1) Dragons - I love the idea of more dragons, my main character finally got to go toe-to-toe with one in a scenario last week. It was clearly an adult dragon and it was questionable whether defeating it was within the capabilities of our group or if we should negotiate with it. The tension at the table made it very exciting.
2) Goblins – I personally love Goblins! I don’t think I could really ever get sick of these little heathens.
3) Orcs – More Orcs would be awesome as well. They’re iconic enemies of humanity and also usually a very good challenge.
4) Drow – I’m indifferent on these guys, if more are featured fine, but I won’t be disappointed if they aren’t.
5) Dinosaurs – I could do without dinosaurs at all. They’re cool, but not really what I’m looking for in PFS.
6) Undead – Oh man am I sick of undead, seems like a constant opponent of the Society. I understand why from a writing perspective, there’s only so many things that can be locked down in a tomb for a thousand years and still be there to put up a fight when the Society busts in. As someone earlier mentioned, if you’re going to use them, give them some class levels or something to make them more interesting.
7) Swarms – Eh, maybe a bit overdone, but any resourceful pathfinder can typically find a way to deal with these. I rarely find them an interesting part of the story.
8) Outsiders - Outsiders are very cool and it would be a fun opponent. Just be careful with trying to squeeze them into low level scenarios. They usually have DR of some sort and spell resistance, which can be tough to overcome for a group of young Pathfinders.
9) Humanoid NPCs – Keep them coming, as mentioned there is such a variety here that they don’t feel like repeats. I love scenarios with the Aspis in them, the PFS storyline has done a great job creating an enemy worth hating.
Are you using a pre-registered player's card number with the confirmation code on it? If so, just take a moment to set-up your profile and use the confirmation code on your player's card. Any table credits that have been recorded for that number should then appear on your profile at that point.
Stone, have you actually played any PFS yet? Looking at your profile, it doesn't appear that you have and I've seen you do a lot of lobbying for changes the last week or so. There's nothing wrong with asking for changes or engaging in debate, but shouldn't you at least try out pathfinder society for a while and see if these rules really are that big of an issue for your "fun" before lobbying for so many changes all at once. It appears from an outsider rather than just trying out this particular brand of organized play and see how it suits your taste, your going out of your way to change it to something that "you" specifically want before you even get started.
All I'm saying is maybe give it a chance before you go into a lot of debate about what the system needs to do to better accommodate certain players.
I have bolded the portion that I believe justifies why I would rule that you do not have the vestigial wings in the hypothetical that we are discussing. You have the right to disagree and I respect that, it does not however change how I would handle the situation.
You have a right to disagree with what several VOs, including Andrew are telling you. But you keep asking for someone of authority to give you a definitive answer on the subject. While none of us Venture-Captains or Venture-Lieutenants have the authority to make final decisions on rules and are certainly not infallible, I would think that you should take our opinions as meaning something. We have more direct interaction with Mike and Mark than the average PFS player, and feel it is our responsibility to provide appropriate feedback on these subjects so that Mike and Mark can concentrate on their many responsibilities. Andrew and others have stated that what you are asking about, something such as vestigial wings on a character with no mechanical justification violates the rules against re-skinning. And at our tables (I'm including myself as I also believe it to be against the rules on re-skinning) we would likely tell you that your character does not actually possess vestigial wings. You are welcome to get up and leave my table at that point, and I honestly wouldn't hold any ill will towards you, but I also wouldn't feel bad about doing what I believe is appropriate in the PFS setting. You have made your point that you feel the re-skinning guidelines are ambiguous and/or that they do not apply in this situation, several of us have disagreed with you.
As Andrew stated a while ago, you are welcome to attempt to make the character that you are describing, but I think you are likely to sit down at a number of tables that don't allow you to roleplay the character in the way that you envision. Based on that alone, I would suggest you come up with another concept that you would enjoy that would not be at the GM's discretion to such an extent. There are many character concepts that unfortunately are not compatible with an organized play setting (or specifically this organized play setting) and this may just be one of them.
Depends on the ages involved, but I would say Halflings. They tend to be more plump and get pop-bellied in their old age. Gnomes tend to generally be more jittery and lean, meaning the meat is tougher and stringier. The same reason why beef is more delicious than horse meat. Finally a reasonably question worth chiming in on. I knew following this thread would pan-out if I just waited long enough.
Todd Morgan wrote:
Actually, I would be in favor of him making the guidelines to stop all the bickering on these boards and show people what happens when you get what you wish for...
Todd Morgan wrote:
It's not a punishment. It's a clear set of guidelines that was asked for.
I believe it would be an attempt to punish them for asking for something that would have such a substantial impact on everyone. And based on your previous post that I've quoted here, I got the impression you realize it would be a punishment as well.
Todd Morgan wrote:
Actually, I would be in favor of him making the guidelines to stop all the bickering on these boards and show people what happens when you get what you wish for...
While the first part of this is commendable (wishing to stop the bickering), I take issue with the second part. Responding harshly to prove a point would be an option if it only punished those responsible for the bickering, but an over-arcing rule that negatively (in my opinion) affects the campaign as a whole out of frustration is not the answer (again, in my opinion). Mike has come off as a level-headed campaign coordinator, and whatever decision he makes, I hope it isn't out of frustration just to shut up the people bickering.
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Yep, I am hoping that this is Mike trying to make a point and that he is not actually making out these guidelines right now, as his earlier post suggested. I was involved in a relatively small (~17 PFS tables as well as numerous LFR and other gaming/board game tables) local convention of this weekend that went great!
I know the GMs really appreciated their boons (myself included) as did the 4 players that managed to snag one of the player boons.
I think the issue here isn't the normal conventions that were going to exist regardless of whether Paizo supplied PFS boons or not. The people organizing those conventions probably think of the Paizo boons as icing on the cake or a nice perk to help entice players to their convention.
The people that are getting antsy and asking for this sort of thing (meaning a black and white definition of what will get a racial boon) are the players that are trying to organize an event for the sole purpose of getting themselves a racial boon. Let's say random player "Joe Bob" wants to play an exotic race and knows that he may get one if he organizes 15 tables at his local gaming store. He does so and requests Paizo support. Mike obliges and sends him two general player boons to distribute at his event and a third general boon to give each GM. None of the boons sent are racial boons. Since "Joe Bob" organized this entire event for the sole purpose of getting himself a racial boon, he is pissed because he only received general boons and demands to know what he needs to organize in order to get the racial boon. "Joe Bob" wants a "Black and White" guideline so that he can organize an event that gets him his racial boon, it is all he cares about, organizing a gaming event is only the means to an end. Is "Joe Bob" the sort of player we want to cater the convention boon support rules to, in my opinion no, he is not.
If the goal of the racial boons is to reward GMs and players for attending organized conventions, I would think Mike using is best judgement is the most appropriate. If the racial boons are intended to encourage players to go out and organize events solely to earn a specific reward then the Black and White guidelines are probably the most appropriate. If the boons are intended to do a little of both things, it may be best for Mike to continue to use his best judgement as he has been doing.
You make a reasonable argument in comparing Clerics and Wizards spell prep with changing oaths, and if the changing of Oaths only granted a different series of powers without affecting the rest of the vanilla paladin abilities I might agree with you. But the problem is that when a Wizard preps different spells for the day, he is not changing any class features outside of his spells, he's just modifying the "spellcasting" class feature. If all oaths did roughly the same thing, like maybe they all changed the mechanics of smite evil slightly and nothing else I think you'd be on to something.
But in my opinion, since each oath has a drastic (and varied) impact on many of the Paladins core class abilities, I think option #1 in your post is really the only one that would work in an organized play environment such as PFS.
I guess I had not ever really read the text closely enough to even think about this issue. In my area, what few paladins we do have tend to play just vanilla paladins. I unfortunately can't give an official answer or even really a well-supported suggestion on how to rule this, because as best as I can tell it is completely subjective.
My suggestion for PFS play is that the Oaths should be treated as their own separate archetypes (that's the way I've always thought of them anyways). So if you intended to play an Oath of Vengeance Paladin, you would decide that upon reaching 4th level and as far as PFS is concerned, you are an Oath of Vengeance Paladin for the rest of your PFS career. I'm not saying that is how it works by RAW, but that I think would make the most sense for the PFS environment.
I'm sorry, but anyone who simply disregards Rage Prophet and says flat out that it's a terrible prestige class has completely lost my attention. The most powerful and fun character I've ever played in all my years of gaming was in the Rise of the Runelords adventure path that I just finished a while back, and he was a Barbarian2/Oracle4/Rage Prophet9. I'm not going to argue mechanics with you, but I can tell you the character was incredibly effective (over-powered even), and you gain a lot of awesome stuff from Rage Prophet(like adding your constitution bonus to the save DCs of spells at Rage Prophet 7 and adding your Barbarian levels to CL during moment of clarity at 4th) that make up for the inherent multi-classing weaknesses. He did not have magical knack for the record, though I'm more chiming in to stop this blasphemy that Rage Prophet sucks, because it was fantastic!
Also I play a Barbarian1/Sorcerer7 in PFS that does just fine without Maigcal Knack. I'm not saying that I'm against making the trait legal, I really couldn't care less, but the argument that you can't play a multi-classed caster just because the trait is not allowed is false and hyperbole. Will you be slightly less powerful in PFS because of the lack of Magical Knack, sure, does that mean the character is useless, absolutely not.
I will throw my two cents in on this. As Thod pointed out, in general, using arcane mark to get two attacks as a Magus is actually slightly less effective than traditional two-weapon fighting in several ways, and slightly more effect in others. While you can use the same weapon for both attacks thus cutting down on cost in the long run only upgrading one weapon, you take the same -2 on both attacks and should you fail the concentration check have the potential to lose the second attack. Is it a little cheesy, maybe, is it overpowered, absolutely not. I would probably question you about what arcane mark actually does (prior to reading this thread) but after seeing the spell, I would have no problem letting you use it in this fashion.
Optimizing a character is not against the spirit of PFS and it really annoys me with the CharOP backlash that people dish out on these boards. There is nothing wrong with having a PC that is very powerful. I have 8 active PFS characters at the moment, some are powerhouses and some are more mediocre (like my Gnome Barbarian). But I can tell you one thing, when one of my local players is sitting down to play with me and wants to play his Witch (who is about as effective in combat as a wet paper towel) he is always appreciative of me playing my Half-Orc Sorcerer/Barbarian that can pick up his slack.
Having an optimized character is not against the spirit of PFS, having a character with no backstory and completely lacking flavor that is simply a set of numbers on the page, that is against the spirit of PFS. If you enjoy making powerful PCs, go right ahead, I will happily drive into a dungeon with you as long as that powerhouse also has some personality that makes them fun.
Matthew Pemrich wrote:
Our group is scheduled from 6-10 pm and tends to always get done by 10 (sometimes 9-9:30), but the DM's have to realize that there is a time constraint much like at a convention and make sure the players stay pretty focused on the game.
I will suggest that if you can manage, weeknights tend to work best for players. Most people have day jobs and won't be able to play until early evening. If you contact the store a lot of times they may be willing to stay open a little later to accommodate a PFS group, especially if the gamers tend to spend a little money in the store. I know our local store tends to stay open an extra hour or more to let us play on Monday evenings.
We played our first PFS game tonight at Warzone Matrix, it was a close call for the party members as three of the four lost consciousness in the final encounter. But did emerge victorious.
We will be hosting our next game, with myself as GM in two weeks time on Wednesday May 16th at 6:30 pm.
If you are a gamer in the Cleveland area and would like to come out for some PFS, check out our website at www.clevelandpathfindersociety.com or send me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Stay Classy Dungeon Delvers!
I've got a fresh level 1 monk that I whipped up quickly last night to bring to the game, I'll ask the players what they prefer as I'm going as much (if not more) for their enjoyment as my own.
We are going to be at the table minimum of 4 players, so I wouldn't be surprised if they want me to play one of my better equipped PCs. But I agree that having a fresh level 1 just in case will probably the safest bet. I mostly just wanted to double-check to be sure that it was legal to play with a PC that already has a faction.
We're actually running this for our new game we're starting up tonight in Cleveland.
So I had a question to add, I'm playing mostly just to fill out the table and be there to introduce myself to the new players as the Cleveland VC. So my question is, do I need to make a new first level PC to play in this (we are running part 1), or can I use one of my two first level PCs that each have 2 scenarios already under their belt?
Anyone know how that works?
By RAW, yes it should apply to the splash damage. Not sure if that makes much sense intuitively, but your minimum damage is increased when within 30 feet, therefore so is the splash damage. I feel pretty confident about that since they specifically list using the amount of damage done on a direct hit to calculate the splash damage in the example.
Mystic Lemur wrote:
Ok, your last couple of posts to me sound a little more condescending than I feel is necessary, but I feel the need to step in and clarify something. The reason for not allowing upgrades of named armor is not just that there needs to be an actual gp value allocated to the cost of random enchantments not contained in the list of normal enchantments (this would be the +2d6 damage on a charge with Rhino Hide armor for example). The issue is what would that do to the cost of upgrading the armor further, sure assigning a gp value to that random ability is not very difficult, just subtract the cost of a normal +2 hide armor set from the cost of Rhino Hide. The problem is if I want to upgrade Rhino Hide to a +3 suit of hide armor with the charging ability intact, do I need to pay the difference between a +2 and +3 armor set or a +3 and +4 armor set. As you can see from looking at the list of available armor enchantments, some such as energy resistance only have a +X gp value assigned and therefore do not cause an increase in cost for the next +whatever enchantment; while others such as light fortification causes the overall enhancement bonus of the armor to be considered +1 higher. Nowhere in the core rulebook (or any other rulebook) is that random +2d6 damage on a charge ability assigned either a gp value or a +X enhancement bonus value.
In your home game you are more than welcome to do the math, see the value of the random rhino hide enchantment and assign it as either a gp value or enhancement value as you see fit. However, in PFS society you having this ambiguity is not something desired by an open play environment and therefore not allowed.
Also, your insistence that the cannot be upgrade a "mithral shirt" by this train of logic is not relevant because each property of the "mithral" shirt is clearly defined and is simply a masterwork mithral chain shirt mechanically.
No, they do not stack. Unless an ability explicitly states that it stacks with a similar ability of another class, they do not stack.
A character that had 1 level in Druid, 1 level in Cavalier, and 4 levels in Ranger, would have 3 separate level 1 animal companions. Only one of which could be brought adventuring due to PFS rules.
Michael Brock wrote:
Thanks Bossman, that was my initial answer to the player, but I wanted to check on here to confirm my answer's validity. And I'm out of here, stick and move :-)
I agree that if it is legal to have the rhino hide barding, the +2d6 damage would apply to all attacks. Because of this I hope my initial interpretation of the it not being legal is correct, as I feel it is grossly overpowered. Making animal companions even more awesome is not something I want to see, but that isn't my call to make.
If it were at my home game, I would rule that it is probably too powerful and wield my mighty ban hammer.
One of my local players asked if his cat animal companion could have Rhino Hide barding. For those unaware of what Rhino Hide armor is, it is a named magical item:
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 9th
I looked for this answer in the forums and only found an inconclusive disagreement, so I told the player that I would repost the question in hopes of an official answer.
I'm of the opinion that it would not be allowed as it would essentially be altering a "named" magic armor (i.e. crafting) and crafting is not allowed by PFS rules.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but you cannot select a prestige class as your favored class. From the Core Rulebook on character advancement. (emphasis mine)
Each character begins play with a single favored class of his choosing—typically, this is the same class as the one he chooses at 1st level. Whenever a character gains a level in his favored class, he receives either + 1 hit point or + 1 skill rank. The choice of favored class cannot be changed once the character is created, and the choice of gaining a hit point or a skill rank each time a character gains a level (including his first level) cannot be changed once made for a particular level. Prestige classes (see Prestige Classes) can never be a favored class."
Hello all, I am attempting to expand my region's pathfinder society presence to new locales. We are well established in Akron, but I'm looking to build up interest closer to Cleveland.
If you live near Cleveland and are interested in attending some PFS games at the Warzone Matrix please head to the thread that I have started on the Warzone Matrix website. You'll need to set-up a username and password on their website to view and contribute to the message thread. You can also contact me directly at email@example.com or visit our gamer website.
I built the following for my friend's campaign. It is based off of the Dragonborn race that appears in 4th edition D&D. I created it using the playtest rules for the Advanced Race Guide.
Dragonborn race for Pathfinder (based heavily on the version published for 4th Edition) 1st attempt:
Red Ramage wrote:
Don't blame me for that TPK, blame Greg Vaughan and those dastardly Xill. Or the party of 3 sorcerers and a witch on a level 7-11 scenario.
And as for the brianwashing, is there punch at least?
Once again thanks for the opportunity Mike.
Currently gaming opportunities for the area can be found at our gaming group's website, here. At present two tables are run on Monday evenings at Underhill's Games in Akron, Ohio from 6 pm until 10 pm. If you would like to join us just head to that website and post a reply in one of the game threads to sign-up for that table.
If you check out that website you will also notice that several other game stores are listed for the purpose of hosting games at their stores. My first duties as VC will be to get in touch with those stores (particularly the ones in Cleveland) to begin setting up tables at stores like Warzone Matrix for example.
I hope that I can help expand the player base here in Northern Ohio and look forward to being a resource to fellow gamers and the Pathfinder Society campaign as a whole.
Stay Classy Planet Earth.