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

nosig's page

FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 6,916 posts (7,369 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 13 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.

1 to 50 of 623 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

"For common monsters, such as goblins, the DC of this check equals 5 + the monster's CR."

so for common monsters with a CR of 5 or less... anyone can try the Knowledge check - even if they don't have a rank in it.

I mention this as I have seen a table of experienced players, who know as players that you need to hit skeletons with blunt weapons NOT USING blunt weapons because no one at the table had Knowledge Religion - so... a bunch of players felt constrained to try to prevent "meta-gaming"... They knew that the monsters weren't taking full damage, but restricted their PCs, because they knew what to do (as players)- they didn't do it (as PCs). The player "meta" knowledge constrained thier PCs ... If the monster had been something called a "Green Wiglet" and they had noticed it wasn't takeing full damage they would have switched to different/back up weapons to try to find the DR type. It would have been a "puzzle" they would have enjoyed solving! (I can almost hear the table talk now..."Not Silver Blunt! switching to a Magic Slashing! You got that oil applied yet? Think it might be DR/Good then?")

Heck, these were not under-equiped PCs! They all had blunt weapons! they just were afread to appear to be Meta-gaming.... One of the players had a Dwarf that often switched off from Warhammer to Battle Ax, but he was careful to use the Ax so no one would think he was "meta-gaming".

Osirion ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
thejeff wrote:
the average peasant and even most adventurers, those who haven't invested in Know: Arcane, can't even recognize a dragon. Much less know what one is capable of. And that seems wrong.
So in a world that contains not only dragons, but also drakes, wyverns, tyrannosaurs, pterodactyls, and lizards the size of houses; someone who's never actually seen one of the massive scaly beasts from that list being unable to distinguish it from the rest of the list "seems wrong"?

I think the problem is more when he can't tell it from a chicken.

In my defense - I'm a dwarf and I haven't really been exposed to such exotic animals in my underground background. I did not grow up on a farm which has such things.

Undead chicken - that I can recognize most of the time (Knowledge Religion +2)... but I've got training for that...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Fox wrote:
FLite wrote:
The Fox wrote:
mogmismo wrote:

Any GMs out there ever try the reverse knowledge check?

Yes. I had a villain who failed a Knowledge (local) check cast hold person on an aasimar.

Shouldn't that be knowledge (planes)? (That's what we use out here.)

Yes. It was. I misspoke.

oh, I don't know, I could see it as a failed Kn(local) check... after all, if it HAD been something hold person worked on it would have been Kn(local)... ;)

(edit: yeah, I can totally see it going something like this...
NPC Caster: rolled a 19 Kn(local) check - and not getting a clue on what kind of PC he's facing... "Drat! Your CR must be more than 9! Or at least more than 4! so I better use my 'save or suck' attack spells on you! HOLD PERSON!")

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Linking in another (older thread) on the same thing...

Knowledge checks and table variation..

notice that the second post on that thread is Doug Miles linking to another even older thread on the same subject

and from one of my posts on that thread...

On Knowledge and table variations:

Knowledge checks = table variation

there is so much variation here I don't even know how to answer. And I have no idea how to fix this. (so the following is mostly just venting - skip it if you like).

I normally say: "I've got an XX, what's the most improtant thing for me to know?"

Many judges figure I am trying to pull something... when all I am doing is trying to NOT make this a game of Player Vs. Judge where the judge makes me create questions depending on what I as a player know about the monster, while he tries to conceal anything I might get wrong... in other words a Meta-Game Game. Tell me what my PC knows, so I know how to run him for you...

I personally know a lot of important "bits" about Flesh Golems. I can recognize them from their discription.... but my wife can't. She has no idea. "Frankenstiens Monster" doesn't mean much to her (she grew up in a different culture - different myths). So, her "3 questions" are going to be very different from mine. Then add in the judges who give "limited response" answers and we see how useless it is to put points into knowledge skills at some tables.

"What defenses does the monster have?" - "you can't ask that!" - "Does the creature have DR?" - "Yes. That's one question."

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Stratton wrote:

As both a GM and player, I have never found this to be an issue at any table. I know others have had problems, but I haven't seen it in my gaming.

Typically, as Fromper said, I consider skeletons, zombies, goblins, kobolds, orcs, animals and the like to be common (5+CR.)

When they succeed on a check, I give them the monster name and the type of creature (after all, the type of creature determines which knowledge skill has to be used, so it seems only fitting.) I will give them the subtype for free (if they succeed on the initial check and ask me). I then give them 1 piece of useful information.

Beyond that, for each other fact they get, they can ask me about any one category (defense, offense, etc.) I will pick an item from that group to share, and I try to pick one that is most useful to the group.

For me, the flexible and undefined system works quite well. I can tailor the results to the group.

What I don't do is let any knowledge check tell the character everything about the monster. I think that is well beyond the scope of a skill.

The "the flexible and undefined system" reduces a part of a players PC to Table Variation. Dependant on the whim of the judge...

Get a good judge and it can be a fun entertaining event (see some of the posts above) - even if it doesn't inform you of the "important bits" of knowledge.

Get a poor judge and it can contribute to a poor gaming experience (see different posts above) - even if it does inform you of the "important bits" of knowledge.

This is just another bit of YMMV - something that we'll need to work out at each table we sit down to play at. Gameing with strangers today? guess you need to learn the "table rules" on knowledge checks...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Salarain wrote:

I have Question why did most of you avoided the title of my question??

I wanted help with the best way to use my tier points and gold or xp for gear up this cleric?

I have +3K of gold

2nd level points or fame?

I hope I am asking this right???

here you go... this might help for what to buy.

Painlords list of what to buy

as to the points - you only get two, and I would suggest putting one in Diplomacy...
the other? Perception. Always a good skill...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

bah! just get an Alchemist to do it with an Infusion (so he can hand out extracts of Shield that work like potions...)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I expected to see Take 10 on this list...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tim deBow wrote:

As a loyal Andoran I'm appalled at this betrayal. To throw away all the good that can be done by working within the system to to root out the small fraction of bad apples is wrong. I for one will not stand for the Major's perversion.

It is troublesome that the Major thinks that he can separate himself from Andoran politics in order to have his Liberty's Edge group of rebel rousers to strike out against what he feels is corruption. With no governmental oversight, at that.

I worry that the Major will be corrupted by this new level of power that he is granting himself. No one is above the law, and the Major and his Liberty's Edge "freedom fighters" will need to learn this again.

sounds like someone is moving from Andoran to ... ah... Dark Archive... wait, they aren't the Law faction any more... who the heck is for the Law now? Sczarni?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

wow... I feel kind of left out.
I haven't gotten any of these...
What, I don't post enough or something?

(just sarcasm people!)

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
CathalFM wrote:

Another issue with building down is the fact that it really HAS to be a group thing, sure you might think hey I'll make this more challenging by building down and everyone will love that.

You get to table and it becomes quickly apparent that everyone else has either optimised or is at least highly competent and you either:
a) quickly begin to feel sidelined or
b) actually get comments about how ineffective you are

I'm not saying everyone should be optimised by any means, but everyones idea of where the "line" is in regards to useless-competent-optimised is different.

I may be reading into this too much (it is fairly early), so disregard this if I'm interpreting what you're saying incorrectly.

I believe that this is where the GM/organizer/VO needs to step in and say something to whoever is making these comments. It's not proper or tactful for another person at the table to pass judgement about how useful PCs are to the party.

If there are comments that talk about possible improvements people could make, or good spells to select, etc—that's one thing. That's sharing knowledge of system mastery and it's how we all get better at this game. But to tell players that their PCs are essentially worthless in any sort of serious context is a large breach of etiquette. It's just rude.

"the GM/organizer/VO needs to step in and say something to whoever is making these comments."

Bah!, the other players need to step in and say something tactful, like "stop being rude dude."

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:

The thing is, the enemy has to wait until he realizes he can't hit me and that I'm not a threat before moving on to another target.

By that point my wife's archer fighter has usually killed it.

Some judges just never have "the enemy" even take that first swing. Even when you have a Hat of Disguise and look like an unarmored rogue.

You get swung on once in the first fight, then the enemy just moves past you in the rest of the scenario...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kyle Baird wrote:
Having expectations of how other people should play their PCs only leads to disappointment.

Painlords What to Expect at a PFS Table.

guess we have been setting ourselves up for disappointment for some time...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I play with a lot of beginners - esp. lately.

Two of these are a Mother/Daughter pair that almost always play at the same table. At first they always did.

Their first PCs were a Cleric (mom) and a Summoner (daughter). The Summoner didn't have a CLW wand, or in fact, any means of healing. After all, it was covered by the Mom's Cleric (whose first 2 PP went to a wand). Everyone they play with knows this, no one has a problem with it. Because the Summoner has provided for a source of healing. When the pair finally split up to play at different tables, the mom said something like... "you need to pick up a healing wand, so you're not sponging off everyone else... it's kind of like the way we bring snacks to the game to share".

If a mom can teach this to her kid, why can't we teach it to adults?

What do we say to the guy who hits 3rd level and still expects to sponge off the girls mom? after all - she's running a HEALER and it's her JOB.

(edit: and they always bring gram crackers! one of my favorite treats! so, you know, I always try a little harder to bring something to share when I know they are coming to the game... I hate to be a's the way my mom raised me)

Qadira ***

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I was judging beginners tables at ComicCON in my home town. I was expecting to have as much as 100% new players and prepared for that... but prepped several scenarios just in case we got someone who had played before.

and I had a one player who had played before! great! Now I didn't have to worry about healing at a table of all Iconic PCs, right?...

No such luck. The "old hand" was running a character with 2 XP, and 4 Fame... a Front Line, Fighter with an 18 STR, and a Great Sword...

He had spent 2PP on something... I remember now, it was masterwork halfplate armor.

I mentioned that he might want to get something in the way of healing... just in case. After all, he was likely to be the only PC at the table with anything besides the 150 gp. starting money. "Nah, one of them will just have to run a Cleric to keep me healed up." So he spent his gold on a Long Composite Bow, (STR 18 bow, and he had a DEX of 10), and saved his other two PP...

As each new player arrived and I passed out my folder with all the Iconic's printed up (and new PFS numbers), he would say... "We need one of you to play a Cleric to keep me in the game"... and I would say, "Play what you want... I notice you are reading the gunslinger write-up..." He did get one of the players to run Kyra, then complained when she channeled to damage the ghouls... she was "wasting" her heals...

This is the mindset I see when someone says... "I'm the front line fighter, you guys have to keep me healed up. Your the Healer - it's your job to keep me up!" It might not be the actual one that people on the other side of this issue are saying... but it feels that way.

"One of you will have to run a Cleric to keep me healed up... 'cause I need my money for armor and weapons." & "You need to spend your resources to keep me in the game. "

If that is not what you are saying... then we don't have a disagreement. If it is, then ... I guess we do.

Osirion ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
TobiasBlues wrote:

Thanks for the advice.

Nosig, I knew there was a forum somewhere about that, thank you for the link.

All of my characters carry some clw potions and alchemist fire (never thought of the anti-toxin or plague).

Before we go into a "Dungeon Crawl" I hand each of my companions several items....

an anti-toxin, an anti-plague, and a sooth syrup is among them. I will tell them to drink them now, and in an hour I'll give them another... several times the +5 bonus on a save makes a big difference. Some people will state they have one of these they bought themselves - and I'll point out that I make the ones they get from me... so we can save a lot of gold to just use mine.

I often hand out extracts (like potions, only better!) too. Many people are surprised when I hand the front line tank a shield or fly and say something like "if you use it, ask and I might have another." I hate spending a round I can be throwing bombs buffing someone else - so I just let them buff themselves with my extracts!

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Check out this thread

What to Expect at a PFS Table..

the sections for you would be


After your characters first mod, he/she should have a Potion of Cure Light Wounds and have the foresight to mention to their traveling companions wherein it might be found on their body. The person ultimately responsible for healing your character is you. (When the character has 2 PA, you should consider getting a Wand of CLW.) Every character should be able to easily stabilize another party member. (Using curing or Heal skill checks or something).
Your character should have a way to deal damage at range: a ranged weapon, scrolls, wand or whatever.
Your character should have a way to deal with swarms. Of course, alchemist flasks are the easiest, but you may want something else. You know and I know that PFS mods are swarming with swarms...find a solution that fits your character.
Your character should have a way to create fire and light. Something like, a few tindertwigs and a sunrod or light spell.
Your character should have a vial of antitoxin.
Your character should have a smokestick/fog effect.
A melee characters should have a back up weapon and spellcasters have a backup spell component pouch/holy symbol in case something happens to the primary.
After 2 chronicles, every character should contribute to group healing...even if it's just handing off a Wand of CLW. Responsibility for your characters healing does *NOT* reside with any player other than yourself. Your character should be able to help in the healing...if the party happens to have a character who actively assumes this role, that’s good, but don’t expect it. Never expect that it is someone else's job to keep your character in the game.


At 3rd
You should be able to play your character efficiently with whatever role you choose. You should do something to help the party every round even if it is just using the Aid Another action or casting Guidance. *ALWAYS DO SOMETHING.* Even if it’s guard the back of the party or Ready to attack the first monster that appears. You should able to properly use the Delay and Ready actions to align your character with the actions of others.
If you have a knowledge skill to identify a monster, you should make that roll before you do anything else on your turn.
Melee types: should to have a magic weapon or a way to get their weapon magicked (have oils of Magic Weapon available or scrolls of Magic Weapon and pass them out or know how to use them). Your character should have secondary weapons of cold iron and silver (or primary). Your character should be able to overcome DR to slashing, piercing, and blunt. (my personal favorite is a silvered light mace: silver, bludgeoning, simple weapon as a backup.) I expect you to be able to deal non-lethal damage.
Ranged types: should to have a magic weapon or a way to get their weapon magicked (have oils of Magic Weapon available or scrolls of Magic Weapon and pass them out or know how to use them). Your character should ammo of both cold iron and silver. Your character should have some plan to handle close combat and overcoming DRs to slashing, piercing and blunt.
Caster types: Your character should have the beginnings of a spellcasting library in scroll form so that they can handle some of the different and random situations that might come up. Your character should have a solution to help the party deal with swarms and invisible foes...your character is the best equipped to handle them. Your Characters library should have some spells that scale nicely on a scroll: Comprehend Languages, Endure Elements, Faerie Fire, etc.
You should know how to use your characters basic spells in combat and have the spell descriptions in front of you *before* casting the spell. Your should know how staple spells work: Magic Missle, Glitterdust, Spiritual Hammer, Grease...whatever your characters butter is, be able to spread it. You should know how your characters area of effect spells may be placed...know what a cone looks like and the area effect of a Silence.

Cheliax ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
pauljathome wrote:
nosig wrote:
and many of my Good PCs (and all my Lawful ones) are Cheliax. So I felt kind of attacked with this entire thread...

This is a genuine question. It is NOT bad wrong fun or the like. I'm just curious.

Why did you choose to have good PCs join the Cheliax faction? It seems an odd fit.

(reply posted under my Chel-Paladin PC)

Good people live in Cheliax too right? In fact, it is often said that the lower ranks of Hellknights often have Paladins in them. So, when I went to build a Halfling Paladin, I picked a "country boy from Arkansas" type of build - and figured that made him Cheliax. What other country has at it's base the fighting of Chaos (and demons)? True, the high nobles often go a bit overboard... but...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am no one official - but I use these chronicles alot. This is what I understand about them...

...the way the CRs for PFTales books work changed at the end...
perhaps they will update all the old CRs, but for now the only one that really is done the new way is the one for:
Pathfinder Tales, Vol 4: (Liar's Blade, Pirate's Honor, The Wizard's Mask, and King of Chaos).

I have a lot of PCs.... I have all the Tales books. I put the CRs on many of my PCs, but I only have one copy of Vol. 4: which floats from PC to PC until I decide on the Perm boon it gives (which I haven't yet).

Basicly, use the instructions in the Chronicle for each Chronicle - you'll see them on the first page of the download. The instructions for Vol. 4 is different from the rest.

Cheliax ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have a PC that regularly hands the following to the low CHA types at her table. She calls them a "Chaliaxian agreement:"

Contract Offer:

Contract offer:
During the course of our upcoming mission, if at any time
you find yourself in need of my special talents used in a discrete
fashion, you may feel free to request that I fulfill some task for
you. No questions asked. I am quite good with influencing
people, and I do have many other skills that would be at your
disposal. And I am always discrete.

In return, I would like to think I could call on you at some
point to assist me with a small task, something that I feel I am
unable to do on my own. And I am sure I could also rely on
you to be discrete in these matters also.

I would assure you that I would never ask you to do
anything which you would find overtly distasteful. Nothing
to violate any personal code or vows you have.

Signed: Katisha Lee

Sign here:_____________________________________

Though she calls them a Cheliaxian Agreement, until resently she was not that faction (she changed factions to Shadow Lodge in season 3, then back to Cheliax after Shadow Lodge went away). I've also started something like it with several of my other characters... but not as formal (her's is a double business card that I actually hand to the PCs & a copy to the Judge).

I consider it just my little way of RPing "Cooperation" with other Pathfinders.

The amazing thing to me, is that I have had several players reject the offer out of hand, because she is Cheliaxian - and they figured she was that faction (a lot of other players reject the offer for RP reasons - or because they fear "a deal with the devil" is involved, but several have rejected it because of her "race"). Kind of like rejecting an offer of cooperation from someone Chinese, because you didn't like the policies of the People's Republic of China... (only they are from California). I've even had one player actively working to foil my faction mission (back when we still had them)... But then I think he was Silver Crusade, so that was ok?

The actions of PCs are more under the control of the Players than of the factions.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.

PFS story....I cast Unnatural Lust on a Mook in the fight - sending him after the Druids Big Cat companion... He scrambles over it and hugs said kitty, and so I then slumber hexed him...

so, this means that later, when he wakes up, he remembers having unnaturally lustful thoughts (and actions), before he blacked out. Only to come to some time later (and we searched him while he as asleep), with his clothing in dis-array, with a happy lion sitting next to him purring.

Yah... what happens in Almas, stays in Almas...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I get BoL as a 4th level Extract (Alchemist (Chirurgeon)/ 11th) - which I put in poisoners gloves and can hand off to other PCs (like the Barbarian in the party). It's something else to see the party barbarian charge across the battlefield and punch a Breath of Life into someone that just went down.

or I can punch a body with a BoL, and take my second attack to punch it again...."Clear!... AGAIN! CLEAR!"

makes a great RP event...

Qadira ***

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Flutter wrote:
Fromper wrote:
That's what familiars are for. Send them to the front lines, because they have half as many HP as the wizard, so that should be plenty, right?

Tap tap taps pointy stick

... the mission is to sneak discreetly into a fancy party, and the druid wants to bring her elephant companion. "He's just a baby - he's medium sized!" (happened one time when I GMed The Disappeared)

For that you can either get a carry companion scroll/spell, or some balloons and a sign that says "Free elephant rides"

use Prestidigitation to color him pink. The party is in full swing when they arrive, so NO ONE will admit to seeing a pink elephant walk thru the room...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
trollbill wrote:

I can see both sides here. It is beneficial for PFS in Golarion to be Neutral. It is much more questionable for PFS to be Neutral in the real world. And this juxtaposition has always bothered me. Real world PFS wants everyone to play nice. Golarion PFS doesn't care. How do you reconcile the two?

I have no doubt that players who want to be jerks are going to gravitate towards factions like Scarni or Cheliax. I have serious doubts removing those factions will stop those same players from being jerks.

First paragraph you had me in your camp. Second you only half had me. I have found (the small percentage) jerk players in most factions - not just in two. In fact, the worst offenders I have encountered were Andoran faction... but I think they would have been like that no matter what faction they had been in.

Qadira ***

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Let's try this a different way.

I'm putting together a game, and looking at who to invite to play

So, the "team" of Pathfinders are orgainizing, each person trying out for one of those limited "first string" slots. After all, we only have so many seats at the table. Each PC will bring something to the table they were good at... and a lot of extra things too.

So, which Pathfinder are we going to accept in our team?

Bob La Feet - Barbarian "Glass Cannon" who prides himself in putting down the monsters in 3 rounds.... and relies on the rest of the team to heal him up?

Jo La Feet - Barbarian "Glass Cannon" who prides herself in putting down the monsters in 3 rounds.... and has a wand of CLW? (and 2 PP less).

Everything else the same...

Which one are we going to want on our team? Which one do I invite to play?

The guy who we have to "pay with healing" or the guy who "pays his own way"?

and I am not even going to point out that the guy with the wand seems to me to be more of a "team player" and less of a "in this for himself" kind of guy. And I like to play with fellow adventurers on my team, not with employees I have to pay to be there.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
another_mage wrote:
Chris Lambertz wrote:
we have no plans for an ignore feature.

The perfect opening for a shameless self-plug ... must ... resist...

[dice=Will Save]1d20

So, there is this great plugin for Mozilla Firefox that adds a client-side Ignore feature for any users that are interested.

Ignore v5

this is a great thing...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have been reflecting on this thread (and several others on the same track) for a few days now... and I have a couple insites (I think)

If we are NOT expecting to take any damage - and have a few potions just in case something leaks around the edges, are people saying we should have a CLW wand to help heal up the Tank/meat shield (who after all is taking damage that was ment for the party)?

That's a different take on this. Sounds good to me though. I'll need to be sure and share my wand some with the Tank when I've the back rank caster (or the scout or whatever). As my contribution to the "group healing" fund and all. (I would expect him to have one too...)

I've run the front liner who draws fire to suck off the AOOs from the monster. Maxed out AC... and wearing a Hat of Disguise to make my PC look like the back rank wizard to draw fire. Lots of gimmicks. Or sucks off the attacks from the stupid monsters. Or holds the doorway and blocks the monster in the room... or provides cover for the wizard by standing between him and the enemy.

I can see passing over my wand to share some of the expense of patching up whoever the bad guys were shooting at. You know, to spread the expense out in the party. To be more of a team player.

As long as it is SHARED, and not carried by one or even most of the party. If I can't share the "HP Tax" this game? I'll be sure to pick up a little extra next time. We're a team right? And no one likes a Mooch for long. (unless there are other reasons. Like she's cute, or she brought Pizza/donuts/Thia food, something).

And that's what we're getting at right? Spreading the cost of the adventure out between all the PCs... in something like a "fair" split...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dylos wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
The gaming couple across from you spends the whole scenario making out...
but at least they are doing so in character.

it wouldn't be as bad ... if they weren't both older gamer dudes, playing a hot Aasimari couple...

Qadira ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

this thread is going nowhere we have not been before... except maybe to be locked.

Older thread. feel free spend some time there....

One of my posts from over there...

"I play a type of cleric I call a Combat Medic. I play two of them, at different levels. They are fast (40' move normally - and "agile feet" means they ignores difficult squares), has a very High AC, and often has other gimmicks to be sure they aren't hit. They often use the spell Shield Other to keep other combat types up. But you know what? it really hurts to see someone say "hay, after the fight, you need to heal me up - but I'm not expecting to help with that." I mean, often my PC doesn't even OWN a CLW wand. You see, my guy has SR (Dwarven trait), and wands tend to fail when used on him. So any I buy would mean they can't heal my PC. So you are effectively saying. "I don't want to have to spend my resources keeping my PC in the game, I need one of you other guys to do that."

Not to long ago I played one of my PCs in a game where the main melee PC didn't really have all that good an AC. Something like 10 point below my Clerics. I used my spells to raise his AC - but he sort of expected that. My Shield of Faith spell, then charges from my Wand of Prod. Evil (normally used to protect against Poor Will Saves), and the Shield Other Spell. The fact that after the fights one of the other PCs had to chip in charges from their wand of CLW (the wizard said to use his, he hadn't needed it much) is the only reason he got to fight in the last half of the game sort of bothered me. Esp. when, after we got Chronicles he chimed in that he had to decide to either boost the magic on his sword or his Belt... but he didn't have the fame to boost his belt, so he was just going to save his money (again). Yeah... I think it was 16 charges off the Wizards wand, and 8 or 10 off other players. Gotta love that kind of "Team Player"..."

Qadira ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Let us step back and think about it.

PFS is always gathering ancient treasures and locking them away somewhere in a vault, so that they can be "studied"....

WOW... maybe one (or more) of the 10 is actually a Dragon! And it has hit on this cool idea! get the pesky human adventurers to gather treasures from around the globe to be added to the horde..errrr.. vault!

And we have been doing this for hundreds of years right?

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
foolishpete wrote:
In addition to the players success in bypassing misdirection, how does detect magic play into the players identifying Vaga. She is wearing the boots of levitation and the glamoured armor. If the PCs detect magic, won't they identify those items and thing it is weird that a little girl named Tilly is wearing those items? How have other GMs gone around this?

have to remember that it takes 3 rounds of concentration to get the actual items that are magical. Unless they were casting Detect Magic just to pick her out... and even then she might mess up the concentration "EEEEKKKK! you're throwing a curse on me! My mommy tol' me about men like you!" smack him with little girl fist.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aardvark Barbarian wrote:

So none of you have a problem with the fact that a lvl 1 untrained commoner barmaid, with all 10's in ability scores (or a real life child) can:

Feed themselves daily in the wild,
Long jump 10' with a running start,
Follow tracks of a tiny creature in either fog or moonlight across very soft ground,
Guide a mount with her knees while riding bareback,
Determine if food is spoiled from 50’ away,
or earn between 1d10 cp/day or 1d10 gp/week of either performing or crafting?

All with no experience or ability whatsoever.

i might actually have a problem with the fact that almost half the lvl 1 commoners, and the same number of any level of untrained hero or other persons of any level (untrained) CAN'T do any of that....

and can't identify a metal (how about coins? is it gold or copper... sorry, that's KN:Dungeoneering DC10)
and can't tell if a bridge is unsafe to use...
and can't tell if someone is from his home town by the way he talks...
and can't tell who they were at war with last year...
and don't know that they are ruled by a king, grand duke, or prime minister...
and can't name the king, or captial, of their own country...
and can't identify the holy symbol of the only god to have a temple in their home town...
and best of all, can't tell the difference between a goat and a horse... Or a apple tree and a rose bush...

all of those are DC 10 - and anyone with less than a 10 INT, and no ranks in the required skill (slightly less than half the population) can't make that without rolling, and if everyone rolls, the % of persons failing actually gets bigger.

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

actually, I'd like to see spellbooks on chronicles. it would be a cool trophy, to be able to say:
"i've got a spellbook from the Great Enemy - and I'll let you copy spells from it..."

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
SCPRedMage wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:
It's "transfer" of wealth because you can now allow any wizard in your party to save the money he'd have to spend on scrolls to get those spells otherwise.

Is getting a fellow party member to cast (non-metamagiced) continual flame a transfer of wealth, because it allows you to save money over getting an NPC to do it? What about getting a party member to cast raise dead? Under that line of reasoning, how are any of these any different that scribing a spell into a spellbook?

GM Lamplighter wrote:
Spellbook users trade spells in their party all the time - that's part of their class feature. If you want in on the fun, take a level in the class.
So THAT'S an okay "transfer of wealth"?

SCPRedMage: in answer to your question... yes, that is. and it's one of the few allowed and covered in the rules.

Originally, we couldn't cast that spell for someone else. In fact, originally we couldn't cast continual flame for ourselves and have it last past the end of the scenario (I have a 14th level PC who would cast it at the start of each scenario - realizing that it wasn't "continual" and he would have to cast it again next scenario).

Perhaps we can get the rules changed. But until they are changed (or created in the case of no rules for it), we need to play them as they currently exist. That's what being in PFS is all about.

Heck, I can remember when a wizard couldn't sell his (extra) spell book... because there was no rules for it. Now there is. Because we requested them, and the GM (Mr. Brock) provide us with rules to cover it. Perhaps with this thread (and the other ones) there will be enough notice created, enough need shown, that we may get rules for non-book using classes to own spell books.

Until that happens, we make do with what we can. Like my Rogue with the level of Wizard. Like my Alchemist who also has a level of wizard, just so he can return the favor when a Wizard offers to share his with me.

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't like Fallen Fortress first, as it only gives one PP, so no one will have a CLW wand for the second game... and if you have a table of newbies, at least one will get a CLW wand with their first 2 PP...

Also, FF can be played (once) with a 2nd level PC, so if they end up playing in an "extra" game, they can still play it (as their 4th game) with their friends (who missed a game and are still doing the "Training Cycle").


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RainyDayNinja wrote:
VampByDay wrote:
My question is "can you take 10" while climbing or swimming? I mean, if you fail you could fall to your death/drown, so wouldn't that always be a stressful situation?
The description of the Swim skill specifies that you can't Take 10 in stormy water (DC 20), which means you CAN Take 10 in calm or rough water.

...depending on the GM. The rules would allow it, but as we have seen above, some GMs would not.

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

long ago in LG days, I used to use Starburst candies as monster tokens... 4 colors to a pack, and if you grab two different flavor packs that nets you 8 colors. And thus "u kill it, u eat it" was invented. It did mean the "red" goblins seemed to get shot first though...

my adult daughter still calls Starbust candies "Monsters"

Cheliax ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:

"... why do these Kobolds all have Perform: Can can?


I bought all the goblins from Frost Fur Captives (with PP), after the Society had gotten information from them. I was teaching them to be back-up singers - so goblins with Perform: rhythm and blues. I'll have to watch for Kobolds with Perform Can-Can...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kyle Baird wrote:

This entire topic really boils down to trust.

If you can't trust your GM to be fair and have the player's enjoyment as their top priority, you need to find a different GM or a different game.

very much agreed.

and as a judge, we should consider our players wishes, and try (when able) to run the game in a way that they will enjoy... "be fair and have the player's enjoyment as our top priority"..., just a thought.

edit: when one of our players says something like: "can we/you do this? or do it this way?" - do we assume that they "are trying to pull something" - or that "they are expressing an opinion"?

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The organizer looks over your group of friends that pre-arranged to play this as a team and, while holding up a stack of pages says: "Ok, here's the scenario, which of you is judging it?"

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

and I have several times stepped out of a game when it goes to 7 players. I would offer to split it into more than one table - 8 persons would be two tables of 3 players and an Iconic... but even when it means I go home I would not want to force anyone else at the table to play in a 7 person game. This is my choice, but I know several other people who would do the same...

You should mention to the organizer that you are bringing an extra body.... it might save some heartache...

Cheliax ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Broken Prince wrote:
Wait you can put a 3rd rank in perform dance? But all of the empirical evidence seems to indicate that 2 is the limit?! What are you smoking Sir? This is clearly a case of Reefer Madness!

ah... I myself have 11 ranks in perform dance...

I dance and people give me money. I like this arrangement....
I mean I can do other things, but usually that costs extra...

Sometimes when I dance, the sun comes out and flowers bloom... and sometimes you'll think the earth moves.... (wink)

Dance of Kindled Desires requires 5 ranks, and Pallavi of Nirvana's Blossoming requires 11 ranks...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Tilnar wrote:
Why is it considered "fun" to have a character who's amazing at something (say, for instance, a +18 modifier) fail one out of every 20 attempts (on average) to do something that's DC 20?


Lets say I'm doing an oceans 11 style break in to the dragons lair. option 1 is we're rolling. People roll, we wait to see what the dice come up, curse the 1s and cheer the 20s. You could have to run away from the pterodacyles the alarm bell sounded but easily bellyrub the basilisk into submission.

Everyone takes 10.... its no longer an RPG. YOu're now on a script writing a short story.

I am very much in the Take 10 camp. I even "have the T-Shirt".

And I try real hard not to tell other people how to play this game of ours. When I am the judge at a table and it comes to a skill check that the players need to make - I might even say "give me a XXX check - roll or take ten, what do you get?" This is the closest I come just assuming that the PCs take 10 and telling the players the result. Even when I know that the DC is such that the PC can make it on a roll of 2 ... even when I realize that it is going to slow the game down, make it harder for the PCs, even when i KNOW it will be less fun... I let the players chose. Why do I do this? Because, you know, I'm not the player. If they want to roll the dice that's fine - perhaps they find it more fun that way.

I don't. But then, I did say "when I am the judge at a table..."

When I'm the player - and it's my choice - please don't take that away from me because you think it will be more fun. Let me play my character... the way I have fun with it.

I could try to explain why I find rolling the dice cheapens the "fun", reducing a game of imagination and skill to one of randomness and chance. But you know, if you don't see it, I don't want to force you to play it my way....

Why do people insist that I can't be having fun - when they see me doing it over and over again? Why do they insist that I "do it right - the fun way"?

sorry - this is a hot button for me, and sometimes I get carried away. I'll try to go back to lurking again...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

link thingy

here's another discussion of this topic from last year....

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Balgin wrote:
Kyra Clone #3,785 wrote:
I've always used scenarios and modules to distinguish between 1 XP chronicle sheet adventures and 3 XP chronicle sheet adventures.
It's worth remembering that the various Free RPG Day modules (We Be Goblins, We Be Goblins Too, Master of the Fallen Fortress, Dawn of the Scarlet Sun etc) are technically modules despite only granting 1xp and 2 prestige just like a scenario. Their length is technically about the same as a scenario and you get about scenario's worth of content out of them but they're in the module category, not the scenario category.

unless I am mistaken most of the Free RPG Day modules only grant 1 prestige/fame. We Be Goblins, We Be Goblins Too, and Master of the Fallen Fortress for sure, but I also think Dawn too...

Qadira ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

My first PC in PFS (my #-1 PC) is a Rogue with a single level in Wizard, partly so that he could have a spell book pass spells to a wizard. Before the change to allow PCs to "buy access" to NPC spell books, he was very popular with PC wizards.

Back in Season 2...:
swapping spells would often go something like this...

me to other player running a wizard as we are sitting down at the table: "here's my spell book. Look thru and copy what you want. I'd like you to note what you have that I don't on this. Pass it back when your done."

Other player: "HA! like you're going to have something I don't... wait, you've got 5th level spells in your 1st level wiz/6th level rogues book??"

Me: "yeah, I adventure with a lot of wizards. This is my 'Wizard Bait'. Anyway, if you have anything I don't just note it ok?".

Me to the Judge: "If we have time & money before the adventure - we'll copy spells, if not, we'll do it at the end afterword. Is that ok? I'll copy anything he has that I don't."

I've had more than one player say "heck, even if we stop the game now, I've had a GREAT game! I'm a lot poorer - but LOTS of new spells!"

This way it only took a couple minutes away from the RP of the table, reduced table crosstalk, did the needed bookwork, and (most important) didn't cut into the DMs time/setup/etc.

It often resulted in a Wizard player who spent the first 10 minutes of the game with his nose in a spell book - giggling to himself. But I figured this was just good role play. After all, every wizard is a little bit crazy...

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

one of my posts from that older thread...the following is just MY OPINION:

In the spirit of trying to enable players to do things they consider cool - I have considered how, under the current rules, a non-spellbook PC might gain a spellbook with spells in it.

I do this mainly because I hate to tell people "No, you can't do that!", I would rather say "cool idea, let's see how we can do that in the rules!". I like to play with my players, not against them...

and I think I have two. I'm not really sure they are not prohibited in the rules someplace, but I'm pitching them out here for someone to point out why it wont work... or to help players do something "kewl!".

1) A 1st level spellbook using PC (a wizard or alchemist or magus) buys an extra (blank) book. He then scribes as many spells in it as he can afford, or gain access to. The player notes this on his 3rd chronicle and on the ITS for that PC. He then uses the re-write rules to recreate the PC as a Non-spellbook PC without changing his equipment....

2) A PC takes one level of a spellbook using class (say wizard). He then scribes as many spells as he can into his book. Perhaps he creates an extra spellbook, or buys a Blessed Book. He then uses the Re-Training rules to retrain his Wizard level as a non-spellbook using class.

I think both of those would be ways for a Non-spellbook using PC to get a spelllbook allowed in the current rules, and in both cases those would be spellbooks that he scribed.

Qadira ***

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Part of what I was trying to say in the other thread, and the important part that I can see for PFS is that players often forget to tell the judge they are using a masterwork tool. Often they just add it into their skill bonus and forget it themselves.

I personally use a PC sheet written in with a pencil, partly so I can note which of my skills have a MW Tool associated with them (or other odd bonuses). That way, when the judge calls for a skill check on a PC that I only run once every six months, I can glance down and see the skill bonus listed as +5M, and know that the M means I have a Masterwork Tool for that skill. I then can say something like "Take 10 gives me a 15, 17 with my Masterwork Tool."

I have noticed other players who use a MW Tool will just add it into their skill number, and sometimes even forget that it is there. "What's your Stealth" nets a reply of "+10" which might or might not include a bonus for a Masterwork tool (felt slippers to muffle footsteps perhaps?). This is in effect transfering "control" of the circumstance bonus given by a Masterwork Tool from the Judge to the player, or even to the game mechanic if the player forget's how he gets the total bonus he has.

Is this actually a problem? I'm not sure. Do you think it is?

Here's some questions for those players who use MW Tools on their PCs... how do you let a judge know that you are using one? Do you do it every time?

I know I don't, and I try to. But in the heat of the game, when the judge has "the flow" of the story going, it sometimes get's lost in the play. The question "Stealth?" get's a reply of "20" instead of "Take 10 plus 8, plus 2 for my Masterwork Tool of felt slippers gives me a 20" because it is just more "in the flow" - keeping the story going.

So, in answer to the question in the subject line for this thread:
"Need permission to use a masterwork tool "
I'd say "Yes - you need permission. It's a circumstance bonus, and circumstance bonuses are (and should be) under the control of the Judge, as he is the only person at the table who knows all the circumstances involved. So it is a bonus he should apply - or not, depending on circumstances."

Qadira ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
The Human Diversion wrote:

In PFS we're allowed to change any aspect of our character before 2nd level, correct? Well, this just means we can come up with a whole lot of wild 1st level "pre-gens"

Well, post your "best" and "worst," I'll give some examples:

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **...

When we organize at conventions however, we're only allowed to use the official PFS pre-gens to hand out to newbies. We used to print out the rather good book of 89 or so pre-gens from PathfinderDB until word came down we're only allowed to use Paizo's official pre-gens.

Perhaps that is fine for "staff", but there is no rules issue with me turning to my new friend "Jo" (that I just met 20 seconds ago) and offering him a PC from my "starter folder" of PCs that I have built for myself. "Hay Jo! you want to use one of my 'toons? no problem, if you have any questions about something that looks odd, just ask. I'll be right here to help... you being new and all."

Kind of like turning to the guy at the Car Show and saying... "Hay Jo! Feel like takeing a spin around town in my Concept Car? You can drive..."

1 to 50 of 623 << 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.