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

kinevon's page

Goblin Squad Member. FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 3,117 posts (4,275 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 27 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 3,117 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Andoran ***

Dorothy Lindman wrote:
kinevon wrote:

Note: On those traits, you want to make sure you are using the version from the Faction Guide, as the versions printed in the Shattered Star Player's Guide are slightly different, and not PFS legal.

Which reminds me, I need to apologize to the HeroLab folks, and ask them if there is any way to setup an option to let the user decide which version of those traits they want to use.

Under "Configure Hero", one of the options at the top is "Pathfinder Society Organized Play Character".

Turning that on adjusts the content to use the legal resources and special rules for PFS (like wizards getting Spell Focus instead of Scribe Scroll, etc.).

And if you see anything wrong, turn in a bug to Lone Wolf Development.

Nah, the problem is that HL updated the traits to the Shattered Star versions, which eliminates the class restrictions that are there in the Faction Guide versions. Everything else is the same.

Mea culpa, since I was the one who pointed out the difference, before I knew they weren't updated for PFS. Sigh.

Andoran ***

terry_t_uk wrote:

Sealed Gate has a hard mode

You REALLY want to play it in hard mode at high sub-tier :-)

With a 7th level PC...

Andoran ***

Note: On those traits, you want to make sure you are using the version from the Faction Guide, as the versions printed in the Shattered Star Player's Guide are slightly different, and not PFS legal.

Which reminds me, I need to apologize to the HeroLab folks, and ask them if there is any way to setup an option to let the user decide which version of those traits they want to use.

Andoran ***

To add to TOZ's post:

VTT Game Day 4 is August 30th, IIRC.

I have seen games posted as starting anytime during the day, some starting as early as 10 or 11 pm the night before, and others starting at various times during the day.

Note that, since it hasn't been explicitly mentioned, the membership of the PSOC is, itself, international. Members, including both players and GMs, are from all over the world. Some of them are members mainly because they don't have much of a local player base to pull from. Others do, but may be in the PSOC because it gives them the rare chance to play instead of GM.

Hope to see you online!

Edit: Forgot to comment on some other peoples' posts:
Some of us have very little disposable income, due to various issues in our lives. Myself, I have been watching my money pogo around the number 0 for the past several months. I am hoping, this month, to stay in the black. I almost got to go to PaizoCon this year, but the person who was arranging transportation and board wound up with real life interfering, so I wound up with a week's vacation at home, instead of traveling to Seattle.

The local scene is pushing it, at present, to get three concurrent tables of PFS at the same time. It has happened once in the past few months at the local game day. Our most recent local Con was pushing to get a few tables at all in. The next local Con on the schedule is sort of in limbo, as they appear to have decided to change venues, due to an ongoing labor dispute, and that may cause them to change dates, as well. Then again, one of the organizers for the Con told me that I was one of the few people who had actually registered for the Con to begin with.

Due to a recent change in my work schedule, the regular game day is at a bad time for me. It is, effectively, in the middle of my night during my work week. I am attempting to run some games at my home, at a good time for my schedule, but that may be a bad time for most of our local players. The results are currently to be determined, as the first game I have scheduled is for next week...

Andoran ***

The Morphling wrote:

Awesome! That's a relief. I have a guy whose ultimate goal is to die in battle and join the Risen Guard.

Sadly he is a tank, and thus far has resisted being killed, despite his best efforts. He gets very, very angry if someone attacks his friends companions - not because he wants to protect them, but because he should be the one who gets to die in battle, not them!

Tell him he needs to wear a red shirt. ;)


Trekkie90909 wrote:

Spells with a cast time of immediate do not provoke attacks of opportunity (see feather fall as an example). Spells which take a standard action or more do, and the AoO interrupt them because they take extra time to complete. Same idea as with standing up.

I hear your argument; this is not how the trip combat maneuver works. As soon as the trip is a success you are prone. This is RAW.

The flavor text for the action would be something like "The trip is not successful until the enemy has finished falling to the ground." (at which point they are instantaneously classified as prone). Something like catching your balance partway through would be a description for a failed trip maneuver; something in between might be used to describe coming close to the DC and either just barely passing or failing.

From a rules perspective that's irrelevant, but from a GMing/gameplay perspective it's important.

A successful trip maneuver (not the same as being tripped i.e. having a trip attempted against you) == prone. At this point the AoOs go off, because the trip has been confirmed successful. Prior to this the trip has not been successful so RAW you can't take the AoO yet.

Last time: Successful Trip maneuver = successful trip maneuver.

Benefit: After the trip attempt succeeds, your target gains the prone condition.

So, successful trip gives you and your allies who threaten AoOs against the target of the trip.
After the AoO, which is provoked by the successful trip maneuver, the target then gains the prone condition.

Note that this is actually less beneficial for the PCs than your version. It is also closer to how the rules are written.



Trekkie90909 wrote:

Actually it is different; standing up is a move action, falling prone -as per the trip combat maneuver- is an instantaneous action. The reasoning from the FAQ is "the trip provoked from standing up happens as soon as the person starts getting up, if successful they fall back down but retain enough time to stand up again without penalty."

RAW the FAQ says it's not that the trip doesn't immediately knock the defender prone a second time (it supports this), it's that he has enough time to stand up again anyway.

Here it's:

-> attacker's trip success: true
-> gain status: prone
-> Attacker has greater trip: true
-> provoke AoO from threatening enemies

Steps 2 and 4 happen simultaneously and instantaneously -> neither disrupts the flow of combat.


-> attacker's trip success: true
-> Attacker has greater trip: true
-> provoke AoO from threatening enemies
-> gain status: prone

Because AoOs interrupt the flow of action.

Caster starts to cast spell, non-defensively

Now, what happens next?
Threatening enemies get AoO
Spell completes

Spells, per your definition, are instantaneous. Heck, some of them include that as duration: Instantaneous

Now, consider: Being knocked prone from a trip is NOT instantaneous. It takes an appreciable amount of time between being tripped and landing on the ground, prone. Believe me, I used to trip all the time in real life. Some of them were even from someone else tripping me. As my agility improved in real life, unlike the game, where this option does not exist, I was even able, in the time between being tripped and landing on my hands and knees, catch my balance, and stay on my feet.

Being tripped is not equal to being prone, there is a brief but noticeable span of time between being tripped and being prone. That is when the Greater Trip AoOs go off, in many posters' opinions, including mine.


Trekkie90909 wrote:
No it doesn't. The triggering condition for the AoO is that the target is tripped. AoO's go off before the triggering condition. (It is not clear that that is RAI in this case, but the RAW is the AoO goes before the trip occurs).

You're still arguing that the AoO goes off before the trip action succeeds. From greater trip.

Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity.

You CANNOT cause a secondary condition which is dependent upon a primary success before the primary condition succeeds. Otherwise greater trip would read "when you perform the trip action the target enemy provokes attacks of opportunity." This is RAW.

EDIT: @Kinevon bb ninja'd you, but yes he (and any nearby allies who can take an AoO) gets the bonus vs a prone target.

Greater Trip wrote:
Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to trip a foe. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by Improved Trip. Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity.

As compared to:

Vicious Stomp wrote:
Benefit: Whenever an opponent falls prone adjacent to you, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity from you. This attack must be an unarmed strike.

And it has been stated that if you have both Greater Trip and Vicious Stomp, you get two AoOs as a result.

Being tripped is not the same as winding up prone after after being tripped.

So, event: George trips Robert. Robert starts to fall. George and friends get to whack Robert as he loses his balance. Robert winds up prone on the ground, at which point friend Kevin gets to take another AoO and play whack-a-mole on the now-prone Robert with an unarmed attack.

Trip succeeds
Greater Trip AoOs activate
Trip target falls prone
Vicious Stomp AoOs activate


deusvult wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:



Light Exotic Weapon:
Scorpion whip 5 gp 1d3 1d4 ×2 — 3 lbs. S Performance

One Handed Exotic Weapon:
Whip 1 gp 1d2 1d3 ×2 — 2 lbs. S Disarm, nonlethal, reach, trip

So, the whip and scorpion whip not only have very different stat blocks, they're completely different types of weapons to boot, in the eyes of the rules.

Scorpion Whip special rules wrote:

This whip has a series of razor-sharp blades and fangs inset along its tip. It deals lethal damage, even to creatures with armor bonuses. If you are proficient with whips, you can use a scorpion whip as a whip.
Bolded for emphasis. It doesn't say anything about using a scorpion whip as a combined scorpion whip/whip. It just says "as a whip" which is a defined, statted weapon that does no lethal damage, and etc.

As BBT mentioned, there are a lot of bones with the scorpion whip, as written.

For example, how do you justify the change from no reach to 15' reach, just by using it "as a whip"?

That is more than just a minor change in how it is used, that is a major change in the way it works. Where does the extra 10' of weapon come from? We won't even discuss the disarm, trip and non-lethal differences... Nor whether a scorpion whip in whip mode is stopped by armor from doing any damage at all...


Trekkie90909 wrote:
bbangerter wrote:
AoO's go off before the event that triggers them. The triggering event is being knocked prone in this case.
In the case of trip the enemy gains the prone condition immediately as soon as the roll is declared a success. As you have pointed out the trigger is not that enemies are knocked prone, the trigger is a successful trip check. Therefore the act of becoming prone and the AoO are resolved simultaneously. The AoO can't go off before the action that trigger it, because in this case that would be before the success condition for the trip check was revealed.

So, you are saying that if my PC does a successful Trip attack, then, because he has Greater Trip, he takes his AoO from having successfully tripped the target, he gets his AoO with the +4 for attacking a prone target?

Andoran ***

Actually, from what I understand, that scenario explicitly says that if you don't explore the pit, you don't get the reward.

Cairn of Shadows:
Treasure: A search reveals numerous coins and bits of cut gems in the spiked pits, the more durable remains of previous adventurers. There are 8 small ruby songbirds (worth 500 gp each) and 165 pp in Subtier 5–6, and 8 small ruby songbirds (worth 500 gp each) and 465 pp in Subtier 8–9.
Rewards: If the PCs fail to find the songbirds or they bypass the trap entirely, reduce each PC's gold earned as follows.
Subtier 5–6: Reduce each PC's gold earned by 941 gp.
Out of Subtier: Reduce each PC's gold earned by 1,191 gp.
Subtier 8–9: Reduce each PC's gold earned by 1,441 gp.

Andoran ***

BartonOliver wrote:
The reason I say it is cheesy and non-rp is the inability to interact verbally in character while playing.

And there are plenty of ways to make, or allow, such a monk to break either or both vows...

Just because you can't talk, doesn't mean that you cannot communicate, after all.

Andoran ***

Isn't that the source for that evil cartoon, the Powderpuff Girls?


Bigdaddyjug wrote:
kinevon wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Lamontius wrote:
♫ sommmmeone playyyyyed Thorrrrrnkeeeeeep ♫
I was just about to say this. That encounter is brutal. When I ran it, I made sure the entire party was already level 2.

Heh. I have run this module level 6 times, and only hit one PC once in that encounter. And that was the time it was a 2nd level PC, too.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Accursed Halls:
Heh. CR 5? Dangerous. First time I ran it, and I am still not sure I ran it right, they opened with a charging leap. The party just couldn't handle them, no good ACs, so one person down each round, until the party was all down.

Last time I ran it, and another less than effective in combat party, and the crickets decided that hunger was king, and dragged off the dying animal companion for their lunch. That let the party regroup, and rescue the companion from death at the very last second.


Nothing wrote:

Taking 20 on perception takes 2 minutes each time they do it.

The easiest way to reduce the time all these perception checks take is to assume all of the character are taking 10 unless they specifically say they are perceiving. That way they walk into the room, you describe what they notice without rolling, and the game moves along.

If that's still causing too many rolls, you could also restrict the players to one roll to detect anything before they automatically start taking 20.

If active searching were a Standard Action, yes, it would take 2 minutes to take 20. Since an active Perception check is only a Move action, you can do it twice per round, for a total of 20 in 10 rounds, or one minute.

Perception wrote:
Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

ZenithTN: Please do not try and argue against the rules of the campaign.

PFS does NOT allow crafting in general. There are a few, very few, specific instances where crafting is allowed, but those are clearly spelled out and demarcated.

Crafting zero GP items is NOT in the allowed area for crafting for PFS, so it cannot be done.

So, a Druid cannot craft a club between sessions in PFS because it is disallowed by the Organized Play campaign rules.

To be honest, as a GM in a home game, if I had a player coming in with an attitude like the one demonstrated by the whining posts, "Why can't I do this?" and not accepting my statement that it is not allowed, you would get kicked from my table.

So, in the end, it isn't allowed BECAUSE the PFS OP rules say it isn't allowed. You cvan come up with your own reasons behind it, but the simplest one is the slippery slope one, where you then get the "If I can craft a club with my ranks in Craft (Weapon), why can't I craft a Greatsword? It is the same skill!"

Also note, most PFS GMs, in my experience, will let you either "pick up a club" on the way into the dungeon, or will hand wave your having purchased a zero cost item before you left town.

Items you could pick up for free, and should always have in your inventory until you can afford better:
Club or quarterstaff (B for skeletons, depending on PC strength)
Sling and sling stones (everyone should have some sort of ranged option)

Just mark it, you can always claim, if it doesn't eat up game time, that you made it yourself.

But don't be a jerk about it.


Not ambiguous. Bonuses from the same source, even if that bonus can normally stack, cannot stack.

Even though they are different Aid Another actions, they are still Aid Another bonuses from you, so they will not stack.

Aid Another bonuses from different sources, meaning different characters, will stack.


Dasrak wrote:
Note that there is the "Magical Knack" trait, which adds +2 to your caster level so long as this doesn't increase it past your character level. This trait is too good to pass up for multi-class spellcasters, and you should always take it if you plan on building such a character.

Be careful with this trait, though, as some GMs will use JJ's approach, which is that it adds at the end of anything that adds to CL, rather than at the beginning, so it cannot be used if you have other things that improve your CL up to your HD from other sources, like the orange Ioun stone, the bead of Karma (?), Varisian Tattoo, etc.

Others will let you use it first, so it adds before your effective CL goes above your character level...

Also remember that things like this add to effective caster level, not to spells known, or spells per day/spells prepared, etc.


I think the main thing to remember is the rule that, while Aid Another bonuses form multiple sources (other PCs) can stack, bonuses from the same source (one PC) cannot stack.

That isn't to say that you couldn't use your Aid Another ability to bump both your ally's To Hit with one of them, and his AC with another, and maybe his Intimidate with the third...


BigNorseWolf wrote:

You can wear any number of magical rings, but only two will work. So he could have two magical shields, he'd just have to decide which one was on.

A character can only effectively wear two magic rings. A third magic ring doesn't work if the wearer is already wearing two magic rings.

So it sounds like whichever shield you pickup first is the real one, you'd have to drop the other one to switch.

Well, the second shield wouldn't do anything for AC, but with the Bashing enhancement, and weapon enhancements, I see no reason that side wouldn't remain usable as a magic weapon...

Andoran ***

Another option could be set by careful choice of her first few PFS games. If she does the currently stereotyped starting trio of adventures, they actually provide most anyone reasons to join, and a background for it.

Start with the Free RPG Day module, Master of the Fallen Fortress. That one is designed to handle non-PFS characters, and introduce them, ina small way, to PFS. It also gives them a way, means, and possibly even reason, to join the Pathfinder Society, as a successful mission usually includes getting an invitation to join as a field agent.

The next game could be scenario 5-08 The Confirmation, designed both for the graduates of Pathfinder Society Academy and field agents, to give them an idea of some of the things that PFS agents can run into.

And, for the third game at first level, the last remaining introduction scenario First Steps, Part 1: In Service to Lore; where you get to do some of the Society's errands, and introduces your PC to Ollysta Zadrian, the head of the Silver Crusade faction, is a good way to close out first level.

At this point, your Paladin would be a Pathfinder Society agent, in the Silver Crusade, and all set to run errands for the Decemvirate and her faction leader...

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Brom the Obnoxiously Awesome wrote:
Alex McGuire wrote:
Sometimes those boons come from scenario chronicles.
Hmm... Okay.

Yep, as an example, there is a chronicle boon that gives you the option to make new Thassilonian Specialist Wizards, once you receive it.


RAW, possibly; RAI, no.

Actually: Ask your GM how they would rule it.

As a GM, I might allow it, but I would think it was a less than ideal use of both your AoOs, and your allies.

I have a Greater Trip build, which has 10 AoOs due to high Dex and Combat Reflexes, and I have never seen a situation where this would be a viable idea, much less a good one.

If your trip target is vulnerable to tripping, it probably has something worth disarming, so that is, usually, what my trip build uses his AoO for.

After that, with a prone, disarmed target, potentially already hurt from my allies' AoOs, it usually isn't worth it to let what few of my allies' have Combat Reflexes burn those AoOs up.

After all, the prone guy either takes a penalty to hit, or provokes trying to stand up. Or grab his fallen weapon. And uses up all his actions just trying to get upright with a weapon. And then everyone gets attacks on him, gets their AoOs reset, and the fun continues. ;)


PokeyCA wrote:
A +1 dueling spiked gauntlet will cost 16000 plus the cost of the masterwork spiked gauntlet.


Spiked gauntlet: 5 gp
Masterwork weapon: 300 gp
+1 enhancement: 2,000 gp
Dueling (APG/UE)static cost: +14,000 gp
Total: 16,305 gp

Note: If you are using Dueling from the Pathfinder Society Field Guide, instead, which is a +1 enhancement bonus, the cost is different.

Spiked gauntlet: 5 gp
Masterwork weapon: 300 gp
+1 enhancement: 2,000 gp
Dueling (PSFG, +1 enhancement: +6,000 gp
Total: 8,305 gp

Andoran ***

I think we have moved into defunct equine territory here, which may mean that posting in this thread is an evil thing to do...

Andoran ***

Nefreet wrote:

Given the number of vocal opponents who don't believe you get everything transferred over, 99.44% seems a bit high of an estimate.

(though I'm one of the people that fully believes you do get everything transferred over, no matter what Faction you end up going with)

The long story shortened, Edward, is that until Campaign Leadership clarifies exactly what this all entails, nobody is really sure what's going to happen, or when it's going to happen. Despite four different blogs about the Factions, and a short blurb about them in the Guide, there's still much that needs to be ironed out.

For now, you're "The Exchange". Just roll with it until... whenever.

Since The Exchange is the faction formerly known as Sczarni, there should be no issues with existing Sczarni boons, prestige awards, or vanities transferring over, since you are not changing factions. Now, because of the oddities of The Exchange, you won't be able to earn new Sczarni stuff, you will, instead, earn old Qadiran stuff when playing older scenarios.

Andoran ***

bugleyman wrote:
roll4initiative wrote:
I use D&D Dungeon Tiles quite a bit in my PFS games since I have a lot of them and not very many PF map packs or flip maps (slowly collecting, though!). I had a very good representation for each of the maps in The Confirmation, but, not exact. Some rooms were a few squares too big or small. I like to err on the side of too big when a cavern or room seems just too small for 2 large bad guys and 6 PCs. Is this allowed or should we draw the maps on blank battlemats if we don't own the actual map pack or flip mat?

I think that's an excellent question.

That is: No one cares who produced the maps, but are we free to use close approximations when it comes to size, etc.? I would think not. Obviously the impact depends on the situation -- making a 50' wide room 45' wide means a heck of a lot less that making a 10' corridor 5' wide -- but in general the campaign leadership errs on the side of consistency.

I believe the statements in the past about this were:

Close approximations are fine, as long as you are careful that the changes don't negatively impact the environment presented.

Or, Be careful when changing the size of an area, as it might invalidate tactics, or cause unintended consequences. Making a room too big for, for example, a stated initial partial charge to not work.

Also, on the hexes vs squares debate:
I would vote against it, because there are a bunch of things that can get messed up by using the wrong type of map. Some of us use builds that rely on map management, and hexes would change how some of those abilities work.

Even going mapless, with terrain and measuring tape, can cause some ... interesting ... effects. It might neutralize some of the oddities of the square map grid, like the 10' long 5' step on diagonals, might it might also make some other artifacts of the system act inappropriately in other fashions.

In other words, when using a hex instead of a square, or vice versa, be prepared to deal with the Law of Unintended Consequences, as you may not expect all the ways things work differently.

Also note: Every reference I have seen in Pathfinder for hex grids for maps, have all been in reference to large scale, wilderness, maps, whether it is in Kingmaker, or a recent scenario...

Andoran ***

Since it doesn't say, "You add the Cure spells, at the appropriate level, to your spells known and spell list", you cannot use a wand of CLW, as an example, without UMD.

Andoran ***

David_Bross wrote:
Nefreet. I think Paths We Choose is the retirement scenario for all of the other factions.

David, Nefreet was referring to the PC retirement arc, Eyes of the Ten, which is a 4 scenario set from Seasons 1 & 2; now referencing factions which no longer exist in those forms, and for whom, in truth, those faction missions may not be appropriate or make sense, now.

As Season 1 & 2, it would have nation-based faction missions for Andoran, Cheliax, Osirian, Qadira, and Taldor.

As of Season 6, we have Liberty's Edge, the Dark Archive, the Grand Lodge, the Scarlet Sages, the Sovereign Court, the Silver Crusade, and The Exchange. None of them, anymore, are nation-based. Some of them, indeed, might now be of a bent where they would work against their former nation's interests, for one reason or another.

Makes it ... difficult ... when you need to give out the faction missions for a scenario, whether because they are the secondary success conditions, or they make a difference in the play of the scenario (Does shouting out, "I do this for Taldor!" make any sense, now, in Season 6 for a member of the Sovereign Court faction?)

Andoran ***

Pink Dragon wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
The PFS management allowed it. They decided it was a good addition to the PFS community. The players can not decide whate is broken or not. We rely on someone else to decide that for us. Then when they recant because their job was not performed well enough in the first place they ban it.

It is up to the players not to abuse the rules just because they can.

It is not up to PFS management to know every corner case where abuse is possible, for the simple reason that PFS management cannot be omniscient, especially in a rule system such as PFS.


Pathfinder, like anything that is not a simple system, suffers from the law of unintended consequences.

And, as a company that is smaller in scale than, say, UPS or Verizon, just doesn't have the man- and woman-power needed to test all the thousands of rules together, and make sure that every weird combination doesn't break the game.

Not to mention that, as an OGL-based game system, they inherited plenty of things that already can break the system. Stealth, the original rules for all of what are now classed as Combat Maneuvers, Invisibility, Concealment & Cover, Line of Sight vs Line of Effect, etc.

Heck, some of the most common magic item building issues stem from legacy rules along with the relevant specific rules being spread out between sections of the CRB that came from two separate books, a legacy of Paizo combining what, in 3.5 and 3.0, were two different rulebooks.

Andoran ***

Avatar-1 wrote:

The whole quote from that page is:

PFS guide, Potions Scrolls and Wands, p24 wrote:

All potions, scrolls, wands, and other consumables are made by clerics, druids, or wizards in Pathfinder Society Organized Play. The only exceptions are spells that are not on the cleric, druid, or wizard spell list.

For example, a scroll of lesser restoration must be purchased as a 2nd-level scroll off the cleric spell list and may not be purchased as a 1st-level scroll off the paladin spell list. If a spell appears at different levels on two different lists, use the lower level spell to determine cost. As an example, poison would be priced as a 3rd-level druid spell instead of a 4th-level cleric spell. All potions, scrolls, and wands are available only at the minimum caster level unless found at a higher caster level on a Chronicle sheet.

So a cleric/druid/wizard spell level takes precedence over other classes' spell lists.

Avatar-1 is correct, but to further clarify:

If the spell is on any of those three class lists, it must be used from that source, however, if it is on more than one of those lists, and is given at different levels in those lists, you use the one from the list that gives it at the lower level.

So, for another example, if you were to buy a scroll of continual flame, it would be purchased as the second level Wizard spell, rather than the third level Cleric spell.

Part of it was because of exploits; and having a readily available wand of lesser restoration available as a 2 PP purchase would facilitate several of them; and partly for that mythical quality, fairness, since almost everyone looks at the Cleric & Wizard spell lists first.

Andoran ***

Dangleberry Tagnut wrote:
kinevon wrote:

I suspect he will need the actual document, not just a section of it quoted, to qualify for the trait, as though it were someone in the Additional Resources.

I was lucky, and had a copy of the Season 5 Guide on a different PC, as I didn't notice til after I deleted it, that Hunter's Eye appears to have been replaced...

Then again, being forced to exchange that trait, on my only PC who has it, for another, still legal trait, would not have been much of a loss....

** spoiler omitted **

I think I benefitted from the free range once, most combats taking place within the first range band.

Of course, I got the free proficiency as well, and it was for flavour reasons, so it wasn't a huge loss, but I'm wondering if any of the replacement traits would work better...

Since I forked out for a +1 bow, would that be refundable, or swappable for another weapon, if I traded the trait and no longer had proficiency?

Unfortunately, as long as you have a copy of any of the older Guides, and that trait goes back to the original Season 1 Guide, you have to keep it, even if you change out of the Liberty's Edge faction.

Heh. My fighter archer (typecasting, not archetype) used the trait once, in a 7-11, and, unless I miss my guess, all the trait did, looking at the NPC I was firing at, was make me a little more confident in using all my abilities on the bowshots.

The Sarkorian Prophecy:
Range: 180', approximately
Target AC: 19 (yes, 19 in sub-tier 10-11)
Fighter's BAB: +10 (9 levels of Fighter, 1 level of Cleric, 1 level of Ranger)
Dex mod: +6
Weapon Focus: +1
+1 bow: +1
Range penalty: -2 (ignored per trait)
Deadly Aim: -3
Rapid Shot: -2
Manyshot: No change
To hit adjustment, total: +11/+11/+6, with 4 arrows
With trait: +13/+13/+8
So, to hit on an 8 or 6, 8 or 6, 13 or 11.

Yeah, totally worth burning a trait for. [\end snark]


Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Lamontius wrote:
♫ sommmmeone playyyyyed Thorrrrrnkeeeeeep ♫
I was just about to say this. That encounter is brutal. When I ran it, I made sure the entire party was already level 2.

Heh. I have run this module level 6 times, and only hit one PC once in that encounter. And that was the time it was a 2nd level PC, too.

For the most part, that encounter is a lot scarier than dangerous. Either it is going to take a -4 to hit, attacking form prone; provoke AoOs standing up from projne, with its AC taking the -4 penalty; or it has to stand up, and then move to a target, not getting an attack that round.

Rarely, and if anyone does this, they deserve what they get, will it be able to stand up, 5' step, and attack. If you take your PC that close to a potential enemy, without moving into threatening, you deserve what you get.

Also note that, at a +4 to hit, it isn't going to be hitting well to begin with, most martials, who should be the ones closest to it, are going to have ACs at 16 or higher, so less than a 50% hit chance, even before you add in prone penalties.

The Shadow in Thornkeep is usually much more dangerous, for multiple reasons, despite the lower CR rating. And my TPK for that module came from the fungal crickets.

Andoran ***

I suspect he will need the actual document, not just a section of it quoted, to qualify for the trait, as though it were someone in the Additional Resources.

I was lucky, and had a copy of the Season 5 Guide on a different PC, as I didn't notice til after I deleted it, that Hunter's Eye appears to have been replaced...

Then again, being forced to exchange that trait, on my only PC who has it, for another, still legal trait, would not have been much of a loss....

He has used the range benefit during one scenario, in his entire career, and he is currently at 12.0. As a Fighter class, the free longbow or short bow proficiency never came into any use at all.

Andoran ***

David Higaki wrote:

@Nefreet: Last game I played, there was only 1 human... followed with 2 elves, 2 half-orcs, and a druid. The ratio is even less if you count the druid's tiger, the half-orc dog companion, and the elf magi's faerie dragon :)

However, I do understand that aasimar/tiefling ratios are quite varied by region (and I do admit, I have one of each as well).

So, when did Druid become a race, instead of a class?

1 Human
2 Elves
2 Half-Orcs
1 Druid

Um, yeah.

Andoran ***

LazarX wrote:

There are no circumstances that you can have two Chronicles of the same scenario for the same character. There are no exceptions to this statement.

The text you're referencing refers to PLAYER replays, not character replays.

Guide v6.0, Page 20 wrote:
You cannot receive more than 1 player Chronicle and 1 GM Chronicle for the same scenario, regardless of how many times you GM or play the scenario. You are free to replay a scenario in order to meet the minimum legal table size (see Chapter 7), but once you have reached that limit, you do not earn any additional rewards beyond having a good time. A player replaying a scenario in order for the table to reach the minium table size should (in this instance only) be given a Chronicle for the scenario, though marked to earn 0 Gold, 0 Fame, 0 XP; it does not allow the character to make a ‘Day Job’ check, no boons, item access, or anything else appearing on the Chronicle might provide for having played the scenario. This Chronicle only serves as a placeholder to indicate the character participated in the adventure, and gives a place for consumables, purchases, and conditions to be tracked from playing through the adventure. This is the only exception to not having two of the same Chronicle assigned to one character.

Andoran ***

Nefreet wrote:
Would really love the first couple Chronicles for Emerald Spit as well, but I know you guys are busy.

Emerald Spit?

Are there really that many spitting cobras in there? ;)

Andoran ***

richard develyn wrote:

If someone wanted to run modules from the previous season which allowed aasimars and tieflings, how could they find out what was allowed then?

Is there an archive for these guides?

Better still, is there somewhere a master guide which separates the restrictions for PFS from the restrictions for PFS for any particular season?


Ummm. Scenarios follow the rules in force at the time the scenario is run, not when it was created. The only exception to that is for Season 0 scenarios, which have instructions for when and how you can update the monsters from 3.5 to PF versions.

As long as the Aasimar or Tiefling PC has at least one XP from before AUgust 14th, they are legal to run as an Aasimar or Tiefling, based on what they were at the time that final pre-GenCOn 2014 XP was earned.

Andoran ***

"Chip in" doesn't say everyone else has to put in the same amount, or even that everyone else has to donate at all, so the VoP Monk could donate everything past maintenance to a Raise or Restoration, it looks like.

Andoran ***

Neongelion wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:

The problem may be that in your character set-up you did not click the option for "PFS Organized Play character". If you did not click that, then your character is perfectly legal. However, since PFS requires a paladin to worship a god, and since all deity-requiring characters in PFS must be within 1 step of their deity, your character is illegal.

When I created my paladin in HeroLab, only the LG, NG, and LN deities were available to choose from. Check those settings and see if HeroLab throws up an error code.

It's all good, changing her to warpriest I suppose. I have a feeling playing as paladins in PFS will just end poorly anyway.

(I did check PFS Organized Play Character option though)

In the interests of staying on-topic:

A character of a friend of mine is an eccentric Chelaxian human magus/summoner who wears leaf armor. Normal, until you realize that his profession is "Barrister at Law". I should add that his eidelon, which is a bear/devil/stag combination, definitely raises eyebrows through the roof.

If we are discussing PCs for friends, one of the locals has a summoner whose eidolon is a big teddy bear with fangs, and his summoner, a little girl....

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
Profession Sailor actually comes in useful in a few scenarios as more than a day job. It saved us a lot of trouble in [REDACTED].

Yes, but it won't substitute for profession ([REDACTED] Sailor), since my PC with ranks in Profession (Sailor) couldn't sub it in. :(

Andoran ***

David Haller wrote:
Kenneth Fisher wrote:

Sounds like a great "hard mode" run! I'd likely use the "one other item" clause to be a prestige award wayfinder.

Could a VoP monk donate their share of the treasure to help pay for the cost of a party member's spell casting services(raise dead/restoration), or does donating to the charity take priority?

They could not donate all their treasure, no - per the "we're all friends" clause in PFS, they'd be able to donate the same fractional share arising from dividing the costs among the table, and THEN the balance would go to charity.

It's certainly one way to avoid dealing with item purchase sheets! :P

What rule are you quoting for equal fractional shares?


deusvult wrote:

Has anyone seen the FAQ come back with this question lately?

In universe it seems there's no reason they shouldn't work.

From a game mechanics standpoint however, the benefit of a quiver full of sharpened arrows is far too good for the cost of purchasing & using a whetstone.

Eh. Only works if both the bow and arrows are non-magical, so it is a stopgap measure, only useful for a relatively short time in the PC's adventuring career.

Overall, while it is "cheap" in game money, it adds up rapidly in game time, and is gone the moment the PC uses an Oil of Magic Weapon, or gets his weapon enhanced to +1 or better.

And, overall, it adds less damage than just getting a composite bow set for your strength modifier.

And, of course, it can't be used on many, if not all, of the special arrows, like blunt arrows.

Actually, the best place to use it, probably, would be for a crossbow user. Or for silvered arrows...


Remember that most spells that can be used for this do not give the target saving throws.

Very few touch spells give saves in addition tot he miss chance, and they are usually fairly high level, and extremely powerful in their effects.

Also note that Spellstrike does not negate having to make an SR roll if the target has SR.


Jeff Merola wrote:
thaX wrote:
Ok, so you pass out when the combined Lethal and Non-Lethal equal your MaxHP.
Almost! You're only staggered at that point. If the combined total is more than your MaxHP you pass out.

It helps, in this scenario, if you mark down remaining hit points, rather than damage taken for lethal, and track damage taken for non-lethal. That way, you know that:

1) If non-lethal damage taken equals the remaining hit points in the lethal column, the target is staggered.
2) If non-lethal damage taken is higher than the remaining hit points in the lethal column, the target is unconscious, but not bleeding.
3) If the non-lethal damage ever equals the maximum hit points, all non-lethal damage that would normally occur, past maximum hit points, becomes lethal damage, and is therefore removed from the hit points remaining in the lethal damage column.

That makes it difficult, but not impossible, to kill someone through non-lethal damage-only. If they are fully healthy, and you are only doing non-lethal, you would have to do double their maximum hit points plus their Constitution in damage to kill them.

If they are taking a mix of lethal and non-lethal damage, it becomes a little bit easier to do.

Then again, in both cases, it usually takes either a determined attacker (and why wouldn't you be doing lethal damage to begin with?), a coupe de gras (typically delivered by an arcane caster (Strength dump) using a dagger, for 1d4-2 or 1d3-3), or a nasty crit (bow shooting a blunt arrow for an x3 crit non-lethal), to do so.


Maybe consider tanglefoot and/or tangleburn bags, too.

And, if you have a caster in the party, maybe consider Blindness or Glitterdust. A 50% miss chance, if it fails the save, is never a bad thing.

Andoran ***

IIRC, the scenario itself mentions just such a ledge, and even gives the Acrobatics DC to use it.

Andoran ***

Kerney wrote:

Only time I had problems with Godsmarket was when I ran a party with without ranged weapons. As for Kinevon's concern ** spoiler omitted **

P.S. Like that your placing the groups taste above your own taste.

It is easy, at low tier, for one hit to kill.

1d8+2, x3 on a crit, +2 to hit and damage if the target is human.

High tier, too, can prove dangerous.
1d8+3, x3 on a crit, +4 to hit and damage against humans, +2 against elves. First shot in a round where she can do a full round attack will be two arrows on a hit, potentially doing 4d8+28 on a crit against a human target.

Cleric is a d8, so:
1st level: 8 +2 (Con) +1 (FCB) +3 (Toughness) = 14 hit points
Arrow crit: 3d8 + 6 (base) +6 (human) = 21 points of damage, average
-7, bleeding, DC 10-2+7= 15 to stabilize
5th level: 8+4*5 +2*5 (Con) +5 (FCB) +5 (Toughness) = 48 hit points
1st arrow crit: 4d8 + 12 (base) + 16 (human) = 46 points of damage, average, giving the iterative or Rapid Shot attack to run another 1d8+7 points of damage in.

And, of course, the crit could happen on a later shot, so the target has less hit points left when the crit lands... Even in low tier, she has Rapid SHot for two attacks a round...

Andoran ***

EvilPaladin wrote:

Raise dead happens all the time in pathfinder. "I slay the Evil Wizard X!" "Ah, but then his cleric friend raised him and I slayed him too."

Or, go with BNW's solutions:The first rule about PFS Time Travel is we don't talk about PFS Time Travel.

Seriously. Just played a scenario where we ended up killing <redacted>, which was actually rather fun, even if none of my characters have a real bone to pick with him. However, it is also known that, even if he died in this scenario, he has a bunch of contingency plans, so it was not totally unexpected that he shows up alive in a later scenario.

Especially if you played an earlier scenario, where your mission is supposed to be to keep him alive. Although his contingency to survive if the PCs fail their mission in that one feels a bit ... cheap.

Andoran ***

Fromper wrote:
kinevon wrote:
Fromper wrote:
Yeah, the Trade Prince has always struck me as the most boring faction head, too.

Who? Isn't the Qadira faction leader Pasha Muhlia Al-Jakri?

** spoiler omitted **

From what I saw, Pasha was interesting in exactly one scenario - her last one.

Heh. And that,. to my mind, exemplifies why Qadira and Sczarni are merging. Qadira was too bland and boring, and Sczarni was too flamboyant and exotic.

Mix them, and you might just wind up with a tasty but tolerable meal, instead of porridge or wasabi...

To be honest, the most interesting thing I have seen about Aaqir is that he has a husband. There really isn't that much about him for use in the RP heavy portions of Merchant's Wake, which should have been where he got a good spotlight. Sigh.

1 to 50 of 3,117 << 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.