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

leo1925's page

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber. 4,860 posts. 17 reviews. 3 lists. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,860 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

How much should we change the prepared spells for the planetars and the solar (other than swap the good spells for evil ones)?
I am sure that this would depend on each one's group but any guidelines? for example should we allow the planetars and the solar (unity's avatar) prepare spells from Unity's domains?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

Tricky wording indeed.
In my opinion it doesn't negate the displacement miss chance (that's a job for the seeking special ability) but it does negate the miss chance granted by blurr.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Ganryu wrote:
StabbittyDoom wrote:
I've personally found that there are only three kinds of "one big boss" encounters: those that end quickly in a TPK, those that end quickly in victory, and those wherein the boss doesn't follow the same rules as the PCs.

You forgot those that end slowly in TPK...

(yes I've been involved in one, on the losing side)

Slow in real life time or slow in-game time (8+ rounds)?

I had battles that took 4-5 rounds but those rounds took 6+ hours to play.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

Yeah you need spell level hours to copy each spell, so no a couple of days aren't enough to copy that many spells.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

What is this core PFS, how it differs from regular PFS?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
andreww wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:

Well, I do see several more rogues being made with the new core-only PFS. By making the campaign CRB only, the rogue is needed again by default.

It still doesn't make it good.

That is only really true if you think that being able to use disable device to remove magical traps is a necessity. I really doubt that, they can be removed with dispel magic, circumvented with dimension door or simply set off by disposable low level summons.

As far as trap detection goes Clerics and Druids are both liable to be better at it and anyone can disable non magical traps if they invest in the skill. Or you can just push a disposable summon into it. To date I have seen one trap in PFS that was even mildly troublesome (in Port Godless). Most cost you a few HP at best. They may alert the enemy but lets face it that is liable to happen anyway as your party wont all be stealthy or the pre-written tactics will screw you over.

I also have encountered a quite troublesome trap for the party

shattered star book 5 spoiler:
The double adamantine doors that connect rooms E1 and E2

Keep in mind that it was a party that nobody had any ranks in disable device, there was a (magical) trapped locked adamantine door, the trap was automatic and a tiny bit dangerous if you let it activate again and again again (and again) and there was an anti-teleport effect in the dungeon. Sure the players would eventually smash the door* but there was a slight chance of having a a couple of deaths in the party if the trap was activated again and again.
So the usual means couldn't work, i let (i am pretty sure that it couldn't be done) the players cast a dispel magic on the doors in order to dispel the anti-teleport effect for 1d4 rounds so that they could dimension door through the doors.
I could not allow them to do so but this would only result in the players leaving the dungeon, coming back with someone who knew his way around locks (a lvl 5 expert (locksmith) would have been enough) and a few castings of aram zey's focus scrolls and then with the trap disabled they could take their time and smash the doors, there was no hurry and there was no issue with smashing the doors, so i chose to not break the flow of my session and allow the players to use their dispel magic solution.

Other than that i haven't encountered a trap that was a big obstacle and would require the presence of a rogue.

*but thassilonians had the bad habit of building huge stone buildings and magically reinforce said buildings to the point that stone shares the stats of steel if not adamantine


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

Thank you all, especially Gauss who dug up the 3.5 rule, i was remembering either an inability to fly or reduced maneuverability (reduced maneuverability seemed more "logical" than inability to fly).
Anyway thank you again for clearing this up for me.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

I seem to remember that flying creatures with a medium or heavy load got a reduce on their maneuverability but the only drawbacks of a medium or heavy load, on a flying creature, that i can find are the usual (speed reduction, skill penalties etc.).
Do i remember incorrectly or is there a rule that i can't find?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

As far as i know there is no FAQ on this one yet.
The reading can go both ways, i think that it does increase the DCs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

As Tacticslion said, use the mythic agile template, also give the boss two or three lives (double or triple hit points), you might not end up gaining more than 1 or (at best) 2 rounds for your boss but thanks to dual initiative those 2-3 rounds will seem longer.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Neongelion wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
Neongelion wrote:

I for one welcome our brain-sucking overlords.

The hidden message (as with all APs) in the final book, by the way, was "keep watching the skies". Distant worlds/Dominion invasion AP confirmed! Helps that James Jacobs said he had a Dominion invasion AP plot slushing around in his dinosaur brain for awhile too :D

There was the same hidden message on the Second Darkness.

Also i am still waiting for those runelords to return (RotRL hidden message).

Well they did technically return. One of them anyway. And not Karzoug. If you don't know what I'm talking about then good, spoiler alert.

Anyway I am getting my Distant Worlds AP regardless! It might be in 2017, it might be in 2045, it might be in the grim dark future 40,000 years from now but damnit I will get it!

Are you talking about

PFS season 4 spoiler:
Runelord of sloth Krune in the "The Waking Rune" psf scenario?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Neongelion wrote:

I for one welcome our brain-sucking overlords.

The hidden message (as with all APs) in the final book, by the way, was "keep watching the skies". Distant worlds/Dominion invasion AP confirmed! Helps that James Jacobs said he had a Dominion invasion AP plot slushing around in his dinosaur brain for awhile too :D

There was the same hidden message on the Second Darkness.

Also i am still waiting for those runelords to return (RotRL hidden message).


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
kestral287 wrote:
Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus, Slashing Grace. Same number as the katana; only difference is that you can use anyone's Weapon Finesse feat for that one instead of needing Daring Champion or Swashbucklers' versions.

Don't forget exotic weapon prof.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Mackenzie Kavanaugh wrote:
This thread is reminding me why it's so much safer to just ban the entire Summoner class and prohibit any and all related content than to worry about stuff like whether alchemical allocation might be overpowered.

I agree with you on the summoner, although i am begining to think that alchemical allocation could benefit from a house rule or two.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Mackenzie Kavanaugh wrote:
If there's no Summoner in the party, then there's nobody to craft potions of stoneskin and the GM will never have to worry about it. If there is a Summoner in the party, and they happen to take Brew Potion, you still have the option of ruling that potions are always created at their Sorcerer/Wizard level, not their Summoner level, ruling out stoneskin. Seriously, the GM controls the loot and gets unlimited veto power on items that aren't in the book. Potions of stoneskin aren't in the book, and the only people trying to get them are people who think it's kosher to make a Samsaran Wizard who casts haste as a level 2 spell.

Actually you aren't correct on that one, it's true that you always default to the wizard, cleric and druid lists for determining the level of the scroll, potion and wand, so you can't buy 1st level wands of lesser restoration because lesser restoration might be 1st level for paladins but it's 2nd level for clerics. The issue is that when you go for a potion of stoneskin the only choice you have is the 3rd level stoneskin that the summoner gets because there are no 4th level potions in order to default to wizard.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

All the tech crafting rolls require the craft: mechanical skill, just like magic item crafting requires the spellcraft skill.
EDIT:Here


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

It's difficult to read for me too.
Can you tell us the module where that trap is present and how exactly the player got the skeleton?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Victor Von Fausten wrote:

Very simple. I would allow it. The sorcerer would have to have a metal fork attuned to the plane to which he want to travel, since no doubt such an item would cost more than 1,000 gp.

Also the plane shift spell states that the caster may appear 5 to 500 miles from his intended destination and who knows what wonders may await him there.

Be careful what you wish for sorcerer, you may just get it.

Can you tell where do you get the prices for those metal forks, because i can't find them in the plane shift spell.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
The 24 is correct, you are forgetting the deflection bonus.
No I'm not - you're likely forgetting strength (as I mentioned before). Unlike CMB - CMD always includes both strength & dex. 10+9(dex)+5(deflection)+1(dodge)-1(size)-5(strength)=19.

Add BAB and subtruct that dodge AC.

I don't why the monster doesn't have that dodge bonus factored in but it doesn't.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Buy an aldori dueling sword. Its the best game expression of a katana out there.

And looks like one too.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Undone wrote:
Simulacrum really just needs a hard errata which states it can only be used on the caster.

Or a big blog-errata post that erratas and defines the spell.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

The 24 is correct, you are forgetting the deflection bonus.

Bestiaries do have mistakes but most of the times are pretty minor.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Codanous wrote:
Hey, did any one have much difficulty with the Haunted Wreck? I worry an Advanced Wraith in such cramped quarters could really pose a problem for a group. Especially with that 1d6 Con Drain and being able to create spawn.

Play it without sound tactics so that it nevers hits the same PC more than once (maybe twice), i went with the "hits the last one who hit him, if able", my players (by round two) figured it out and coordinated their actions so that they control who hit, it still was a very fearful encounter because crits happen.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

@Charender
Thank you for quoting 3.5 spellcraft rules, it's been so much time since i had read them i had forgotten what it wrote.

It's weird that PF used a slightly different table, can it be a legal issue that Paizo didn't use the exact table from 3.5?
Other than that, while the wording used in the spellcraft skill changed (specifically PF used more explanatory text than 3.5 which had a better table) it seemed that it became more unclear in PF, sure it says that in order to identify a spell you need to be able to "cleary see it" and then it talks about perception modifiers but (as evidenced in this thread) it's not clear enough.

Given my re-reading of the spellcraft rules (both in 3.5 and in PF) i am starting to think that you should be able to identify a spell that has neither somatic nor verbal nor material components.

@wraithstrike
Where do you get your quote on SLAs on 3.5, here it doesn't use the exact same wording (specifically the part you bolded).


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Ms. Pleiades wrote:

@Leo1925 There's Paizo staff that have openly stated that the summoner should have gone through another playtesting round before printing.

As for the GM's decision to ban, he should have banned 3.5 material before Paizo hardcover abilities.

Yes i know but, to me, this means "we should have put more thought in this one" rather than "we delivered not finished because there was no time". The summoner class works very well and doesn't show signs of a rushed job, in fact it works too well, that's why i think that the issue is one of poor designing and not poor execution.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

Ok, i just read limp lash and i have to say that the spell is very very stupid.

How do you know that he is a 16th level wizard (16th seems very precise)?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Taenia wrote:

I think this line in simulacrum:

(and the appropriate hit points, feats, skill ranks, and special abilities for a creature of that level or HD)

would make it incredibly difficult to adjudicate in PFS and is so clearly in a gray area I would recommend GMs in PFS not use it at all unless specifically called for it in the scenario.

In home games make sure you spend the time to carefully balance the abilities of the creature with abilities of creatures of appropriate CR so you don't turn a game into a joke.

Yes i thought about that but since we have almost* zero guidelines or rules on the number and nature of the special abilities gained by monsters as they increase in CR i didn't mention it, i mentioned feats and skill points which both have set quantities based on hit die.

*the only rule i can think of is that a mythic monster gains a number of extra abilities equal to it's mythic rank+1


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

@umf78crs
You overthinking this, it's a two handed finessable exotic weapon, plain and simple.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Devilkiller wrote:
There used to be some rules which said that Wishing somebody dead wouldn't work out well for the person making the Wish. I don't see that in the current description of the Wish spell, but I wouldn't be surprised if a DM made you wish you hadn't made that Wish.

The PF version has no such clause, nor did the 3.5 version.

Besides why be that DM? Just use/make the rules of the spell for such a wish, fort save, death effect, instant death on a failed save, some d6 damage (and maybe stagger or something) on a successful save, if you want have it also to go through SR.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

How did the DM run it at the table when the issue came to the magicbane bandersnatch's feats and skills?
I suppose that he had them prepared beforehand but what about his selection of feats, can he do the selection himself?

Undone wrote:
What I'm reading above means I must by rules sic a demilich or magic bane bandersnatch on the group every single time I run waking rune because I'm aware of the tactic. That's unfortunate.

Only if you run the 10-11 subtier, in the 7-8 subtier you can do the magicbane bandersnatch, but the demilich is still legit. :)


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Emmit Svenson wrote:


The longest running SF shared-world series grew out of an RPG.

Are you talking about Doctor Who?

Because i think that the doctor who RPG is quite recent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
felinoel wrote:
Mackenzie Kavanaugh wrote:
That sort of reaction does not bode well. Is the GM going to ban all save-or-die spells too? Weapons that deal more than 1d6 damage? Over-reacting like this after allowing you to use a non-Pathfinder item (the elixir is from 3.5) is just ridiculous.

I've got poison conversion and a $#!7-ton of drow poison so I've got save-or-die explosives.

That s!+&-ton of drow poison is also a s#!*-ton of gold (with 75gp per dose).

felinoel wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
Yes, technically you can get it as a 3rd level potion because it appears as 3rd level on the summoner's spell list, but you shouldn't, the summoner class (and especially it's spell list) was a very ill-thought class (for some parts, for other parts it was very well-thought) and you really shouldn't try to use those flaws for your own gain.

Paizo has had plenty of time to errata the problems and even HAS already made some errata, by now they should be done fixing what was a rush to print.

How exactly did you went from "ill-thought (parts of it) class" to "rushed to print class"?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Sean Nittner wrote:

My experience with a "Brute" based rogue from level 1-9 has been fantastic. She is consistently the heavy hitter in the group.

2 Level dip into Barbarian for Rage, Fast Movement, Medium Armor Prof, Uncanny Dodge (given up by the Rogue Archetype), Martial Weapon Proficiency, and a Rage Power (Auspicious mark has be useful for those near misses and if fits in with the story).

Rogue with the Thug and Scout Archetype for the rest (and will till 20). I've got a wand of Lead Blades and an cracked Vibrant Purple Prism to hold it in, so I'm not rolling UMD at the start of a fight.

** spoiler omitted **

It could be that the rest of the party isn't insanely optimized but after buffs swinging in the low 40s with normal hits (3 with Blessing of Fervor) or in the 60s with Vital Strike and getting to move, does quite well in our game (Kingmaker).

Outside of combat UMD has has made my character the utility caster for any scroll or wand our Druid...

What caster level does the wand of lead blades has so that you can assume to have it going in most combats?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

@Mackenzie Kavanaugh
Maybe the DM didn't know about the existance of alchemical allocation when he let the player craft the elixir of shadowalking or maybe he thought that the alchemical allocation extract only works with potions or maybe he didn't have the time to think when he approved the creation of the elixir. The issue is that you can't know what he was thinking.

@Tacticslion
It is my opinion that when you ban something serious that a player uses in his build you should offer a free and complete rebuild to use if he wants.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

I kinda understand the DM's decision to ban alchemical allocation, it might seem to him that it's too much hassle to house rule an uncertain number of interactions between alchemical allocation and other things and it seems that much easier to ban it completely. I would have tried to come up with a way to alter it before i ban it completely but i think understand his decision.

@MechE_
Actually the blood money spell was updated for PF when RotRL AE was released, and like the 3.5 version of the spell* it is a very thematic spell that have one serious flaw in it's design, it doesn't have a gp limit on the material it can create, if it did the spell wouldn't be so bad.

*which in my opinion was a worse offender for balance purposes but more thematically appropriate

felinoel wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
Yes I know that summoners get as a 3rd level spell, that's the class that wrecked havoc with spell level (mostly).
Then... yes... it can be a potion?

Yes, technically you can get it as a 3rd level potion because it appears as 3rd level on the summoner's spell list, but you shouldn't, the summoner class (and especially it's spell list) was a very ill-thought class (for some parts, for other parts it was very well-thought) and you really shouldn't try to use those flaws for your own gain.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Shadowkire wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
Golarion, unlike earth, is a planet that has had many intelligent races and creatures that were here before humanity. So Golarion could be a word from the Aboleth, dragons, Elder Things, The Vault builders, or maybe even the gods themselves.
Don't forget dwarves.
In the campaign setting dwarves are kind of new, about as old as the human race give or take.

I am pretty sure that they are older (as a race, civ, culture etc.) but they were unknown to everyone because they were deep deep underground.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Espagnoll wrote:

Now this means that the aballonites nor Apostae aren't of Androffan origin.

It absolutely means exactly that.

Aballonites and Apostate are their own thing.

Can you tell me what are you talking about?
It means that Androffa had no hand in the creation of those elements; not everything in Golarion's solar system is a result of Androffa/Divinity tinkering/influence. In fact, pretty much only Numeria is.

I was asking who are those Abollonites and Apostates.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Espagnoll wrote:

Now this means that the aballonites nor Apostae aren't of Androffan origin.

It absolutely means exactly that.

Aballonites and Apostate are their own thing.

Can you tell me what are you talking about?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Casey Hudak wrote:
Way of the Wicked isn't a paizo adventure path, but in my opinion it is the most masterfully written adventure path ever written.

Also it's at least 30% longer.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Hayato Ken wrote:
The GM knows the plan and we are meeting a crazy old women in a clockwork tower that makes constructs soon, who is also a follower of Brigh...so that could be an entry.

Book 2 right?

If yes then that can't be a way into the PrC.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
Golarion, unlike earth, is a planet that has had many intelligent races and creatures that were here before humanity. So Golarion could be a word from the Aboleth, dragons, Elder Things, The Vault builders, or maybe even the gods themselves.

Don't forget dwarves.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:
Leo, that sounds more like "needs improvement", not "debacle".

this is the internet! i thought phrases like "Debacle" or "s&$~ty enough that monkeys won't even throw feces at it" really meant "Needs Improvement" or "Good Job Sport!" i could be wrong tho:-p

And for the record, i wouldn't call MA a "debacle" or really even that bad, WotR on the other hand "needs improvement"

I wasn't talking about MA, yes it has flaws (serious ones), but it is something you can work with. I was talking about WotR, i think that the encounters in books 3-6 need a serious revamp/overhaul/do them again kinda approach in order for the AP to be "service-able".


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
Hayato Ken wrote:

That would be superawesome though!

Pathfinder Spacebattles^^ A lot better than Spelljammer hehhe.

Question: If i play a technomancer in IG, does that spoiler something?
Planning to take my impossible blood arcanist there sooner or later.

Besides, the magus that can have ranged spell combat is also pretty cool for technologist!

It's kinda difficult to explain how got into the PrC in game but if your DM is ok with the PrC tell him to go the iron gods forum and we will help him.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

Ok that makes sense, it makes me sad but it makes sense.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

Yes I know that summoners get as a 3rd level spell, that's the class that wrecked havoc with spell level (mostly).


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

To be fair dimension door is a 4th level spell and thusly can't be made into a potion, it's stupid early level spells on a number of powerful spells that has wrecked havoc, (like teleport, that after the summoner it's "wand-able").


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

Slaves is usually the best option.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

Why would you think that greater make whole can remove the timeworn condition? it doesn't say anything like that.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Jadeite wrote:
Considering how well the Technology Guide sold, how are the chances for an Ultimate Technology hardcover with expanded rules on computers, spaceships, mechs and all the robots?
Better than before, but still not all that high.

What about a Technology of Golarion (same size as inner sea gods) and talk about the technology found and used in the solar system?

James Jacobs wrote:
leo1925 wrote:

I checked the saves of those who have the technomancer PrC in Palace of Fallen Stars, and the result was that everyone who has that PrC has the correct save progression and not the printed one, specifically:

1) the Shade uses the correct save progression
2) the technic league captain uses the correct save progrssion
3) gryne rasik uses the correct save progression
4) Ghartone uses the correct save progression
5) ozmyn zaidow uses the correct save progression
6) zernebeth uses the correct save progression
Yay!

Yay indeed.

Whatever program you use to generate statblocks at Paizo must work on the basis of the general rules about classes and PrCs and not use different numbers for each PrC and class.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

I checked the saves of those who have the technomancer PrC in Palace of Fallen Stars, and the result was that everyone who has that PrC has the correct save progression and not the printed one, specifically:
1) the Shade uses the correct save progression
2) the technic league captain uses the correct save progrssion
3) gryne rasik uses the correct save progression
4) Ghartone uses the correct save progression
5) ozmyn zaidow uses the correct save progression
6) zernebeth uses the correct save progression

1 to 50 of 4,860 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.