aboyd's page

Organized Play Member. 259 posts. 20 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 1 Organized Play character.


RSS

1 to 50 of 259 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

I have a question about the map for hospice of the Blessed Maiden on page 112. It says that the map is "1 square = 10 feet." When I look at the map, all the items drawn on the map are absolutely wrong for 5 ft OR 10 ft. For example if the map squares really are 5 ft big, then that means all the cots shown on the map are for halflings, because those cots are not even filling a 5-ft square. They're like 4 ft long. They're tiny. If however we say that each square is 10 ft then that means that these cots are 8 ft long, which is also ridiculous. Because the map appears to be wrong at either size, I'm not sure which size is correct. How are you guys using the maps for the hospice of the Blessed maiden?


Hey, sorry to cast Raise Dead on this topic, but it's just a few days since it died. I thought I should tell you all what just happened with this item.

The healer watched in horror as a giant ate a person and then spat the body at her. She then used the item on her turn to heal objects via a quickened channel -- and since dead people count as objects in this game, it healed the corpse -- and then on her same turn she cast Breath of Life, and brought the guy back.

I was completely perplexed as to how this should be ruled. Healing the corpse using object healing from the magic item seems like it would at least mend bone & skin, even if it didn't bring the person back to life, so I counted it at least to help get the victim out of the deep deep negative hit points it was in. Then Breath of Life topped that off and the person was alive.

I found this to be a completely unexpected but possibly correct application of the rules. I have no idea if I adjudicated that correctly, but it was the best I could figure.


It IS a Jeopardy door, but try not to word it that way for your players. I did not word it that way myself, but when one player figured it out, he said exactly that out loud, which caused another player to then answer a couple of questions in actual Jeopardy format, which doesn't actually work.

(If I remember correctly, the current "answer" on the table was "Pharasma, Rovagug, Nethys." The correct question for that is "Who are some of the gods?" Or even "What are the names of some of the gods?" However, because a player heard "Jeopardy format" she then replied "What is a god?" In Jeopardy, that'd be right. In this door system, however, you're expected to ask a real question that gets that answer, so it should be as close to natural question/answer as possible. The question "What is a god" would get a response such as "a god is a supreme being, possibly all-powerful, or all-knowing, possibly the creator of existence" or something like that. It's totally wrong for the answer provided. Thus the correct answer is "What are the names of some of the gods?" Or close to that.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A year ago there was a post on Reddit about a puzzle called the question door. The idea is that to get a magic door to open, the door speaks some words, and the PCs have to respond correctly. However, it's a small trick: the door is speaking the answer to a question, and the PCs have to provide the question. This is an interesting challenge because the players are not told that they are being given answers, nor told that they need to provide the question. AND the door will hear any question -- even "what is this door talking about?" -- and count that as the question, and evaluate it. So there is a funny early moment in this challenge, when players are asking questions, they don't realize that they are providing the door with something to evaluate, and then the door deems the question to be the wrong one, and it moves on to the next set of answers.

Last week, I ran my players through the very first ever Pathfinder Society module, called A Silent Tide. I ran this as a house-ruled home game, not official PFS stuff. One of the sections of the module is a challenge of 5 treasure chests to open, but supposedly none could be opened by a normal locksmith -- Disable Device (or in this old module, they call it Open Locks) won't open the locks.

EXCEPT... one of the chests *can* be opened with that skill, completely undermining the story that the locksmith was befuddled. So, I had to take that box (chest #1 I think) and give it a new test or challenge. I chose the puzzle door idea. I told players that the box had 3 glass circles on the lid, looked like they might light up or something, but none were lit at the moment. A PC pressed the first circle, and the sequence began, answers were spoken with a mechanical voice. Get one right, a circle lights up. Once you light up all 3 circles, the box opens. My players needed almost all the question/answer combos below, because they had no idea what was happening for the first 10 tries or so.

* Eziah of the Silent Sanctum -> Who lives on the sun? (Or, what famous wizard moved to the sun to get away from people?)
* Somal -> What is the name of the moon of Golarion?
* onyx gem, silver wire, diamond dust -> What are some spell components?
* pork, beef, chicken -> What are some types of meat?
* breathing fire -> What is a red dragon's special attack?
* copper, silver, gold, platinum -> What are the coins of the realm?
* Pharasma, Rovagug, Nethys -> Who are some of the gods?
* Misery Row in Absalom, also Downmarket in Kaer Maga -> Where can someone buy slaves?
* Acavna, Amaznen, Aroden -> Who are the dead gods?
* Alaznist, Xanderghul, Karzoug, Krune, Sorshen, Zutha, Belimarius -> Who are the Runelords? (Or who are the *last* Runelords?)
* Brigh -> Who is the goddess of invention?
* Milani -> Who is the god known as the Everbloom? (Or, who is the god who fights against oppression and unjust rule?)
* you -> Who is trying to get into this box?
* cinnamon, cork oak, eucalyptus -> What are some trees that have a bark which is harvested for use?
* Akiton -> What is the desert planet? (Or, what is the 4th planet from our sun? Or, what is the red planet?)
* Sovyrian, on Castrovel -> Where is the ancestral homeland of the elves?
* Cailyn and Romre Vanderale -> Who saved the city of Magnimar from the spider-race known as the shriezyx? (Or, who are the leaders of the Eyes of the Hawk?)

Anyway, if any of you wish to steal these pre-made answer -> question sequences, feel free. (Note that I picked which ones to use in random order. Also, once they realized that they needed to provide the questions, I allowed the players to do Knowledge checks for info -- kind of a fun way to learn some facts about the game world.) Have fun!


zza ni wrote:
it does nothing that mending or make whole can't do

Yes, it does. That's why I'm here asking about it. From the rule text for Mending, and by extension Make Whole (since it says it works as per Mending):

Quote:
All of the pieces of an object must be present for this spell to function.

This is why Mending and Make Whole are limited. All pieces must be there -- it basically glues the pieces back together, but it does so perfectly with no seals or seams. However, if you're missing pieces it doesn't work. AND if a fire burned your spear's shaft and it is now weakened, Make Whole won't fix it, because the burned away parts are gone.

By contrast, the magic item under discussion here has no such limitation. It heals as people are healed from healing spells. And people are magically healed from a monster biting/clawing skin off, or a Fireball burn destroying skin & hair, etc. So if a player says, "my spear is ruined, the fire weakened the shaft and it's going to break," then with Make Whole or Mending the answer is: "correct, that item is ruined." However, with this magic item, the answer is: "if healing will heal up a person burned by a Fireball, then it'll heal this burned spear shaft too. Watch as the wood regrows and looks whole again!"

Similarly, missing pieces ruin Make Whole or Mending, but do not ruin this magic item's power. If a sword has lost 3 small pieces of the blade, Make Whole & Mending say "nope, can't do it, your sword is forever stuck in a broken state." However, this magic item again can do it: "yeah, I mean, we can heal a person who had a bear take a bite out of his side, so we can heal a sword with a few little 'bites' out of it, too."

Obviously, it can't do as much as the Regenerate spell, but it can do as much as the Cure spells. And that's a lot more than normal, which is why it is an anomaly, and why I called it out.

Also, Make Whole & Mending have this limitation in the spell text:

Quote:
Magic items can be repaired by this spell, but you must have a caster level equal to or higher than that of the object.

The magic item discussed here has no such limitation.


A player in my game has asked to buy Construct Channel Brick which seems on the surface like an actually weak item. 10,000 GP to be able to use your channels doing what is essentially the Mending spell.

HOWEVER. This item has none of the limitations of Mending. The wording even suggests the power of it: you heal objects as you heal people. Well, Mending can't "heal" a burned building, because by the rules the burned areas have been converted to a different form (ash? particles on the air?). But in Pathfinder we ALWAYS heal our teammates when they get Fireballed. In other words, normal healing will heal a person who is burned, and will heal you if a bear takes a bite out of your leg.

So this item, unlike Mending or even Make Whole, will "heal" buildings that are missing chunks of wall, or burned areas. I guess since normal healing won't regrow missing limbs, I could say that this special magic item won't regrow support beams or other big "limbs" of a structure... but the outer walls got charred black by fire? Fixed. Missing bits & pieces? Regrown.

Why is the item's wording like this?!?! And do you think the pricing (10,000 GP) is fair?

So far, all I've told the player is that I will not allow "starfish" exploits, where they blow up a building, separate the pieces, and then "regrow" hundreds/thousands of buildings from the wreckage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks everyone.

While I appreciate the discussion about SLAs needing minimum ability scores, I would note that all examples are for playable races that players can take. The original question is in regards to monsters the GM is running; in this case, devils. These devils have nothing listed about minimum ability scores. They don't work like player races.

For example, the Magaav. It has some SLA, two SU, and one EX. Nothing has a minimum CHA listed. Of course, the general rules for ability damage note that under charisma the saving throw DCs are reduced, but nothing else is listed.

So all in all, I think that whole line of reasoning is distraction from the original question. For devils, they have nothing listed that shuts off their powers for a lowered charisma score. I suspect that's the same for all or most monster stat blocks.

So I think the people posting that SLAs are not shut off due to ability damage are right. They function even with ability damage. At least for the devils in question. However, it also appears that SLAs do get treated as spells for Feeblemind's "shuts off spells" line.

I would note that this debate has been raging since 2002 back in the D&D 3.0 times, and it looks like the rule text was never updated anyway! So this problem has been around a long time.

I'm still not sure what to decide, but I think I'm falling on the side of SLAs are like spells "enough" that it means Feeblemind wipes 'em out. Probably.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm running a game in which the BBEG just failed a save vs. Feeblemind. We conveniently had to end the night at that point, so I am able to read up on how exactly this works. My BBEG is a type of devil with spell-like powers and supernatural powers. Do any of them work, still?

According to Feeblemind itself, it only says it shuts off "spells" -- so I assume anything else works. But sometimes spell-likes are considered to count as spells; do you think that applies here? And what about supernaturals?

Even if the devil can use these powers, with a charisma of 1 I have to assume that they have horribly lowered saving throw DCs, to the point of almost being useless. Right? Because most Sp & Su abilities are powered by charisma. Or at least I think that's true.


If my character doesn't spend the harrow points accrued in module 1, can I spend them in module 2 or 3? I understand that I'll get some new harrow points in each module, but some of them won't help/matter -- for example, I don't care about the strength or intelligence harrow points, but the dex and con harrow points are a big deal. If I save them, can I use them later?


Does the word "constant" really mean "24 hours" or similar? I have never heard it used that way.


Tribal Bond for reference, it's about halfway down the linked page.

I have a player who has used Tribal Bond as an all-day thing. I recently looked it up because that seemed a bit OP, and we ended up in a debate. Here's the issue: it says the effect is "as Telepathic Bond." Well, Telepathic Bond says it lasts 10 minutes per level.

Argument in favor of it lasting all day: it says the shaman gets this when she "communes with her spirit animal to regain spells." So you don't get to pick a time to start the effect. So it would seem to be a "when you start the day" thing, which argues in favor of it lasting all day. If it doesn't last all day, I'd want the players to be able to pick when it triggers.

Argument in favor of it not lasting all day: Telepathic Bond says it won't.

What's the verdict for the rules lawyers here? Both RAW and RAI would be welcome.


Thanks Scavion. I ended up finding some real stuff, though. It turns out Cayden's church is a mead hall. So I gave them that option, as it was right there. And then I took the Saucy Wench, which is canonically in the Coins District, and just decided it was a bit north right by the market. With those 2 in place, I think it's OK.

Thanks again!


My players are visiting the church of Sarenrae and the market. They want to stop for a beer, and want to find a place to stay. I told them I'd find a tavern in the Ascendant Court or market, but when I went to the Pathfinder wiki, it featured none.

So does anyone know (or can easily find) a name or link to a tavern or inn that is close to the Ascendant Court? Maybe in the north end of the coins? Or even a tavern that just had a single mention in a product, and happens to be right next to the temples?


I appreciate the necro, in any case.

I literally just searched Google for this issue, for Pathfinder 1, and got brought here, and the new posts are the ones that helped the most.

It's a dead game nowadays, and yet these new bits are helping those of us searching, even now.

Thanks.


Kevin, I wasn't asking for that (scenarios that make sense for why you're fighting a Runelord), so saying it can't be done doesn't really contribute to the conversation.

I feel like this entire interaction has gone wonky, with me trying to clarify & re-clarify what I'm looking for, and at this point it just doesn't matter. I posted years ago asking for a certain campaign using PFS scenarios and I had it within a day or two, and it was perfect. This time, I asked for something that followed one or two of the themes of the season story arcs, and instead I got "look up by area" or "can't be done with Runelords" or other stuff. It's clear it's not working out. Thanks for the help anyway, it was kind of you to take time out. I guess I didn't convey my needs well. I'll blame myself. Thank you all. Please carry on in other threads -- I've clearly muddied this so badly that it's pretty hopeless for anyone to chime in and offer solutions or ideas. So no need to waste your time.

Once I figure it out I'll contribute the list. Thanks.


Quote:
There's not really a way to string scenarios together that'd make sense

I mean, we're literally in a thread where people ARE stringing scenario together regardless of the adventure paths. And the campaign I'm in now is directly pulled from this thread, and it works!

But OK, I understand that Pathfinder 1 is pretty far gone now, and the people who were doing the original posts here have moved on, so I'll set to building it myself. I'm not that good at this, so I expect it requires me to read/skim ALL the published products for seasons 5-10, so it'll take me months, but when I'm done I'll come back and post the list just in case any other stragglers are out there still playing PF1.


I didn't see anything at that link about putting together a string of modules that follow the season 6 theme of tech, or follows the season 8 theme of elemental planes. Or some other story arc. Am I missing it? Sorry if I'm just not seeing it.


Thanks! I should note while my season 0-4 arc was in Absalom, the next one can be anywhere. I'll take any scenarios/modules, if they're fun, make sense, and are from seasons 5-10.

Though it sounds like season 9 & 10 aren't really needed as a story arc, maybe just filler? Since they didn't have a big theme pushing them forward.


Hey everyone! I wanted to add to this topic before Pathfinder 1 is dead dead dead. I'm currently running a "mostly Absalom" campaign, from page 2 of this topic. It was created back when seasons 0-4 were the main seasons. It has been going GREAT.

However, the team is asking if there is a campaign for seasons 5-10. I'm not even sure what the themes were for each of those seasons, but my guess is that trying to cover ALL of them would be difficult. Does anyone have an idea for a campaign that covers seasons 5-10, but tries to do justice to at least 1 or 2 of the major season themes?

I'd sure like the "tech" theme of season 6, but I don't know what the other themes were, and if they were good. Season 5 is demons? Season 7 is spirits/haunts? Season 8 is planes? No idea what 9 or 10 were.

Anyway, if you have ideas -- if any of you even remember what PFS modules were good & fun from this "era" of Pathfinder -- I'd love to hear from you. Even if you don't have a full list of modules/scenarios for a campaign, I'd be open to just hearing something like, "get 6-07 and 7-09 because those two are the best" or anything like that.

Thanks thanks thanks.


Thank you all so much. I feel like I really have a grasp on this now. Much appreciated.


bbangerter wrote:
(Unless there is also a rule somewhere I'm forgetting that says creatures with total cover cannot be targeted by spells).

Kind of. The combat rules section on total cover says this:

Quote:
You can’t make an attack against a target that has total cover.

That seems pretty cut & dry, but then the aquatic rules section adds this:

Quote:
A completely submerged creature has total cover against opponents on land unless those opponents have freedom of movement effects. Magical effects are unaffected except for those that require attack rolls (which are treated like any other effects) and fire effects.

So something like a lightning bolt might shoot directly into the water, no attack roll, and seemingly ignore the total cover limitation. I don't know if that's right -- according to some answers so far it's not right, but maybe they hadn't put all these rule quotes together? Or maybe I'm missing something.


From the aquatic terrain rules:

Quote:
A completely submerged creature has total cover against opponents on land unless those opponents have freedom of movement effects. Magical effects are unaffected except for those that require attack rolls (which are treated like any other effects) and fire effects.

Based upon this, my players have argued that total cover doesn't exist in this situation, as the rules say the spells are unaffected. With no cover, Magic Missile hits unerringly.

Yes? No? What does that rule I've quoted do for this issue? Is it a monkey wrench?


Question 1: Can a person standing on shore cast Magic Missile into the water, hitting a creature completely submerged?

Question 2: Can a person standing on shore cast Magic Missile into dirty water with a film of algae/scum that blocks visuals, hitting a creature completely submerged?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

To answer the original question back in post 1, I'm still playing PF1. I'm GMing Rise of the Runelords and we're in module 6. Once that's done, one of the players will become GM and run us through Curse of the Crimson Throne.

I also have a 2nd group that is going through a "campaign" of PF1 PFS scenarios, each strung together to form a long story arc. AND we're using only modules/scenarios from the first 5 seasons, so we have all the original factions and faction missions, and so on. I've snuck in Flight of the Red Raven, and it'll tie to the end-cap with all the Eyes of the Ten scenarios. Should be cool, IF we stick together (this is the group that is having the most trouble keeping at it).

I also have a 3rd group that is running through Dragon's Demand. I expected them to hate it. They're all young (20s) and love D&D 5th edition, and I'm the odd-man-out, in my 40s and running them through a Pathfinder 1 module. But they seem to love it, and have asked that I come up with good follow-up modules to keep playing after Dragon's Demand, so that's nice.

I suspect I won't give up PF1 until PF3. PF2 didn't go in a direction I want. I saw that Wizards of the Coast course-corrected when D&D 4th edition didn't go well, so I'm holding out hope that maybe PF3 will be a course correction in about 8 years. But if not, that's OK. I have TONS of material to go through with PF1, and the rules are forever free online. So it's great!


I have a player who has Ghoul Fever, and failed a couple saves so now it's ongoing saves each day to try to end it. The team is now trying to stack advantages to the saving throws as he's making the rolls. However, I never thought that the PCs even had a real "time of day" when a save is made -- we mostly just roll in the morning as the game day starts, but the roll is a reflection of 24 hours of disease.

Because of this, I thought short-term boosts would not help. You wouldn't even know when to time them for a save, and if you did, you'd need the boost to last the whole day leading up to the save.

So can casting Remove Sickness at 1st level, in which it only lasts 10 minutes, be enough to grant a +4 to that day's saving throw against Ghoul Fever?

Also, since this is the rules forum, if you do have an answer, I'd love to see any rules text that backs it up directly or indirectly.

Thanks for your advice!


I think "burn it with fire" is not very meta. It's pretty normal, even in the real world.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nick, hearing what your intentions are for this really helps a lot. Thanks so much.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dan Armstrong wrote:
Harold Ervin wrote:
Less Fewer haunts.

I seem to have a hard time making these fun as well. I wonder if they should have some more element of puzzle in them to engage the players more.

I would also like to hear some GM tips from someone who has success running them.

For me, haunts were a mess until I read & re-read & re-re-read the haunt rules. I think they're really wonderful and can tell a great story, but you have to be soooo perfectly in tune with the rules. It takes a lot of GM descriptions and prodding, in order for players to feel like they're even sure what's happening. Here are two interesting nuances I picked up from the rules:


  • Haunts, by the rules, would only ever trigger on one person. Group experiences are impossible. Why? Because it triggers the moment a PC hits a designated zone, which is almost always a leader and almost never a group of PCs who fanned out and are approaching an area in a wide line that would all hit the zone simultaneously. So it should almost always be that 1 PC is suffering effects and everyone else just stands there watching (or, you know, takes action to help, but at that point they're an observer rather than participating in the ongoing mental interaction). Technically, you can't move in to experience the opening vision of the haunt, because of this line: "All characters in the haunt’s proximity can attempt to notice the haunt at the start of this surprise round" which means they cannot move in to the haunt's zone first, and thus cannot participate in the hallucination/haunting, even if they wanted to.)
  • Here's a neat thing. I've never seen a PFS GM use this rule, except for me. But check this: "The GM may elect to treat all neutralized haunts (those reduced to 0 hp) as CR 1 rapping spirits while they reset. Using this option, haunts retain enough ectoplasmic fortitude to linger in the area, where they attempt to convey their needs to the living. While these knockings are still potentially frightening, communication with these feeble spirits can be established by working out a series of codes (such as one rap for “yes” and two for “no”) or by calling out words, numbers, and letters for selection by the spirits." That is so completely right out of scary movies and kids with Ouija boards hearing thumps and bangs and so on. It's also something like modified Christmas light communication, straight out of Stranger Things. It's cool and helps the PCs a ton.


In addition, I really enjoyed the haunts in Rise of the Runelords, but they modified haunt rules to make it more customized to the PCs. So that's kinda "cheating" to make it more enjoyable.


Will is about willpower, or your brain. Why would being able to bench press 400 pounds mean your brain is strong?


I'm trying to find high touch-AC monsters. I found that a beetle was listed as having high touch AC. And the stat block does have the touch AC at 16. However, what you may notice is that it's applying natural armor to that touch AC. That shouldn't work. It should be that the touch AC is 11, and the flat-footed AC is the high one, at 16. Right?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I just finally played through this as a player (high tier) and read the module afterwards, and I have to say that I really enjoyed it! However, it has a problem that is similar to 9-03 Border of War. That is, TONS of status effects. Confusion? Yes. Poisons? Yes. Ability damage? Yes. Smoke & Black Tentacles combo effects? Yes.

I think it made for a LOT of fun, but it's also a lot to juggle if you're the GM.

I loved the terrain & environmental challenges. I'd urge GMs to be very familiar with ceiling heights, box/barrel heights, rules for difficult terrain, etc. Know the maps!


RealAlchemy wrote:
On the Enlightened Ambassador boon from the chronicle sheet : am I reading it correctly to think it can be used to ignore invisibility for one round?

No, but yes, kinda. It grants you the ability to ignore concealment entirely. However, that doesn't mean you see invisible creatures, and you do not ignore their invisible state. You still cannot see them, and you still must figure out which square is the correct square to target. Here is what the rules say about invisibility:

Core Rulebook wrote:
A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something’s there” but can’t see it or target it accurately with an attack. It’s practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature’s location with a Perception check. Even once a character has pinpointed the square that contains an invisible creature, the creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance).

So... the Enlightened Ambassador boon will "turn off" the miss chance, but it does nothing to help you pinpoint an invisible creature's square, nor does it let you "see" the invisible creature. You'll need to get over those hurdles before you can take advantage of Enlightened Ambassador. But if you DO get past those hurdles, then you have 1 round of ignoring concealment, making your character awesome.

SanderJK wrote:
I understand that warpriests are a pain and a half to run as a BBEG anyway, but he actually did the thing Cult Leaders need to do and buy Weapon Focus, which qualifies him as far as I can see?

I don't think the full stat block has every class detail. If you are clear about what the Cult Leader archetype takes away, and how the class works in such a changed state, then I do not see why you would hold back. The class is documented and this bad guy seems to follow the rules for it. However, you cannot ignore the tactics section of his stat block. It says:

Test of Tar Kuata wrote:
During Combat Tasutek uses his enthrall ability to stop the PCs in their tracks, giving him a moment to cast spells that augment his combat abilities and move to a more advantageous position. When possible, he flanks a target with the thognorok. He uses his fervor ability each round to grant himself greater combat prowess.

So if you are truly running a normal Pathfinder Society game, following Pathfinder Society rules, you must start with Enthrall, and you must use Fervor. If that interferes with his ability to use Sacred Weapon, then it does. If you can use Sacred Weapon and still obey the "During Combat" tactics text, then that seems 100% fair to me.

My memory of this encounter (and I may have even posted it previously here) is that the final encounter is pretty meh. Ah, yes, just scrolled back up -- the thognorok has no climb speed, and cannot operate on its own web properly. So by the rules the encounter is already nerfed. So if you have a way to have it not suck, that might be good.


Flarx wrote:
Can players sit and roll saves to see if they cure or eventually die? And if they're lucky enough to have someone of level to cast remove disease, they can just spend a few days casting to clean the party up?

In fact, in PFS they're kinda mandated to do this. You can't have conditions on your character between games (there is maybe 1 exception for level drain, but I'm unclear on that). You have to resolve diseases, poisons, etc. So the players can at the end roll saves, or cast spells to resolve the issue, or hire spellcasting services, etc. They can use prestige points to have conditions removed.

They should be able to walk into the next game with a clean & functioning character sheet, or else be dead.


thorin001 wrote:
Now you have to give the other (potentially) five players a chance to speak. This probably adds nothing of value to the discussion

This is my favorite part of role playing, and probably where I derive the most meaning & "gameplay" out of the game. :(


kaisc006 wrote:
these forums exist for us peasants to talk to the kings

Do you... do you really think so? You think they expressly put the forums here so that we can interact with Tonya? Or the PFS review team? I was not aware that PFS leadership was obligated to read or answer anything here; I see none of them here debating this with you, nor do I see them making concessions to you, nor do I see any of them making the changes you requested. They're just letting you waste your breath talking to the rest of us.

However, if you've seen differently, great. I wish you the best of outcomes.


kaisc006 wrote:
aboyd wrote:
Literally, there is nothing that can come of this discussion. All it can do is peter out or get locked.
Why no one is being disrespectful?

You don't have to be disrespectful for a thread to be closed. They have, on occasion, closed a thread simply because "all that could be said has been said, and that's enough." In other words, once the powers that be decide that a topic is just running in circles, useless, they'll kill it. And that accurately describes this topic. It's a go-nowhere, get-nothing-changed topic. It's just a theoretical "what if we could run things, and do it our own way?" topic. It has no real-world traction.

kaisc006 wrote:
aboyd wrote:
This thread boils down to "But I want muh stuff!"
Essentially but I think you can have an conversation about why said stuff should be allowed.

Have it. I'm not saying you can't. I'm saying it's pointless. It's like a king made laws and now some peasant who has no influence with the king is standing in front of 3 other peasants saying, "I don't agree with the king. Change it, you guys!"

I mean, what do you expect the peasants to do? We're not in power, there is nothing to be done but nod at you and say, "OK, well, good luck with getting them to abandon all their rules about which things are allowed or not." And then we wander off to go back to our normal day. There is nothing for us to do.

kaisc006 wrote:
I think as much paizo content as possible should be allowed. We just disagree on what "as possible" is.

I haven't expressed any disagreement or agreement at all. The point is, whether we agree or not, it's irrelevant. It's a conversation that has no point. If we disagree, why even express it, as it gains nothing? If we agree, why does it matter? It won't change anything.

For my part, I guess I was just so astonished to see what is essentially a pointless shouting into the void that I came by to say, "Hey, you're shouting into a void. You know that, right?" I guess if you know that and are cool with it, carry on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This thread boils down to "But I want muh stuff!"

I'm not clear on what the point of that is. Nobody here has the power to change this, and those who do have power to change it, won't. And I suspect most PFS players are happy about that. Leadership has a proven system, and we like it, and that's partly why we are attracted to PFS.

Literally, there is nothing that can come of this discussion. All it can do is peter out or get locked.


I don't mind if a person doesn't want to act out the conversation, but I mind if a person wants a roll without an explanation. I have bare minimums for combat, too. For example, if a player is mid-combat and his/her turn comes up and the player just rolls dice and looks at me expectantly, I'm going to ask for communication about what is happening. If that player hasn't even bothered to move the mini into position, or never bothered to buy a weapon and still expects to do 2d6 lethal greatsword damage, I'm going to say no. There is a minimal expectation of participation. If you can't participate, I can't include you.

I have that same minimum standard around social skills. If your character is not in the room, has not said anything in the ongoing conversation, and you can't even tell me what the conversation is about, then no, your character can't lead the conversation nor even Aid Another. I say this because this actually happened. I had a player who was literally playing Candy Crush on his phone and whenever he heard the keyword "diplomacy" he would -- without looking up from his screen -- roll a d20 and say, "I assisted."

He finally broke my brain when, after a fight, he went back to his phone, and then remained there for an hour while the rest of the group carried on. They closed out a mission goal, cleared 3 rooms, and were now on the other side of the map. Mr. Candy Crush? His mini was still back in the room where the fight had happened an hour earlier. He heard someone make a Diplomacy roll and absent-mindedly rolled for himself and said he assisted. I asked how. He looked up from his phone and said, "What?" I repeated my question. He said, "I got a 12. That's enough to Aid Another." And I said, "Yeah, but doing what? What are you aiding, and how are you doing it from 3 rooms away?"

He shrugged, tossed his mini across the map, said he was there, and that he aided in "whatever." Then, he went back to Candy Crush. So I barred it. I was later backed up by the Venture Caps/Lieuts, so I feel comfortable saying that you need to meaningfully participate to be included. You don't have to act anything out, but you have to pay attention and explain how you're accomplishing your goals. If you are too timid or lazy or bored or unwilling to accomplish that bare minimum, then you are not really playing the game, and I'm OK to have a minimum standard there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
the mission briefing has enough hints in it that you ought probably to check out the town.

Yeah, it has a huge hint. VC Alvar almost flat-out states it. Here is his comment when asked about what they have time to do:

Venture Captain briefing wrote:
Try to delay these hostilities to buy time for your exploration. I recommend spending a day at Zmeyka, and then another day at Hartsfall; two at the most.

So the "delay hostilities" thing is him asking the PCs to smooth things over with the nobles -- so you'd have to at least get into town and talk to them to succeed at that request. Then he says he expects the team to spend a day in town before going to the keep.

So, yeah. The VC is pretty blunt about this. The mission isn't one of those "what should we do" things. It's clear, or at least seems that way to me. I guess if the PCs never ask the VC questions about the mission, they could miss this text, though.


In the blog's first line, the two links to the combat tiers page do not work.


Kaladin_Stormblessed wrote:
Ideally it should be something reversible within a session or two, especially since I want to not feel guilty about just telling them to leave the table for the day one way or the other once they pull out the "no, I don't want to play unless you change this" if it isn't resolved quickly.

In my games, we have established that we are playing in infinite multiverses. The idea is that there are infinite universes reflecting every possible change. There is a universe where the flowers are made of water. There is a universe where chickens have taken the place of dogs. Aaaaannnd... there is a universe for every possible, conceivable configuration of the team.

So if a player doesn't show up, we're playing in the universe where that PC not only doesn't exist but never existed. When they come back, we're playing in the universe where he/she exists and always has. Because of this, we don't have to invent stories about why the PC is not around. The character doesn't exist, so nobody would even bring the PC up. Simple.

Now, I don't give XP when you miss a session, and that can be odd. For example, if a player had to leave for a few games and is back, we are now playing in the universe where the PC has existed all along. That should mean he/she was there for all the adventures. And my response to "If my PC was there for it all, I should get XP," has been, "Well, it's a gamey thing. I want players to try to attend, so you get XP if you attend, and you don't get XP if you miss. Hopefully it motivates you to attend more."

And I leave it at that, and it mostly seems to work well.


Thanks!

Dragonborn3 wrote:
Do not underestimate a Lv0 15ft Fire cone when you never know when swarms are going to show up.

Do you mean level 0 10 foot cone? Wordcasters don't even have a 15 foot cone option. But maybe you are aware of some meta words that I missed? I'd love to extend level 0 cones to 15 feet if it's really possible.

Also, do you (or anyone else) know if Magical Lineage trait applies to meta words? Can I meta boost a spell, have the spell go up in level, then apply Magical Lineage to reduce that increase by 1?


I know there are many PFS "best items" topics. However, I want to discuss a non-PFS situation: the Rich Parents trait. I'm aware that some GMs feel it's brokenly good to start with extra cash, and other GMs feel it's laughably bad because there are no retraining rules for traits, so you're just stuck with a dumb useless trait at level 5+ when you've already spent the money and can no longer gain from it.

So let's not discuss that part. Save that for another topic. Here, let's say that I've already made the smart/stupid (depending upon your POV) decision to have that trait. I now have 900 gold to spend, and I want to use it in the way that best enhances my group's chances of surviving to level 2. I'm thinking I need to have answers to as many low-level problems and dangers as possible. Without knowing what the GM is going to throw at my group during level 1, what are some purchases that make sense? What purchases have at least a maybe decent chance of being useful during level 1 (or even level 2)?

(I'll be playing a sorcerer using Words of Power if that changes your answers in any way, but I'm fine to hear general answers too.)


Let me cast Breath of Life on this topic. When I started the topic, I was playing only until low levels. However, I now get to make a new PC for Rise of the Runelords, playing all the way until the end.

SO!!! New question: those of you who are good at Words of Power, can you tell me what level(s) it gets good? When will I start to do impressive or unique stuff, and what are some of those things? If you ever played a wordcaster, how'd you do it, and what were some of your favorite word combos?

From my first try at it, it's clear that levels 1 to 4 are not impressive (although the Friendship word is powerful -- unlike Charm Person, there is no opposed Charisma check to get a target to do stuff). But what about levels 5 through 10, maybe? Is there something cool I should consider?


Grim Bastion wrote:
Sharrowsmith's backpack (the magical item) is only found in the high tier - therefore should I cross it off the stats of this item off the chronicle sheet, or should I just cross of the 4-5 listing and allow them to purchase the item when they have the fame?

They have to have a valid way to unlock the item purchase. So that item needs to appear in a book or something, in order for them to buy it. The only other way is to have it appear on a Chronicle sheet, and be in the tier they are in. So if you cross off the tier 4-5 items, which unlocks the purchase, then they need another valid resource to purchase the item -- the Chronicle sheet will never unlock it for them.

Because of this, you could cross it off both the tier 4-5 and the item listing itself, IF you run low-tier.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
aboyd wrote:
It's scary to buy your unreliable products.
This is kind of a silly stance.

Luckily, whether a person's stance has your seal of approval or not, we still get to have our stances anyway. So if Paizo's issues are not fixed, that's OK, I'll put my money toward other games. No worries. So really, it's just down to whether Paizo wants the money from the customers they used to have, and if so, are they willing to address those concerns in order to get that money back.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:
I guess my question to you would be this: When -- not if -- an unbalancing option is published, how would you prefer it be handled in PFS?

In my home games, the standing rule is that if a player can even find the original text for an item, they can have that version for double the price -- with Quickrunner Shirts at triple the price.

But that's it. Just... pay double, get to use the original text. Seems to have worked out OK. The items are still desirable and useful, but maaaayybe require a little more thought about their worth.

The Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier at 10,000 GP is still a decent choice, if you get all the original features. Nobody feels mad or ripped off at that point; it just becomes something to mull over and you only end up buying the things you really still want.

In PFS if they did that, it would feel much less painful than the current handling, because characters level up long before any errata is produced. In other words, by the time the errata hits, the PC will have acquired more gold, and be able to pay the price difference. Mostly. Usually. In this way, it slows the usage of overpowered items naturally. Newer players might hesitate at the price, while older players will probably be able to keep 90% of their stuff as-is, if they can pay the price difference.

Harold Ervin wrote:
Nerfing Tribal Scars invalidated the entire People of the North purchase as far as I'm concerned, and you've cost yourself sales... again.

Wait. Tribal Scars got nerfed too?!?! I can't keep up with this stuff. This is ridiculous.

But that's beside the point. My point would be: you're right, Harold Ervin. In 2013 & 2014 I bought maybe 40+ Paizo books. Big books, splatbooks, PDFs, hard covers. Probably over $1000 USD if I bothered to add it up. My last big purchase was Occult Adventures in 2015. Since then I've purchased only 2 of Paizo's paperback splatbooks in 2016, and a handful of PFS modules up through 2017.

Why did I spend $1000+ in 2013/2014, and then maybe just $35 in 2017? Because it's scary to purchase a product that is unreliable. Let me say that again to Paizo management: It's scary to buy your unreliable products.


I'm having flashbacks to Anomen.


James Anderson wrote:
We went 1-2-plains-plains-forest-plains-done, as that's what looked fastest. But because of that, the only creatures we faced were the amphipteres (which the Eidolon made fast work of).

For any GMs reading this, please note that the caterpillar fight explicitly states that if the PCs get off the beaten path, you may move the caterpillar fight to them. Note: it's "may" not "must," so you could skip the fight if needed. But if you have the time, you are 100% allowed and expected to drop that fight on the PCs, wherever they go. See page 14 for more info.

1 to 50 of 259 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>