open locations.
• Encounter the villain.
• If you defeat the villain, close the villain’s location.
• Check to see whether the villain escapes.

"The villain does not escape" only changes things in that last section:

Check to See Whether the Villain Escapes wrote:
If any locations are not closed, the villain escapes. If you defeated the villain, count the number of open locations, subtract 1, and retrieve that number of random blessings from the box. Shuffle the villain in with those blessings, then deal 1 card to each open location and shuffle those location decks. If the villain is undefeated, do the same thing, but retrieve the blessings from the blessings deck instead of from the box. (Note that if you did not defeat the villain, there is always at least one open location: the one in which it was just encountered.)

And temp-closing *any* location *anytime* you can temp-close always has just one effect: the villain cannot escape there.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Rebel Song wrote:

I know you said to hold, Vic, but I wanted to point out the specific reward text.

Other scenarios say "each player gains a random weapon or item," indicating that you randomly choose from all of your options from your class deck (in this case, Adventure 5 and below). This scenario specifically states "each player draws an ally that has an adventure deck number of 5 or below from the box." Why word it differently if "each player gains a random ally" was the intention?

I can't speak for Tanis's intent, but I can speak for templating. We used to say "draw a random X from the box," but since the FAQ entry I linked defined a drawing from the box as random unless a specific card is named, the template is now simply "draw an X from the box." They should be considered equivalent. If we want you to choose, old template or new, we should say "choose."

Rebel Song wrote:
Unless "the box" in this case is the base box and not the class deck. Which completely negates my entire previous paragraph.
Earning Scenario Rewards (Page 8 of the Guide) wrote:

When you would

be rewarded with a card from the box, you instead take a random card of the same type from your Class Deck box.

So as currently worded, that reward is very clearly a random card of the same type from your class deck box.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

skizzerz wrote:
What is forbidden by Vic's sidebar is, and I quote, "In these cases, the things you do cannot require anyone to do something else for your action to be meaningful—the things you do must directly affect the check."

"Anyone" means "anyone." If we meant "anyone other than you," we'd have said "anyone else."

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Please hold.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

You only add a card's traits to the check when that card determines the skill you're using for the check. The skill is determined by the weapon, not by the card that summons the weapon, so you add the traits from the weapon card, not the summoning card.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ryric wrote:
I don't know if they're going to stick to any sort of order when releasing them once we finish the CRB classes - maybe roughly the order or RPG release?

Nope. There's no huge list going deep into the future. We do them in batches of 3 or 4, and usually, we decide what the next batch is just shortly before the designers are ready to work on them. We factor in obvious things like what we're doing with Adventure Paths and OP (for example, Paladin was the top of the list for new decks because of Wrath) and less obvious things like making sure we space out basic character types (we don't want a bunch of focused spellcasters all in a row, for example). But we also factor in whether or not the designers already have a bunch of ideas sitting around for a particular class, or whether a class might benefit from mechanics that we plan to introduce in a future Adventure Path, or just whether the designers are particularly keen on working up a particular class.

Which is to say, I think we'll keep surprising you.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Myfly wrote:
However, on the other hand, it is a CARD which has the OFFICIAL Pathfinder back side and comes with the subscription ...

It went out with a bunch of paizo.com shipments, not just PACG subscriptions.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

The rules for locations cards say "The front of each location card has the following features," before the discussion of traits. So traits are only listed on the front, and still apply when the card is flipped over. (Of course, if the location card has *two* fronts, a trait's presence or absence is very much relevant.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Y'all might want to check this FAQ.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
skizzerz wrote:
Blog post says "And let's not forget that every demon they defeat (including Vellexia) has a 1 in 6 chance of summoning Shamira." but the rules indicate otherwise. Vellexia is never defeated, if she would be defeated she's evaded instead. That means she never triggers the 1 in 6 chance to summon Shamira. Which is actually correct so I know how to play it when I finally end up getting my AD4?

The blog is incorrect. Removing "(including Vellexia)."

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

I have removed some posts. Reminder:

Vic Wertz wrote:
Please note that this is not a rules discussion thread. Please keep this thread for updates and commentary about the FAQ itself, not about the gameplay issues that are or are not described in the FAQ. (See the Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion forum for discussion of those issues.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

It's an advertisement for the Card Creator created by DriveThru, not a promo card for the game created by Paizo. They gave us a bunch to put into store orders, and so we did; it had nothing to do with your subscription (and you'll note it was not listed as an item on your packing slip or in your order history).

Also, we did not promise you will "get every card through your subscription." The subscription listing says "Subscription shipments will also include any promo cards associated with that month's release." To date, we have associated every promo card we've created with a subscription shipment *except for* the Iconic Heroes cards, and we will continue to do so, but it is possible that some future promos will be treated like Iconic Heroes. I will only allow that to happen when I have confidence that subscribers will have the opportunity to get those cards with reasonable ease (as is the case for the Iconic Heroes cards); I won't allow super-rare or geographically limited promos.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Added to FAQ.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Added Mythic Marshal.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
So basically, until Lucas's death, there CAN'T be a 1080/24p, 7.1 DTS HD MA Blu-Ray of the ORIGINAL original trilogy (and even then, it will require a deal between 20th Century Fox and Disney).

I can't remark either way regarding the veracity of your general statement... but if you want the ORIGINAL original trilogy, you can't have a 7.1 soundtrack. The closest thing would be the original 70mm 6-track mixes, which had 3 front channels (left, center, right), a single surround channel, and a pair of low-frequency-effects tracks. (In modern terms, they were "4.2" mixes.) You want split surrounds and differentiation between rear and side, that won't happen without somebody making additional creative decisions well outside the scope of the original production.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

aka "later this week," unless something terrible happens.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Please note that if you've sent emails to Mike, there's no need to resend them.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Sigh. Ok, I've figured out what's happened.

• The first printing (Gamemastery logo, © 2010) had the errors listed above.

• The second printing (Gamemastery logo, © 2012) corrected the Fatigued error but did not correct the Confused error.

• I could not find a copy of the third printing (Pathfinder Cards logo, © 2013) at Paizo, but one of Liz's posts above says that both errors were corrected.

• The fourth printing (Pathfinder Cards logo, © 2015) reverted to the first printing text, meaning the errors are again present on both cards.

The responsible parties have been made aware of the error, but given that we're only a couple months into this printing, this is going to be the status quo for quite some time to come.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Hold please. Drawing from the box is always random, unless a specific card is named. (See this FAQ.) If Tanis wants this reward *not* to be random, it needs to use the word "chooses" instead of the word "draws."

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

*Playing* is legal—our *reporting* ducks just aren't lined up yet. They should become reportable later in the week.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Technically, the product's not out until next Wednesday.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Random is random, but over time will trend toward the average. And when you're seeing one entry more often than the average suggests, there's an item you are seeing less often than average suggests.

(Also, I frankly have no idea how many entries have survived the culls.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

11 people marked this as a favorite.
Pizza Lord wrote:

I kind of hope that with the cull the time limit will be reduced. I understand the 60 seconds at first, when there's definitely going to be items that haven't been seen, but when the list is narrowed I think it can be reduced.

There may be newcomers showing up late, but they can obviously take as much time as needed to read, it isn't like there's a deadline per vote.

The delay isn't about making you take the time to read it—it's about mitigating voting fraud. We don't want people clicking as fast as possible through all the entries until they spot their own (or their friend's, or just their favorite) and voting it up, then repeating. (Or doing the same to repeatedly downvote an entry they dislike, or just to introduce chaos to the voting by randomly voting on as many pages as possible.) Assuming a number of entires in the high hundreds or low thousands, seeing two entries per minute means you have to vote for hours (on average) between seeing the same item twice (of course, random is random, so it's *possible* to see repeats much sooner, but over time, you'll drift to the average).

Since culls result in fewer entries to go through before you're likely to see your target again, the delay actually becomes *more* important to the process as we cull.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

5 people marked this as a favorite.

It's great to hear that you're using them together. I think some people have the misunderstanding that Occult Adventures is our idea of a "definitive answer to psionics," which it really isn't. Apples and oranges coexisting in the same bowl!

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
nondeskript wrote:

Vic has stated in the past that Paizo does not own a trademark on "Adventure Card Game", strongly implying that they view that as a genre of games which any game designer can work in without asking Paizo or Lone Shark for permission. If you wanted to design your own ACG and use a few of the larger concepts from PACG, you would probably be fine, just like how Arctic Scavengers and Dominion (both Deck Building games) share some concepts (such as purchasing cards, having the same starting deck every game, using all of the cards in your hand each round). Depending on how many concepts are reused between Apocrypha and PACG and which specific concepts they are, Paizo may not have been able to stop them even if they wanted to. Of course, since Lone Shark and Paizo clearly have a close working relationship, it would be truly shocking to find out that Paizo had any issue with it or that Mike hadn't at least mentioned it before the KS launched.

tl;dr: Paizo likely couldn't do anything to stop Apocrypha unless it was literally a 1:1 reskin of PACG, and Lone Shark's relationship with Paizo means that would be highly unlikely.

I have previously said:

The Pathfinder ACG actually began when Lone Shark brought the game that would become Apocrypha to us, saying (more or less) "We're working on this game that we know isn't quite right for you, but we think we can make a game *like* it for Pathfinder that you will love."

..to which I will add that it was always clear that Lone Shark was going to continue to develop that game. But in no way is it PACG 2.0—PACG and Apocrypha are separate branches on the same family tree.

I have also previously said:

When it comes to competition, I believe that Magic: The Gathering actually benefited quite a bit from the existence of other trading card games. By itself, M:TG was a successful game, but it couldn't be the cornerstone of a genre until there were other TCG/CCGs. This is why we didn't trademark "Adventure Card Game"—I'd love it if, in a few years, there are a handful of ACGs in existence, giving weight to our game.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

10 people marked this as a favorite.

Please send me a copy, then—we're still in editing, so having a finished copy would make the job much easier!

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Robert Jordan wrote:
Vic, from a different view point I agree that C is the winning option for how to handle things. The issue is that the updates aren't just hitting PFS, they're going to the source material instead of a PFS reference document. Some of my players will buy the PDF or a more recent physical copy than the source I have on my shelf. That causes conflict at tables outside of PFS, where it really shouldn't. PFS is it's own strange beast with it's own esoteric rules and adjustments and that is perfectly fine, when it flows out and begins to twist the rest of the game it becomes a problem.

Following that logic, you would prefer we were selling new players the exact same Core Rulebook that we introduced several years ago, complete with all the problems that we've identified and fixed in the years since? I'm not a fan of that plan.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Words like "editions" and "versions" mean different things to different people.

Officially, Call of Cthulhu has had 7 editions, though the rules themselves changed very little between the first 6, so some people would say there have been just 2. Yet others say there have actually been *18*.

When it comes to PACG, where the content gets completely replaced every year, and sections of rule are added, removed, and rewritten, there's really no point in that kind of naming/numbering scheme.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Myfly wrote:

Just spinning some ideas...

[snip]

Just my belly feelings...
What do you think?

I think very little of that has a connection to reality.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Myfly wrote:
MTG never got a 2.0 update, so who knows...

There was a time when Magic sets had numbered editions. Alpha and Beta were retroactively considered (but not labeled) 1st Edition; Unlimited was retroactively considered (but not labeled) 2nd Edition, Revised was retroactively considered (but not labeled) 3rd Edition, and 4th through 10th Editions were actually labeled as such. (The next 6 editions were named by year, followed by Magic Origins this year, which, had the numbering remained, would be 17th Edition.)

1 to 50 of 20,172 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 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.