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

W E Ray's page

3,078 posts. Pathfinder Society character for Molech.


1 to 50 of 3,078 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

"Beth What Can I Do?"


Bob Dylan first, though!

Grand Lodge

For the record, I really love what you guys do in titling your Store Blogs each day.

Sure lot's of 'em are kinda banal but, I know, when you're trying to come up with a new one every friggin day it can be challenging to be creative and clever each time.

This line from "The Boys are Back in Town" is great. One of your best in a long while. I'll be singing it the rest of the day now (until I start killing PCs in tonight's session, that is).


And I just saw your homage to David Bowie in the corresponding Paizo Blog.

Even better than Thin Lizzy!

Grand Lodge

Hey, Deadman Walking, Thanks for potentially ruining Wrath of the Righteous.

Remember the Spoiler Tags please.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In my game if someone said "toon" or "murderhobo" I'd do what many grognards would do... ask what the hell a "toon" is.

If the answer is a player's cartoon character in a computer game I'd likely say, "But that's not what a PC is..."

I don't know any positive or negative connotation for "toon" or "murderhobo" so I'd just throw out this in conversation. When we think of cartoons we think of childlike fun, Saturday mornings when we were kids (at least, those of us who grew up when cartoons were only on Weekday mornings for an hour and Saturday mornings for 2 hours -- not now where there's whole networks devoted to them and there's a whole infestation of, um "non-children"? cartoons out there.

So "toon" -- based on this grognard's perception of it, seems cartoonish and shallow -- not at all like a PC.

But were some new gamer, say someone who's just out of college or someone who only started D&D in the mid '90s when Magic and Yugi Oh and Pokey Men were invented were to explain to me that a "Toon" isn't at all cartoonish & immature and doesn't at all imply shallow, banal, min-maxed characters, I'd be fine with the term "toon" -- but still prefer "PC."

Grand Lodge

Damon Griffin wrote:

Will (should) the first book of Iron Gods have shipped before the announcement is made regarding the next AP?

I have so little interest in Iron Gods that I've been considering the permanent loss of my Charter Subscriber status ....
Having fallen, there's less incentive to buy all future APs, so I might be opting in and out on a case by case basis after that.


They will announce the one after Iron Gods well before I.G. ships out.

This is exactly what I went through a while back.

I had absolutely NO desire for the Oriental Adventures AP, "Jade China" or whatever, but didn't want to lose my Charter Subscriber tag. As it turned out the first three volumes of "Chinese D&D" aren't even in the Far East of Golarion and vol. four is a Mongolia-like setting. Cool. So I kept my Charter subscription and just swallowed the final two volumes like a used enema.

And that did make it easier to cancel later on.

The "Let's Be Stupid Pirates" AP was when I cancelled my Charter Subscription for 6 volumes. Pirate adventures don't grate on my nerves like Oriental Adventures do but it was waaay more than enough for me to cancel.

And then I went ahead and cancelled again for Wrath of the Righteous only to more easily avoid spoilers so someone else could DM it for me as a PC. I'm back for the "Mummies in Egypt" AP though I gotta admit, I'm not too excited about it. And NO WAY am I gonna buy the "Spaceships" AP in August.

I'm again looking forward to next February's AP, hopefully a more classic D&D adventure setting & theme.

Grand Lodge

Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
Thank you for categorizing my interests as hogwash.

You're welcome, anytime.


Grand Lodge

Landon Winkler wrote:
The one after Iron Gods will probably be more traditional. They've made a point, thus far, of alternating between traditional and experimental APs.




And here's hoping they decide to stop, at least for a couple years (4 APs), doing the "experimental" APs.

Modules are a great venue for time travelling and SciFi Planet adventures and all that other hogwash that's only fun every once in a blue moon.

The APs should stick to new twists and plays on the classic D&D / high fantasy swords & sorcery tropes.

Grand Lodge

Seth Parsons wrote:
Oh! Oh! Maybe it has to do with the Harbingers!



Ah Hah!

Bethcha you're right.

And The Harbingers of Fate Adventure Path could take place pretty much anywhere though an Absalom beginning sounds most likely, especially considering that outside of Society Play we have essentially nothing in Absalom despite such huge demand for such an obvious "standard D&D setting location" -- THE central, mega metropolis -- i.e. Free City of Greyhawk, Waterdeep, Ptolus, etc., etc.

But from Absalom I can see The Harbingers of Fate AP going to Azlant (another hugely in demand location. But though Cheliax would also be an obvious stopping (or starting) point for the campaign, I don't think it's as likely, for metagame reasons, since we've had an entire AP there already -- though for me, there'll always be room on my shelf for more adventures in Cheliax.

Grand Lodge

Confirmation email received.

Anything I was doing wrong on my end?

(And,... did Paizo stop doing the 10% discount on other products if you have the AP subscription? Or does it still exist just not with non-mint merchandice?)

Grand Lodge


With the new AP I'm trying to renew my charter subscription to the Adventure Path line but I'm having problems.

I tried Saturday and now again today and when I get to the final step, placing the order, nothing happens.

Please, someone help me resume my subscription to the APs.
(Also, I'm adding a scratch-n-dent Bestiary 4 to my subscription order of Mummies-R-Us vol.1 Adventure Path.)


EDIT: Oh yeah, and wasn't there a 10% discount on other Paizo products (such as the B4) for customers with a subscription to the AP line? Is that gone? Does it maybe not apply to non-mint items?

Grand Lodge *

Omar Kintale wrote:
Alright, but forewarned being forearmed...



Just introduce me to the drunk one.

Grand Lodge

NG Halfing, Gestalt 5th Lvl Barbarian / Monk (I know, right?!)

He decided to stay and fight 4 Doom Guards (Constructs made of suits of armor, 2ed.) even though he should have made a Withdrawl.

And he forgot he had a Hero Point.


"Lady of the Mists" (Dungeon 42)
elements from Carrion Crown vol.s 3 & 5, "Broken Moon" & "Ashes at Dawn"
elements from Second Darkness vol. 4, "Endless Night"
"A Rose for Talakara" (Dungeon 25)
"The Lost Tower of Cabilar" (Dungeon 1)
"My Lady's Mirror" (Dungeon 52)

Grand Lodge *

Honk if you play the same (or a very similar) PC each time you start a new PFS PC -- ie., a Paladin of Iomedae with the same Race, Ability Scores, Feat selection, etc., etc.

Grand Lodge *

Yes, I still have about 4 or 5 from that list of ten from, what, 5 years ago? (But my number is even 3000 earlier.)

Grand Lodge *

Looking over my PFS Event records I noticed I made a huge mistake and need to know how to handle it -- in case it ever becomes a problem.

A few weeks ago a new Player arrived at my Event and wanted to learn about Pathfinder and play through the Scenario I was running. I grabbed my old list of blank PFS Numbers and assigned him the next one on my list, 14415, scratching it off so I wouldn't use it again. The Player (I have no idea his name) enjoyed the Scenario and sorta learned the difference between a d20 and a d10 but has not returned to play Pathfinder (yet).

This was 24 Feb '14, Event 1275 "Ray's PFS Home Game." He played 14415-1; I gave him the code to register in PFS should he want to.

And today, looking over my PFS Event records I noticed that I already gave that number to another Player several months ago.

This was 9 July '13, Event 1275, "Ray's PFS Home Game." I gave out Number 14415 to a new Player and she enjoyed the Scenario -- despite her PC dying -- but hasn't played again. She is the girlfriend of one of my regular Players (and also plays in my non-PFS game).

Thus, my suggested solution (since she has not yet registered the number (I don't think)) is to give her another Number while I Edit my Event record for 9 July '13. This way, if she ever wants to play in PFS again she can, albeit with a different Number -- and the guy, whom I may never see again -- can also register using the 14415 I gave him. (He has my email should he ever have any questions; I do not have his.)

Please, I'd like to know what PFS wants me to do....

Grand Lodge

Another one bites the dust in Society.

Scenario #4, "The Frozen Fingers of Midnight" eats another first level Pathfinder.

Beingarr Haldyrsson got a critical hit in the loft of his warehouse on a foolhardy CN Inquisitor of Lamashtu human as he continued the charge down one of the ceiling's skylights -- following an Eidolon who also got killed (by the two Ulfen warriors).

It taste good to me.

Grand Lodge

Why a deity instead of an Archdevil?...

Well, I dunno but why not? It's not as if his status as one as opposed to the other (or the difference between them) is a sacred cow for grognards.

Why does it bug you?

But no one will notice -- or care -- if you make him an Archdevil in your game.

Grand Lodge

The Pathfinder Wiki is faaaar superior to The Inner Sea Guide which has one paragraph of info on a location for every ten (or 12) locations. The Wiki will have (at least) one paragraph on 9 out of every 10 locations.

Grand Lodge

Dungeon Master Zack wrote:
...fey-like fiends, similar to the Azata...




Love the idea!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think that when you take one of the Greyhawk classics to put in Pathfinder you gotta think about where you'd put many of the others first -- look at them collectively -- then see what's best.

Otherwise, a year down the road you end up kicking yourself when you try to put Tamoachan in the Mwangi (perfect fit, yes?) but realize that you've already made the Mwangi Hepmonaland!

ToEE (and Return to ToEE) are great for far eastern Taldor, nice and rugged, out-of-the-way area for Hommlet & Nulb & Verbobonc. And that leaves some of the more obvious Pathfinder-locales for other GH classics.

But you should look at several...

Age of Worms would have to be near something like Greyhawk, for example, and pretty close to Scourge of the Slavelords (The Pomarj). But far from wherever you put Tsojcanth and G-D-Q.

I've put Against the Cult of the Reptile God in Varisia, a bit north of Wartle, that area, but nearer the Churlwood than the Sanos.

Tsojcanth I'd put in the northern tip of the Mindspin Mountains, on the Belkzen side, not the Nirmathan side.

Saltmarsh I'd put on the south Taldor coast (but far enough from Qadira to not be a problem).

G-D-Q seems right for just west of the World's Edge Mountains of eastern Taldor, though LOTS of folks will want it in northern Andoran. Just make sure it's not too close to ToEE -- maybe put ToEE in the NE mountainous region of Andoran if the World's Edge Mts aren't big enough for both GDQ and ToEE in your mind.

Here's a surprise: Ravenloft in Nidal, in the northeastern Uskwood -- NOT Ustalov. Ustalov is just too pulp, too "high fantasy" to be the terrifying, low fantasy I6.
(And have you read Nightglass? It's much more "Barovian" than any of the pulp-fiction of Ustalov.)

Tamoachan in the Sodden Lands, leading into the Mwangi.

I ran "Ghost Tower of Inverness" in the Spire of Nex.

"Dwellers of the Forbidden City" in southwestern Mwangi, on the Sargava side but remote from the Chelaxian colony.

A1-A4 is tricky but I'd go somewhere between Brevoy and The River Kingdoms. That's "Pomarj-enough."

I think you have to save Cheliax for the Kingdom of Ahlissa. (Which fits nicely since north of Ahlissa is the Pale -- not too unlike the darkly religious Nidal, and south of Ahlissa is Tilvanot which holds The Scarlet Brotherhood, AKA, plagiarized Red Mantis & Mediogalti.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Norker (We need another Goblinoid!)

Kopru (It's a shame this mega-great monster never had an illustration worth anything.)

Rakasta (Will the real cat-folk please stand up? Please stand up.)

Xvart (Waaay to cool to be forgotten.)

And, of course,
Mind Flayer
Yuan Ti
(But these aren't really gone; they still make regular appearances in my -- and every other PF gamer's -- games.)

Grand Lodge

MC Templar wrote:
"Never trust a Gnome in the dark"

They say that one all over Golarion!

Grand Lodge

Who is King Mogaru?

Nevermind, found him in the B4.

Grand Lodge

That's true, too. Like I said earlier, I'll go back to the drawing board -- not like I'm gonna get to play a PC for a while anyway.

Grand Lodge

Heretic gets rid of Monster Lore, thanks though.

I love (gotta have) the Fluff but if I go Inquisitor it'll be for that extra bump to my Knowledges for monster weaknesses.

Don't think I wasn't a trifle tempted when I looked at it earlier today, though.

Grand Lodge

I thought about Hermea but, I dunno, I don't see Mengkare revering anybody but Mengkare. I'm gonna read over Guardians of Dragonfall and the dragon article in AP #4, Fortress of the Stone Giants later this evening as those are the two sources that I have with info on Apsu -- but it seems Dragons Revisited and maybe the book on deities would also have info -- info I don't have access to.

Any help here would be nice.

Grand Lodge

Is there anything in any of the Pathfinder canon that shows where in the Inner Sea Apsu is heavily worshipped or revered (by humans)?
Even in the distant past?

Specifically, my choices in order would be,

1) The Land of the Linnorm Kings -- Humans or First World Fey who worship Apsu

2) Cheliax -- Humans who maybe long ago worshipped Apsu and are around somewhere hiding from House Thrune

3) Varisia -- Humans who at least revere Apsu

Or, is there any place in the canon where it does say that Apsu is worshipped or revered by humans (or, ugh, another PC race)?


Grand Lodge

Yeah, that's possible, I guess. It's just that the Fluff background is that ever since childhood Desna sent him dreams and growing up, especially with some Desna-birthmark Trait or something I found, he knew Desna had some big plans for him -- so he became a Cleric (or Inquisitor) but after several levels of adventuring (tbd during a campaign) he would discover the Worldwound or somesuch other Hey-I-want-to-fight-for-Iomedae thing and start taking levels of Paladin -- WITHOUT losing anything from Desna.

I guess I'll have to go back to the drawing board.

(No biggie, I'm DMing now anyway with no forseeable future of running a PC.)

Grand Lodge

Thanks guys.

This really sucks; I really like the character concept, raised Desnan, learns of the Worldwound and begins a new Class as a Paladin championing Iomedae -- though still revering Desna.

But alas, it is not possible in this situation to have two gods (RAW // home DMs can overrule). Although other situations exist where one can have two gods.

Grand Lodge

Tholomyes wrote:
I'm confused (on) how you could be both a Cleric of Desna and a Paladin of Iomedae, since the Cleric side must be within one step of the deity (NG, CG, or CN), while the paladin must be LG.




Okay, so it's official, my PC (assuming it's okay as per RAW) will be an Inquisitor of Desna -- with it's same Varisian backstory & Fluff) and later a Paladin of Iomedae after adventuring for a while and coming to feel the zeal of Iomedae.

It's a bit different mechanically to the Cleric I was originally thinking -- and a Desnan Inquisitor does sound kinda odd to me at first -- but thinking about the character's Fluff it still works and, more importantly, seems allowable with RAW.

Grand Lodge

Claxon wrote:
I believe that the religiously devoted classes must devote so much time to one deity that they would never have time to devote to another without losing the connection the first. Also, I suspect that deities are a bit jealous of one another



And generally I'd agree -- however -- that's why I came to this Forum where RAW is king. I'm looking for pure RAW.

I'm pretty damned sure I would never allow it in my game. (unless perhaps it was a Fighter of Desna and a Cleric of Iomedae, or something) But what does the RAW say?

Grand Lodge

Thanks guys.

Well, "generally speaking," "technically, it's within the scope of the rules" and "depends on your (DM)" sure seem to indicate that a PC CAN have more than one deity.

Unless, perhaps, you speak specifically about the Cleric Class. The problem, however, with adjudicating it such is that no where (that I found) in the text for Cleric is there language stating a Cleric must choose a deity -- it's implied of course that a Cleric must choose a deity (for Domains and Channeling) and there is language that specifically deals with Clerics "of no particular deity" but there isn't any language that says a Cleric must choose a deity -- and thus no sentence, phrase or something where we can analyze the language.

Regarding specific issue, well, whether a Player is doing it for some cheesy, munchkin reason to gain access to something or for sincere Fluff, we'll always be able to come up with a plausible reason for this AND that deity.

My personal PC is one who was born in Varisia and raised to revere Desna (even has a Desna Trait) but who, as an adult discovers Iomedae and begins to follow Iomedae. The PC does not abandon Desna -- still reveres her and follows most Desnan day-to-day precepts. But as far as the paladin-fluff, let's go kill some demons! The two deities are NOT mutually exclusive.

I easily see this Cleric of Desna becoming a Paladin of Iomedae without losing anything from Desna.

What's really cool is that, were a DM to include an aspect in the campaign where the PC must choose (even briefly) a course of action supporting one deity to the exclusion of the other, the PC (whomever he chooses) must then seek an Atonement. That would be hellafun to play!

All in all, though, it seems as if there is NOTHING in RAW indicating that a PC can't have two deities.

Grand Lodge

Could a PC be a Paladin of one god and a Cleric of another???

Or an Inquisitor of one god and an Oracle of another?
Or Inquisitor and Paladin?

Yes, right?
Paladins and Oracles don't have any RAW abilities drawn from specific deities, just general Divine powers. Whereas Clerics and Inquisitors have specific Domains and Alignment restrictions tied to a specific chosen deity.

So technically a Paladin of say, Iomedae, could also be a Cleric of Sarenrae because Clerics get Domains -- actual mechanics tied to a specific deity, as opposed to Paladins who just get Divine powers from a generic "their god."

Thus a Paladin's choice in deity is all Fluff (just has to be LG) but Clerics and Inquisitors choose because of Fluff and Crunch. And since a Paladin's choice is all about Fluff with no additional Crunch, the PC could have two deities, one for each Class.

How 'bout this:

Could a PC be an Inquisitor of one god and a Cleric of another?!?!

This seems much more unlikely but still, RAW seems to indicate, um, "Probably."

"If the inquisitor has cleric levels, one of (his or her) two domain selections must be the same domain selected as an inquisitor."

So, one of the Domains HAS to be shared but does that really imply that the deity must be the same? Plenty of deities share Domains!

Grand Lodge *

Aberrant Templar wrote:
Oh come now, I've called the Pope worse things than "ayatollah" over the years.



Not me.

I've called the papacy worse things over the years.

No problem with the individual.

Grand Lodge *

Thanks everyone,

Yeah, I still see it as I saw it in my OP -- I'll arbitrarily decide when I change my Alignment and let the DM know at the end of the Scenario, ask him or her to initial it on my Cert. if he or she really feels it is or is not necessary, and it's done.

Obviously, in some cases a PC rules-set will actually change: a Barbarian becoming Lawful, a Monk becoming non-Lawful, a Divine-build PC moving too far from the deity or Alignment -- but if the Player decides to go that route then there's nothing in the Core (and Society as far as I see) that says he can't.

If a Player wants his Monk to become Chaotic then he gets to arbitrarily say "He's Chaotic" and he's Chaotic -- and he just lost pretty much everything on his character sheet but, hey, it was his choice.

In my case would be a PC, probably all Fighter, who finally switches to Lawful Good and can take levels in Paladin. All I'd have to do is tell the DM that I'm changing Alignments and he or she can decide whether or not to initial that change on my Society Cert. I don't see how (in this case) it would really matter but let the DM decide.

I can see, on the other hand, that if the PC I create has a level or two of Barbarian in addition to the levels of Fighter when I finally decide to become Lawful Good, the DM has more of a reason to initial my Alignment on my Cert. since as of next Scenario my PC can no longer Rage.

Grand Lodge *

Talon, can we find that out for certain?!


In my case, the background for my PC is that he wants desperately to one day *be* a Paladin of Iomedae.
He feels the call.
He has the zeal.
He has absolutely no idea why Iomedae doesn't answer his prayers and bless him with Paladinhood.

He's Chaotic Good.

But as I play him, over the levels, I'd like him to gradually develop, grow from the pathetic lame-ass chaotic alignment to neutral good, and eventually Lawful Good -- the BEST alignment in the game, of course. (We all acknowledge the truism that everyone with a Chaotic alignment sucks, right?...)

And one day, I dunno what level but someday, my PC will become LG and start taking levels of Paladin.

(Rules-wise, crunch-wise, he'd only lose his ability to Rage if he has a few levels of Barbarian. Not sure if he'd be a Fighter or a Ranger or a Barbarian before he finally becomes a LG Paladin, but if it's Barabarian, he can't Rage ever again.)

Grand Lodge *

Majuba wrote:
Hey Ray - I think the primary reason to strongly limit credit for playing multiple times is "fun".

Yeah, that's understandable.

For some folks, though, "fun" is achieved differently.

In my specific case, I really like the season 0 Scenario "Black Waters." I don't remember if I played through it or DMed it in Society (pretty sure I played but that was, what, 5 years ago?). Anyway, I like it enough that I've run it a few times as part of Homebrew campaigns, adjusting things from time to time as desired, but still really love it as a Society Scenario.

For me, I would have fun DMing that (and a handful of other Scenarios) several times for new Society Players -- obviously I couldn't (wouldn't want to) run it for any one Player twice, but for all new Players, "Black Waters" would be my "go-to" first or second Scenario.

Incidentally, one of the other Scenarios I really like is "Voice in the Void." As it turns out I've already DMed it and Played through it. Now, I know I'd like to run it again in the future (obviously only for folks that haven't experienced it) but, honestly, I am kinda upset that if I do I won't get to apply a Cert. to one of my PCs.

It's not the end of the world; it just sucks.

Grand Lodge *

Chris Mullican wrote:
Have you read the forums more than just this post to complain about GM rewards?

Admittedly no, that's why I come to the Boards to ask -- you guys will have waaay more insight than I. In our conversation Saturday we were pretty split on Boons. Talking it through we each acknowledged several sides of the issue: it's good as it stands; it's badly designed but easily fixed in the future; some folks will read ahead no matter what and find a way to cheese/cheat, etc.


Chris Mullican wrote:
People said the chronicle sheets were nothing more than sheets with your gold on it. So mid-season 3, season 4 they started adding cool boons for completing scenarios. They are very well liked. Then in season 5 we got Faction Boons and other boons. Overall they have been generally well liked.


This is what I was looking for.
....In the opinions of regular Society players, are Seasons 0, 1 & 2 Scenarios considered not-"beneficial"-enough-for-PCs compared to Seasons 3 & 4?


Chris Mullican wrote:
You keep bringing this topic up like it hasn't been discussed before and like your thoughts are original thoughts


Ray wrote:
Has there been much conversation on the Boards here about . . . . Has there been any thought about....
Chris Mullican wrote:
I can assure you isn't going to change despite what you say or think about GM rewards.

Well, perhaps but that's one of the important aspects of the Boards, to see what people like/don't like. If I'm in the vast minority then, of course, but I'll still ask and try to begin a dialog (afterall if Boons from the first few seasons SUCKED and enough folks talked about it so that the next few seasons Boons were WAAAAY overpowered, who knows what the future holds?

In Season Zero DMs only got half gold, half prestige and a half-ass PC because of it and, among others, I'm sure, I b+&&#ed like hell on the Boards here and by, I dunno, Season 2?, DMs got full gold and prestige.

....Anyway, thanks Chris for the insight.

Grand Lodge *

So,... one can change his or her PC's Alignment at the end of a particular Scenario, um, arbitrarily, right?

So after finishing my fourth Scenario, for example, I can inform the DM (when he's signing my Cert.) that I'm going from CG to NG and, uh what, he writes that down or doesn't really need to or what?...


Grand Lodge *

So,... back to the OP--

In our Homegame Saturday we talked about this crap-bag Society rule that you can only get credit for a single Scenario twice, once for a PC when you play through it and once when you DM it.

This lead to our conversation of why that rule exists.

Is it just because of the following two reasons:
1} So folks keep having to purchase pdfs of new Scenarios making Paizo more money. (That I don't have a problem with, though I feel that two credits is too few.)

2} Because jerk-off cheese-cheaters find Scenarios with a tad more gold and, more likely, the ones with the stupid-broken boons -- the BANE of Society play -- and thus munchkin their way to a slightly stronger PFS-PCs?

Because if it's because of #2, the boons, that really upsets me. Boons are one of those "good-idea-in-theory / really-shi++y-in-practice" things about Society play (kinda like Factions & Faction Missions).

Has there been much conversation on the Boards here about the unbalanced and/or ridiculous lameness of Boons?
"Hey look, I get a +1 on a single Diplomacy Check the next time I meet a *Gnoll* from friggen Katapesh -- Now there's something for my character sheet! . . . . "Oh neat, that's like my Boon, one free True Resurrection."

Has there been any thought about just eliminating all Boons altogether and vastly improving Society play?

Why can we only get credit twice for one Scenario if we regularly DM?

Grand Lodge *

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Thanks guys -- now it's all clear.

Much Appreciated



Not that it really matters but... I've been playing D&D and saying "DM" since I was a little kid in the '70s -- I still play D&D and say "DM" even though Paizo's not legally allowed to call it "D&D." (Or "DM"). That doesn't mean it's not D&D. Pathfinder is D&D. The best edition so far. My favorite so far and I've played all of them except the one/s that WotC did after they cancelled the magazines. Again, it's no big deal but Pathfinder IS D&D. And for me, meh, I say "DM" cuz that's what I've been saying my whole life. Your preference may vary.

Grand Lodge *

So, once one of your PCs has played through a Scenario you can't get credit for that Scenario in the future for another PC if you're DMing the Scenario?!?

So if my PFS PC#-1 plays through Scenario #29 (for example), then, a few years down the road, I'm asked to DM a Scenario -- and since the Event is filled with gamers who've played lots of Season 3, 4, & 5 Scenarios but not so much from Seasons 0 or 1 -- AND I remember how much fun Scenario #1 was when I played through it a few years ago and even has three sequels from Season 1 so I could continue to run the series -- and thus choose to DM Scenario #29 -- I DON'T GET CREDIT FOR IT to apply to my PC#-2?!?

If that's how it works, that's ridiculous.

Grand Lodge *

Confirm please....

When you DM a Scenario you can apply DM-Credit to any of your PFS PCs that does not already have credit, player or DM, for that Scenario.

When you Play a Scenario you can only play one you have NOT DMed or played UNLESS you must in order to create a "legal" table to allow the "play, play, play" rule. In these (RARE) cases, you can still only play a PFS PC that does NOT already have that Scenario's credit.

Finally, if you must play through a Scenario you've DMed or played (in order to make a legal table for "play, play, play") but none of your PFS PCs who haven't played that Scenario are appropriate level, you play a level-appropriate PreGen and when another of your PFS PCs reaches the appropriate level, you can apply the credit from this PreGen to your real PFS PC. (This seems like it may not be the protocol.)


Grand Lodge

Ah, I see.

Yeah, I'd definitely go back to my first response: Give Paizo a few more years -- it's all still pretty new (compared to FR).

I remember about 6-7 years ago having a conversation with some gamers explaining I loved FR but was an "infant" as far as, well, as far as Realms Lore. I knew a bit and enjoyed the setting but compared to the real FR Heads I was a babe.

Later that night (and why this is memorable to me) I counted up the FR novels I'd read and the adventures I had ran. Turns out I've read 38 FR novels and own/ have run 19 FR adventures, plus 8 sourcebooks.

And I'm an infant.
All that said, we do have quite a bit of Pathfinder stuff so maybe it's time to consider a name.

And even though it maybe doesn't yet roll off one's tongue and even though it sounds alien to us now -- why not call a Pathfinder expert a Chronicler with great knowledge of the Chronicles.

It fits with the Pathfinder setting and doesn't sound bad at all once you get used to it.

Grand Lodge

In first edition there was a "monster" race called "Frost Men" that were about the same, "CR-wise" as a hobgoblin or a norker. They were in the 1981 Fiend Folio. Probably find it online somewhere.

Grand Lodge


Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Give Paizo a few more years -- it's all still pretty new (compared to FR).

That being said, the Pathfinder Chronicles are a pretty reasonable equivalent to Realms Lore.

If you're a Pathfinder then you probably hope to publish your own journal in the Pathfinder Chronicles, meaning there's lots of Pathfinder Chronicles out there to read. Cooler than Elminster's drivel or the silly Vollo's Guides since the Chronicles are written by adventurers (mostly actual PCs).

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Do you know your Eidolon?

In the Biblical sense?

Grand Lodge

Even for an Eidolon,

"No" means "No."

That being said, you know that every Eidolon in the history of Summoners that isn't with an adventuring PC, and even many that are, looks like a tall, hot blonde (or red-head). Heck, you can change your Eidolon's look to suit your taste, so...

Bring on the Serpentine Form!

Grand Lodge

Thanks guys for all your help!

1 to 50 of 3,078 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.