|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
There may be specific locations that have custom DCs for swimming.
I think the DCs for Level 5: The Drowned Level, may have other numbers. Been a while, so I might be wrong, there. I do know my Sorcerer, using a spell that gave him a swim speed, however slow, was able to make the DCs easily, due to the +8 it gave his Swim skill.
There could also be other hazards that cause Swim checks. Anyone know what the DC is to not get sucked into a whirlpool?
Yes, as Joe mentioned Adopted is a trait with no uses, at present, in Core play. Whether there may be boons on any scenario sheets that give an option for any Race Traits is unknown, I don't recall any. Do keep in mind that it allows the taking of a Race Trait (like the Elven Warrior of Old trait), not a Racial Trait (like the Human Skilled Racial Trait).
As Joe wrote, the faction traits are not the ones in the Faction Guide, but the ones listed in each faction write-up in the Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide, currently v7.0, on pages 13-18, listed under the <faction name> Traits headings. Each faction should have 5 traits listed in that chapter, usually as the last item under the faction's write-up.
Rise of the Runelords:
"Hello, my name is Nualia. I am a new member of the Pathfinder Society, recently journeying here from Sandpoint. My apologies for my ... deformities, they were incurred when some mad adventurers assaulted me a short time ago, and, in their madness, drove me form my home, and my father's resting place, in Sandpoint. I do not know all of what they have afflicted me with, so these deformities may increase in the future. Shall we adventure onwards?"
And you hit a couple of nails on the head, there.
"plot relevant" is not the term I would use. Giveaways and blatant spoilers is closer to what it is.
And some of those missions, Taldor or otherwise, were just PITA for anyone not in those factions. People sneaking away form the party to do something "no one knows about" or having to do stupid things (set fire to a granary? Seriously?)
And, of course, there were those faction missions that were just so stupid that they couldn't be failed, even if you weren't trying to do them. "Kill the guy who turns out to be the BBEG for this scenario." is what a couple I have seen basically translate as, when you connect the fluff (Kill the evil bard) with the scenario (BBEG is an evil Bard)
And I won't even go into a couple of games where I don't remember what our Pathfinder Society mission was, as it got completely ignored by everyone trying to do their various and sundry faction missions. I know I spent a significant portion of one scenario, while we were completing it successfully, looking for the people who matched what one part of my faction mission said. Turns out that we ran across them early,m and completed the mission successfully, but didn't find out about it until the wrap-up.
Hall of Drunken Heroes:
Andoran faction mission included one part where we were supposed to not kill anyone who was under a compulsion effect from an outsider, or something like that. Turns out that the priests/bartenders who kicked us out of the bar were the ones under a Charm Person. Yeah.
BNW: I think the problem is that you are assuming that you have to schedule 4 tables all-at-once in order to have both Core and Standard PFS.
I help coordinate a small location here, and we usually are only able to get one table going any particular day. We just schedule the table as either Core or Standard, depending on how everyone, including the GM, is feeling.
We do have limits on some of our players on Standard mode scenarios available (myself being one of the worst culprits here). In order to open things up, we tend to wind up alternating, at present, between low-to-mid Core (1-5, 3-7) games and higher Standard games (5-9, 7-11). That gives the GMs a chance to run "easier" stuff, with the low-to-mid tier games, with games that take more preparation (5-9, 7-11).
For a larger group, with multiple tables, find out if you have enough people to run a Core group as an occasional insertion in place of one of the Standard tables, as a way to ease the scheduling for Standard games, maybe give a GM an easier (in terms of PC capabilities, at least) game to run.
DM Livgin wrote:
My first death was due to weak character builds, combined with robot beat down, combined with bad luck on the dice. It is a blessing in disguise that those characters (mine included) died at lvl 3, so that they did not go on to endanger more experienced field agents. The part that really hurt was that I'd just finished modelling and painting that miniature...
And, this, IME, is one of the most common causes of character death, usually permanent character death.
"Hey, guys, I just finished painting my customized mini for my PC. Let's play!"
Pink Dragon wrote:
Actually, I could see where she might not only not be contributing positively to the party, but actually contributing, if you want to call it that, negatively.
If she is the 5th player at the table, she is ramping up the difficulty (removing the 4 player adjustment) without contributing enough to compensate for said change in the scenario's difficulty. Equally, her PC's level is also affecting things like the APL calculation to determine sub-tier.
Explore! Report! Cooperate!
James Anderson wrote:
I'm sure I've seen this somewhere before, but can't find it now. If you bought something using the Master of Trade vanity for 10% off, but later want to sell it (because you realized you can't actually use it while you're wild shaped, for instance), what return do you get? Half of the listed price or half of what you actually paid?
Don't have the link handy, but it would be half of what you paid.
I do not know how much of it is reporting bias, but I hearing a lot of death by one or two bad rolls. I am not sure what that means though.
Usually means that you roll bad when a good roll, maybe even only one or two numbers higher, would have meant survival.
Example, although this is actually a "good" roll, just not "good enough".
Of course, he does get better, and next level, his Init mod goes up by a bit, as he gets the Kensai initiative bonus at that time. Meh.
Christopher Rowe wrote:
Check out some of BNW's posts, referencing "What happens when you get to the table" with the PC Sodoku mentioned by him and several others.
I have 37 defined PFS characters, 5 of them Core, the rest Standard, levels ranging from 1 (I think I have one in the batch without any XP), to 16, with most tiers having multiple PCs available, other than 16.
Level 12: Fighter with a bow, Fighter (Lore Warden)/Magus with a whip
Evil overlord list number 5a: Given some heroes' abilities, I know that the only way to not be in a charge lane is to be behind a Wall of Minions (tm).
Charge distances can be, with some builds, well over 100', possibly 200'.
So, with only a little bit of work, you can get a charge distance of 80' with drawing a weapon during the charge, or 160' if already armed. Add in a pounce build, and it is really difficult to stay out of the charge lanes/death zones of some of these builds.
They removed Mana Burn?!
Yes, they did.
From what I have seen, as an antique (Unlimited, and the tail-end of Arabian Nights), it makes a change in tactics. I know it would massively affect my old Urza deck, as it would make the scaling Mana production of the Tower/Mine/Power Plant much less of a hassle to handle...
Odd, I took it as a list of PCs, myself.
Too many PFS PCs, I guess.
How do you have Weapon Specialization when you only have two levels of fighter?
It was a level 3 fighter, not 2, but the question is still relevant, since Weapon Specialization has a prerequisite of 4th level Fighter...
Also, to verify, you are planning on retraining all three levels of Fighter into 3 levels of Wizard (Transmuter)?
That will, of course, take 21 PP to do, since I don't think Fighter and Wizard have any sort of synergy...
Feats mentioned during this discussion:
Since Weapon Specialization is, under regular rules, illegal for the current build, you would have to change it to a legal feat anyhow.
Liberating command still isn't bad as a standard action sometimes. It scales with level even without the spell scaling with level
Since it is based on the caster's level, and scrolls are minimum caster level, I would think a scroll of it would be practically worthless, since it would be CL1, so +2 to an Escape Artist check.
Maybe for a Rogue?
@nosig: For masterwork tools that apply to all uses of a skill, like Masterwork Thieve's Tools, it includes the bonus, and removes the penalty, when applicable, if you have it checked.
For a situational bonus, like a masterwork tool that only applies in certain circumstances, it will add a note about it.
For both, however, if you hover over the skill on a Windows box, it will bring up a pop-up window showing the full breakdown for the skill total shown, any situational modifiers that might apply, and even the actual text from the skill from the CRB, including any standard DCs listed.
It also reduces Horibilimus Skillimus Decriptionomus, like the following, an actual skill description I have to include for my Unchained Rogue:
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Not as uncommon as all that. Color Spray, for one common example, will apply at least one round of stun, at a minimum, if the target fails its Will save, no matter what level the target is.
And Color Spray, as well, is an AoE spell.
5 or more HD: The creature is stunned for 1 round.
The Fourth Horseman wrote:
Sorry, just like local Town Guards, you can always bring in a one-eyed, one-horned, flying purple people eater of the Drowinator variety.
Whether you can also force the Drow to wear a yellow polka-dotted bikini is a different question...
** spoiler omitted **
Not absolving the Decemvirate, just pointing out that GMT is at least equally at fault.
GMT has too many apologists who ignore every time he has screwed over individual Pathfinders and/or the whole of the Pathfinder Society.
Then again, due to GMT, I have had at least one PC die. And it wasn't even the real GMT.
Just to supplement the scribing thing:
He gets 3 cantrips (0 level) and one (1) 1st level spell slots from Wizard.
Got ya trumped: Gelatinous Cube, our old iconic monster, has an AC of 4.
As a corollary, it is also possible to have fairly large Initiative penalties, like a Cleric wearing full plate and using a tower shield, both without proficiency:
As an add-on, there is a cracked or flawed Ioun stone that gives a +2 Perception bonus, at the cost of a (minor) -1 penalty to Initiative.
Something like that. The Shaman wouldn't have to worry, at that point, for other things like the Shadow, and its relatives, Strength damage, as it is called out as negative energy:
Strength Damage (Su) A shadow's touch deals 1d6 points of Strength damage to a living creature. This is a negative energy effect. A creature dies if this Strength damage equals or exceeds its actual Strength score.
Kahel Stormbender wrote:
That is a bug you should report, since it shouldn't be doing that.
"Hey, guys. I have heard a rumor of some interesting stuff over here. No real information, but... " YMMV.
Of course, the leader of the group personally violated one of the basic rules of exploring ancient ruins: Never split the party
It is a wonder, with the way that group worked together, that they made it through the desert...
Oddly, given the way things work, it is a wonder that they didn't set the trap off before they got to the final room, rather than when running away from the final room. Maybe the Rogue activated the trap, rather than deactivated it?
And, of course, the question comes up as to [why Ven Lorovox left a healthy party member behind when he fled the scene...[spoiler]
[spoiler=Way to give out the background to the players]As to giving the players the background, the GM, when I played it, used the sarcophagus to provide that info. Helped that the questions we asked were about what had happened to them, so...
Jeff Merola wrote:
The rules basically make it more-or-less a cooperative effort between the GM and the player as to what the Dirty Trick can do against a particular opponent.
Probably easiest to use in a gaming group that tends toward more cinematic descriptions of combat (I take a fairly good swipe (I hit AC 19) on the goblin, bringing my sword down on his shoulder (doing 7 points of damage) making him fall down, unconscious) than in the more basic roll-and-tell (I hit AC 19 for 7 points of damage, is it down yet?) game group.
"I am going to use Dirty Trick to use a dagger slash to my target's forehead, if a 19 beats his CMD, and he now has blood gushing from the minor head wound, blinding him for a round."
Luke Parry wrote:
I'm sorry, I have played and run that series, and, IMO, GMT was the creation of an adventuring group who ignored several of the Society's tenets. Explore! Report! Cooperate!
At some point, if your group leader never tells you anything, your group is in trouble. That, however, is an issue internal to the group, not something that you should blame your employer for.
"Okay, guys, we are leaving Eto for an undisclosed destination. I can't really tell you anything about the place, however, as is obvious, we are going to be travelling through the Osirian desert. Some of the aspects common to deserts are heat and dryness, so pack plenty of supplies, including water. And, of course, Osiria is a place deeply into ancestor worship, and tends to wind up with a lot of undead roaming around, due to all those violated tombs. So, maybe, bringing along some stuff to help deal with the restless dead might not be a bad idea."
Sorry, GMT has always come off as being a little ... isolated from reality, even as far back as Silent Tide. That isolation and resulting disconnection is why I have no problems seeing him doing what he did in that scenario. And, also, why he has trouble with some basic cause-and-effect type stuff.
Don't forget, that book is also where the rules about imbedding Ioun stones are.
If that is "run of Iron Gods for PFS credit", this is the correct forum.
Will you be doing this every Friday?
I admit to interest, but my bi-weekly Friday RotRL group would prevent me from being able to do this if your plan is for weekly games.
Due to certain actions later in the Destiny of the Sands series, I'd be surprised to see him come back, and if he did members of at least one faction would want his head.
Due to certain actions before the Destiny of the Sands series, I would not be surprised if certain Pathfinders already wanted his head.
Let's see.1: It takes one of your traits to allow you to do what you naturally did before taking the archetype, since Sorcerers use Charisma as their casting stat, and UMD is a Charisma-based skill...
2: Where do you get that? If you are emulating UMD, don't the restrictions on UMD still apply?
3: Skill checks do not suffer automatic failure on 1s. UMD includes a rider if you don't succeed on a 1, but I would think, if you are emulating the skill, that, again, the restrictions would still apply.
After all, if something gave you the ability to emulate a climbing check with, say, Knowledge (Dungeoneering), wouldn't you still fall if you failed the check by 5 or more?
Christopher Rowe wrote:
Like any tourist-oriented place, Vegas will have a lot of options to draw people's interests. How else do you make money in tourism?
And, honestly, while there are plenty of adult activities, there is plenty of family-friendly stuff, as well. Amusement parks, kid-friendly places and shows, all sorts of stuff.
Heck, Vegas is one of the few places I know of where not only is there a restaurant open for any holiday, there are a variety of restaurants open for any holiday.
There is a way to add in various PFS exception options, using ShadowChemosh's free add-on for HeroLab. It gives a way to add adjustments for feats, races, archetypes, and something-or-other else to a specific PC. Makes most of my non-standard PCs not show errors for boon races, unlocked-by-boon archetypes, etc.
Gary Bush wrote:
You were not directed to a conclusion, you decided, independently, to draw a conclusion based on insufficient information. Whether the conclusion you draw is correct or not is immaterial, it is formed on a basis of air.
My conclusion for that conversation? That TOZ was trying to be cute, in his own, inimitable, fashion. I did not have enough information, at that time, to draw a conclusion. I did form a hypothesis, but that has, privately, been dis-proven. Live and learn.
I did not attack you, I simply stated that, in my opinion, it was sad that you showed a tendency, in this thread at least, of jumping to unfounded conclusions. Oh, and by the way, I believe the word you want to use is refrain, reframe would be something a painter does to a picture...
My apologies if my reaction to your post or posts is negative. Maybe that is my response to how you present yourself in writing on the forums.
Various Elixirs and Salves/Unguents in the Wondrous Items section pretty much kick that idea in the can.
Actually, IIRC, in 4th Edition D&D, you could only put ranks in skills that were explicitly listed for each class. And only at first level. After that, skills improved based on level, but even included the untrained skills.
5E gives more sources for which skills can be trained, class, race, backgrounds, but once you are done, you are done, and improvement mainly comes form leveling up, again.
Christopher Rowe wrote:
Usually means you have to use Diplomacy, first, to improve their attitude toward you, before you make the attempt, again via Diplomacy, to request the favor.
You can change the initial attitudes of nonplayer characters with a successful check. The DC of this check depends on the creature's starting attitude toward you, adjusted by its Charisma modifier. If you succeed, the character's attitude toward you is improved by one step. For every 5 by which your check result exceeds the DC, the character's attitude toward you increases by one additional step. A creature's attitude cannot be shifted more than two steps up in this way, although the GM can override this rule in some situations. If you fail the check by 4 or less, the character's attitude toward you is unchanged. If you fail by 5 or more, the character's attitude toward you is decreased by one step.
DC: Unfriendly 20 + creature's Cha modifier
If a creature's attitude toward you is at least indifferent, you can make requests of the creature. This is an additional Diplomacy check, using the creature's current attitude to determine the base DC, with one of the following modifiers. Once a creature's attitude has shifted to helpful, the creature gives in to most requests without a check, unless the request is against its nature or puts it in serious peril. Some requests automatically fail if the request goes against the creature's values or its nature, subject to GM discretion.
DC: As listed in the scenario, I would suppose.
So, initial Diplomacy, schmoozing the Kortos agents, trying to make nice with them. Under standard rules, the roll could make them hostile (DC-5 or less), no change (DC-1 to DC-4), make them indifferent (DC to DC+4), or even make them friendly (DC+5 or higher), in some rare cases (Diplomancer Bard with the right feat or ability, IIRC), it can even make them helpful (DC+10 or more).
If you are lucky enough (or just plain good enough) to make them indifferent or better, then you get to make the check to get the appropriate assistance.
@Gary: Remember that, in many cases, using the right pregen as a replacement can keep the game in the same sub-tier.
Lost a 3-5 level PC? Try a 4th level pregen, odds are fairly good that the party can opt to continue playing at the same sub-tier. Same holds true for a 6-8 level PC, use a 7th level pregen.
Sometimes the APL will change, then you take a few minutes too discuss the situation with the players, and get their buy-in on how to proceed.
"Okay, guys, Bart had to leave to take Kenny to the hospital. We can pause the game for now, and start it back up when Kenny gets better, or we can sub in a couple of pregens for their PCs. The scenario is a X-Y, you have been playing in X tier. A X level pregen for each of their PCs would change the APL to Y. If we do that, and continue in the lower sub-tier, you would only get the rewards appropriate for the lower sub-tier, even though you played part of it at the higher sub-tier. How do you all want to proceed?"
The only difference is if the player was using their tablet for something that drained their battery earlier, and doesn't have some way to charge it or provide backup power, they can have an option to let them stay at the table. (Part of my kit, now, includes a couple of backup batteries, chargers really, that can recharge my phone on the go. Despite being up-and-out, sometimes, for almost 24 hours, I have seldom had to pull out the second charger.)
This also covers an issue another coordinator mentioned ion a different thread, where his site has a couple of people who can only stay for the first two hours or so of a slot, and they do it consistently. Now, he has an option to let the game continue for everyone else, with appropriate replacements and challenge level...
Got it, responded to it. Note that, as my PM says, just because a PC has a retired trait, does not mean the PC is not PFS legal, as many of us have PCs with grandfathered options on them.
I started playing PFS in 2008, and my first PC actually had to be updated from 3.5 rules to Pathfinder rules before I could play him starting with Season 1. However, as he was a member of a national faction, and the trait I took for him from that faction is no longer offered by the non-national version, it was grandfathered in for him.
Also, if you switch factions, you retain any faction trait from your old faction, not your current faction.
Of course, knowing what I know now, I would rather have been offered the option to retain it or change it to a currently-allowed trait...
Note: You may want to put in some form of tracking for factions, where a player can annotate if and when their PC changed factions, either due to personal change, faction retirement (Shadow and Lantern Lodges, and Sczarni), or faction name/focus change (All the national factions to non-national versions, Cheliax/Dark Archive, Andoran/Liberty's Edge, Qadira/The Exchange, Osirion/Saphhire Sages, and Taldor/Sovereign Court), etc.
The Clarifications Document principally addresses rules material that appears in softcover sources such as the Pathfinder Campaign Setting and Pathfinder Player Companion lines, rather than the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game hardcover books.
Note that this does not prohibit them from dealing (or having to deal) with rules ambiguities that crop up when using softcover books and rules interactions with material in hardcover sources.
Example: Wand Wielder arcana for the Magus. Explicitly allows the Magus to use Spell Combat with a wand. Does not cover the interactions with Spellstrike, if the spell would be one that could normally be used to Spellstrike with, like a wand of Shocking Grasp.
Do you have to track the source of a spell, on later rounds, to note if the Magus has to use a non-weapon touch attack with it, or a regular weapon Spellstrike with it, even if the spell is on their list, if it was cast from a wand, staff, scroll, or other class spell slot?
How about if the spell came from a spell storing item, that the Magus originally cast the spell into? How does that work with Spellstrike?
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Steve Lau/Dragnmoon has a post around here, thought it was stickied, with a link to a Google document with a bare bones listing of all PFS legal deities.
Most classes, true classes, are legal for PFS. Archetypes (case-by-case), and evil classes (antipaladin) and PrCs (assassin) are not legal.
I admit I would love a list of classes and legal archetypes. I know I listed the legal pregens somewhere, and there were a lot of them, even without there being pregens for some classes/books yet. Of course, that egal archetypes list would be even nicer as a matrix (class x archetype) and include compatible archetypes (Blade Bound & Kensai, for instance) as their own entries, as well.
Tabletop Giant wrote:
Congrats on getting it open.
Of course, it just shows my timing sucks. I had sent out a batch of emails with the codes you gave me less than a day of you opening the site up. It was amusing. I have, since, sent out a general email to the local players about the site.
I also sent you a PM on the site about a minor issue I ran into with one of my older PCs, where the older Faction traits are not available, although he has one grandfathered in...