Well, there is one clue that the Sczarni may be leaving. If you look at their report, they mention that they are getting a lot of Varisian recruits, but there is no recognition back in Absalom. When the campaign moves away from Varisia, it could very well move away from the Sczarni, too.
I did notice that, so I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out they were one of the ones to go. I know at least one local player who will be horrified, though--I think every single one of his characters is Sczarni.
I know a lot of people have mentioned Osirion, but it's relatively popular here. People seem to really like that "Risen" vanity--I've seen people get dumb just to get killed and then raised with that title.
My money's on Shadow Lodge and Silver Crusade. Their goal updates are concerned only with the events of this season--all the others made some mention of the future, even if it was bleak.
We will be unveiling a revamped Pathfinder Tales boon system in the coming weeks, which will bring them in line with other Chronicle sheets (1 per player).
So you're saying I should hurry up and get those boons applied to all my characters now, before the rule changes kick in?
I am guessing (but really really hoping I'm wrong) that it's going to be that level 1-2 characters playing in 4-5 are going to get the level 1-2 wealth (and so on for all tiers).
*Crosses fingers that I'm wrong.*
I hope not. It's going to make it that much harder to balance tables--if a Level 5 can get his L5 gold for playing T1-2, there's no reason not to play down and get easy money. Similarly, if a L1 has to face the danger of a T4-5 but doesn't get the reward, there's basically no reason to be willing to play up.
(Note: I don't mean whole tables playing up/down, I mean one or two people playing out of tier because that's how the math works out when the table composition isn't negotiable.)
Mike, what are the chances of getting these bullet points answered in some text form after the podcast? Either as a blog or post? For those that aren't connected into the podcasting world.
I am confident that the messageboards will be chock-full of people debating this stuff seconds after it's broadcast.
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
It seems from the mid-season descriptions that Osirion is done for sure and that the other faction is either going to be Cheliax or Taldor, probably Cheliax. All the other factions described mainly successes, whereas Osirion and Cheliax both seemed in serious trouble, with Taldor describing a tepid lack of success.
Keep in mind that a faction head can be replaced; it has happened before. That doesn't necessarily mean that the faction itself is going under.
Of course, it doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't.
If your concern is that you can't keep track of what you've run, download a list of scenarios and mark off the ones you've run. Take it with you to game days. All set.
For PFS play, that is, indeed, cheating. If you want to run Masks of the Living God, and you don't have a character of the appropriate level, you need to use a pregen. Then you can either hold the Chronicle for when your character gets to an appropriate level, or you can start a new character with it.
And yet you still don't seem to have got the message ...
If your party need more healing than the cleric's regular daily allocation of spells can provide (even assuming the cleric has nothing better to do), you need to be prepared to pay for the consumables.
Way to assume, dude. The guy in question didn't want to actually spend any of his spells or channels on healing us. And he was playing a buff-build cleric. Also--kicker--it was my first session with this character, so it was impossible for me to have that wand.
TetsujinOni wrote:
Hold up, Pathar - I would hold out the opinion that if you're a damage sponge character, it's your job to cooperate by investing some of your WBL in healing yourself. It's perfectly reasonable for a cleric to have an issue with having to use ALL of their play resources for healing up the rest of the party.
So, the fact that I'm letting all the damage be concentrated on me means I have to pay to heal it ... but if I let other people take it instead, then it's not my problem?
So if I stop tanking, everyone wins! I guess I'll let the wizard do it.
Brox RedGloves wrote:
Then you have the unfortunate encounters I have. Like last session. our cleric (of Pharasma) said to me (1/2 orc rogue) "You guys don't know how to treat your dead do you?" I said "What do you mean by that?" Whereupon he cast some spell on me causing me to have horrible visions of the afterlife. No explanation. No nothing. When I asked why he cast these visions on me he said, "Fine, if you don't like it I wont cast 'any' spells on you then".
That seems to fall well within the region of player-on-player unpleasantness. I don't think your GM ever should have let that spell go through--I certainly wouldn't have.
Just remember, there is nothing in the rules that says you have to buff or heal any/everyone when playing a cleric. Just optimize your RP that way. "I will not heal you because your actions are against my beliefs" is perfectly valid phrase. "Why should I help you?" is another of my favorites. Some of the people I play with may not enjoy me forcing them to roleplay, but I enjoy RP immensely and will have it one way or another...
Your characters are required to be members of the Pathfinder Society. Explore, Cooperate, Report.
Trying to use an in-game method to bludgeon player behavior is unproductive.
This is a pretty good point. I've had at least one cleric-player try to tell me that it's my job to buy a wand of cure light and loan it to them if I want them to heal me. I think next time I'll tell him it'll be his job to buy me magical full plate and loan it to me if he wants me to tank for him.
Seriously, you're worried about germs on your dice? Do you wipe down the handles on grocery carts? Do you wear rubber gloves when you punch elevator buttons? Do you carry paper seat covers for sitting at a restaurant?
This is hilarious.
Yes, thank you for mocking anxiety disorders. Maybe next you could tell us that if we all just stopped worrying so much, everything would be okay.
Ew. Ew, ew, ew. Thank you so much for giving me that little neurosis to add to the stack I already had. Blej;klrja;slkejff.
Okay, seriously though, now I'm starting to worry about this. Plastic dice are easy to clean, no problem, but I have one little set carved from bone and amber. How on earth to I clean that?
Thanks Pathar. Nothing personal in my comments. I'm sure I'll see you guys again. I just needed to get that off my chest.
No worries on my end. :)
Ubercroz wrote:
I am a big fan of GM's not allowing laptops at the table, I don't allow laptops at the table. It slows down the game and becomes a rules lawyer fight.
It's tempting, but a lot of people at least around these parts bring their characters pulled up in Hero Lab and use it to track statues, resources, whatever. So you'd have to declare in advance that they can't use laptops, or they'd be out of luck. Besides, we all have access to the PFSRD on our phones anyway. And at least electronic versions are searchable; pulling out books and flipping for one specific rule can take even longer.
If you take the chronicle as a 7th lvl character you get it when your asigned character reaches that level; and it works just as normal.
If you choose to add it to a 1st lvl character you get gold, xp and prestige. You will generally not get items on the chronicle since they are tiered and should be crossed over. If the chronicle has a boon or items tiered "all" then you get it even for your new 1st lvl character.
Interesting! So in the case of Red Harvest, I'd get the boon, since that's tier "All," but not any of the equipment, since that's tiers 7-8 and 10-11 respectively.
I can live with that. Although there was once piece of equipment I really wanted to get my hands on after a few sessions of saving. Alas. ;p
I do feel compelled to note that, like it or not, the cleric often finds him/herself in a support role. They heal and they buff, that's kind of their thing. That's not to say that there's no options, but for a cleric to not be a support character, especially in a group with other characters optimized for damage, it requires--and I know you don't want to hear this but here it is anyway--a very deliberate build. You might have more fun with another class.
Hey dude. I was in that game with you, and while I had fun, I can totally understand your frustration. I should note that (at least in my opinion), not all games are like that. Sometimes it's just a matter of finding people you enjoy playing with and making sure you're at their table. (And, you know, the opposite of that procedure, too.)
Okay. So the rules for replaying scenarios are on page 16 of the guide to organized play. It's long so I'm posting it under the spoiler tag below. I have two questions about interpretation.
blah blah blah long:
Guide to the Pathfinder Society Organized Play wrote:
Replaying Scenarios
In certain circumstances, a player may need to replay a scenario he has already completed, or play a scenario that he has already run as a GM. The following rules determine when replaying Pathfinder Society scenarios is legal, and what benefits you may gain from replay.Â
• The first time you play a scenario, the character you play receives a Chronicle sheet that grants him XP, gold, Prestige Points, boons, and the opportunity to purchase any special items discovered in the course of the scenario.
• When you GM a scenario, you receive a Chronicle that you may apply to any character within the scenario’s tier that does not already have a Chronicle for the same scenario. That character receives the maximum XP, gold, and Prestige Points allowed for its subtier as if she had played through the scenario. Such a PC gains access to the equipment listed on the Chronicle sheet, but does not receive any of the special boons listed. If a PC to whom you apply credit falls between two subtiers, always grant the award for the lower subtier.Â
• You cannot receive more than 1 player Chronicle and 1 GM Chronicle for the same scenario, regardless of how many times you GM or play the scenario. You are free to replay a scenario in order to meet the minimum legal table size (see Chapter 7), but once you have reached that limit, you do not earn any additional rewards beyond having a good time.
• If you have already played a scenario and wish to replay it for any reason, you must inform the GM that you have already played the scenario. Some GMs may not be comfortable running an adventure for players who have foreknowledge of what is to come. If your GM is not comfortable with you replaying a scenario, you must find another GM who is. GMs have the right to deny players the opportunity to replay a scenario for any reason, but all GMs are encouraged to be as flexible as possible when replay is the only option that allows them to seat the minimum legal number of players at a game table.
• If you spoil the plot for the table, the GM has the right to ask you to leave the table and is under no obligation to award you a Chronicle sheet. Be very careful about character knowledge versus player knowledge. If you’re concerned about possibly spoiling something during the course of play, take the GM aside and ask how she would like it handled. Remember: the goal of replay is to make sure fun gaming happens, not to remove the fun from gaming.
There is one exception to these rules: All Tier 1 scenarios and Tier 1–2 sanctioned modules are available for unlimited replay with a 1st-level character for credit. The sanctioned modules can also be played with a 2nd- level character once for credit. You may continue to replay the sanctioned modules with 1st-level characters after playing through them with a 2nd-level character. GMs can receive another Chronicle sheet each time they run one of the Tier 1 scenarios or Tier 1–2 sanctioned modules. No character can ever have two of the same Chronicle—the Chronicle must be applied to a different character each time.
So, questions:
1. If I GM a scenario I have not already played, I can play it later, as long as the GM at the table is aware that I've run it and doesn't have a problem with that. (I base this off the fact that I don't see any rule against it in the information above.) Is this correct?
2. Regarding the exceptions, does this mean specifically modules that are only Tier 1, such as the First Steps series? What about something like, say, Tide of Morning (#0-23), which has two tiers based on APL? Either way, is there a definitive list somewhere?
Okay, a question came up during our game tonight. I played a high-level pregen, then applied that chronicle sheet to a new character. The rule in the book is as follows:
Guide to the Pathfinder Society Organized Play wrote:
If you play a non-1st-level pregenerated character, you can apply the credit to your character as soon as she reaches the level of the pregenerated character played. You may also opt instead to apply the credit from the non-1st-level pregenerated character played to a newly created character with the GP gained reduced to 500 GP (or 250 for characters using the slow advancement track).
I took it as read that the character I started with this sheet would, once he managed to get some gold together, be able to purchase the items from the chronicle sheet, and perhaps more importantly, use the boon. (The scenario in question was Red Harvest.) A GM at the game tonight suggested that I would get the XP, the PP, and the capped gold, but no other chronicle benefits. Is there an official ruling on this somewhere?
Hey all! I'm starting a new PFS event at Villainous Lair Gaming in Normal Heights, San Diego. It's going to be fourth Saturdays starting in July (June conflicts with the post-FRPGD module plans at Game Empire), and I'm looking for some GMs who are interested in running tables.
I'm already talking to the region's Venture Captain, and I'm hoping to make announcements at both Game Empire and At Ease Games PFS events in the coming month, but I figured I'm better off getting the word out any which way I can.
Obviously I've set up all the usual sites, and I'm getting a Meetup added, but right now I'd like to get a few GMs signed on, so if anyone is interested, please let me know. Thanks!
Particularly, "swearing during the application process and/or interview" was a false assumption. Here is a section of what Haladir said that brought about my response which is NOT during the application process and/or interview:
Haladir wrote:
or who I overhear cussing while I'm eavesdropping on applicants' conversations
There is a fairly major difference.
I disagree, because of the rest of that sentence, which you left out. Here it is, emphasis mine:
Haladir wrote:
eavesdropping on applicants' conversations with my admin staff
He's not eavesdropping on their cell phone calls in the lobby. He's eavesdropping on the way they interact with people who already work for the company. Conversations with employees in the building at the time of application or interview are part of the application/interview process. This has been the case at every place I have ever worked. I assume it is the case at any place I have interviewed where I did not get the job. I will continue to assume that it is the case at any place I interview in the future. I am aware of neither principle nor practice that would lead me to believe Haladir's stated policy in this matter is, as you declared, "dictatorial and irresponsible." It is practical, and more, it's something that any job applicant should assume is happening anyway. (As evidenced by the fact that it is happening, mind you.)
Edit: I'll note further that I presently work for a call center where every communication a potential employee has with the company, starting from the moment they first call to inquire, is considered by the manager either directly (listening to the recording of the call) or indirectly (asking for the opinion of the person who took the call). Everything an applicant says or does in earshot of the employer is fair game for considering the way they present themselves. You don't have to like it, but that's how it's done.
This... seems like you are using your personal judgements of others as a measure when put in a position of control. This is dictatorial and irresponsible with the position you've been given. When in the responsible job of hiring, the quality of the applicant to perform the job at hand should be your only concern (yes, the applicant's ability to socialize with his coworkers still counts as his ability to...
Are you ... are you kidding? Is this a joke? The decision to not hire an applicant who is swearing during the application process and/or interview is "dictatorial and irresponsible?"
If people come in wearing torn jeans and don't take of their sunglasses, is he being "dictatorial and irresponsible" by judging their outfits? Of course not. His job is to screen people who don't present themselves properly.
Paper qualifications do not trump the entirety of a job interview or the interview would serve no purpose.
I was raised that a guest was waited on and made to feel comfortable. If someone is thirsty, give him drink. If someone is hungry, feed him. If someone spills something on his shirt, lend him one while you wash it. We don't care if you're just the plumber, you at least get a glass of iced tea and asked if you want us to make you a sandwich while in our house. Even the first group of gamers I hung around with were like this. We would game around a giant steaming pot of Shepherd's Pie or Chicken n Dumplings, feasting as we played. I think the dice even got lost in the mashed potatoes once.
Guests in your house, yes. Members of your gaming group, not so much. You think the host has an obligation to provide water? Yeah, I'm hip. Claiming that it's my job to feed five players every week because I was generous enough to let my living room be used for the game? That's just absurd.
When I host, the rule is that they can either chip in for a group dinner or provide their own. And if someone forgets and they're trustworthy, we'll let them slide. If they fail to cover it the next week, especially if they expect to be let slide again, I say hell no, you're an adult, and you know what the rules are. And I will (and have) publically shame people who just help themselves to my food without asking. If they have a problem with that, we can always play somewhere else, which is significantly easier for me.
And when I'm not hosting, I bring my own snacks and drinks, I chip in for the group meals, and on the rare occasion that I'm going to hit up my host for a soda or the like, I ask permission. Every. Time. Because anything else is just rude.
Yeah ... I think you were. You failed to pay for pizza for an entire year
No, I failed to pay 3 times. And I only really forgot twice.
Quote:
you drank their milk despite being told not to
You're right, I did. Once.
Quote:
you failed to live up to their social requirements (re: swearing)
I was good enough about it that it wasn't an issue for 1 and 1/2 years.
Quote:
Who cares about them? Move on and forget they exist.
I like to think the fact that I care shows that I'm not some callous freeloader who really was a bad guest.
It doesn't. Remorse after punishment does not erase the initial issue. And posting in this forum hoping for exoneration then nitpicking people's responses when it's not forthcoming is not making you look any less a bad guest.
If I believe you are guilty based on your side of the story, there's a good chance you're probably guilty. And you know it. You just want us to tell you that it's not so bad. But it is. So learn the relevant lessons and move on.
Yeah ... I think you were. You failed to pay for pizza for an entire year, you drank their milk despite being told not to, and you failed to live up to their social requirements (re: swearing). The only thing you seem be in the right about is the snack situation--unless you were consistently eating snacks purchased by other people, in which case that's also a yes.
We've done this two ways in the past. First, investments: If players want commodities, they can invest early in things that pay them back, like businesses, which allows them to get better equipment at higher levels as well as all the commodities they can handle. Second, land grants: A village gives the wizard an old tower so they can say they have a wizard, the king grants the heroes a villa near his palace so they're on hand for emergencies, whatever.
I'm trying to create a messageboard alias using my real name (Patrick Harris). The system tells me that name is in use. The thing is, when I search "Patrick Harris," I only get four results in the "Users" tab--my profile, my wishlist, and two people who have Neil Patrick Harris listed as their deity. So I'm not convinced my name actually is in use as an alias.
If it is, how come I can't search it?
If it isn't, how come I can't use it?
Thank you!
PS: If an admin reading this can solve the problem by simply renaming my "Patrick Harris 483" alias, please feel free to do so.
If you're the GM, you can declare that animate rope animates the marionette strings. I think that's a neat application of the spell and as GM I would probably allow my players to use it. Just don't be shocked if they use something very similar against you at some point in the future.
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from a prohibited school, but it uses up two of his available slots (see below).
I'm starting to think that the DM is testing the OP. Some of the comments made suggest the DM is not willing to give a direct answer as to what the cleric should do. I'm wondering if he wants to see how committed you are to your character, and maybe he has some sort of reward in mind. The other players might even be in on it.
A great theory, and it had me wondering for a moment, but then I flashed on some of the OP's followup details, like the holy crusaders of Pharasma he'd been loaned who couldn't be bothered to leave the city when the horse's owner decided to take a bit of a ride in the country. At this point, I don't think the DM is encouraging RP.
... but yeah, by that point I was just really confused. I was recanting my original statement and confirming that the quote was accurate; it didn't even occur that the concern was the interpretation.
So zealot PCs take precedent over their more tolerant companions? Is that what you're saying? Superstitious Barbarians are being jerks when they burn captured spellbooks? LN Wizards are begging for Paladin smite when they seek to retain the spell book that details, among other things, unspeakable evil?
But none of these things are HAPPENING. What is HAPPENING is a party that has, for a long time, involved AN UNDEAD SLAYER has suddenly and for no apparent reason GOT TO INCLUDE UNDEAD except it's not even an undead character, it's a MOUNT. There is no reason this should even be a THING.
You're telling the OP - "dude, you're in the right and those other jerks are just all kinds of wrong and they need to bow to your will etc."
But he IS in the right and those other jerks ARE all kinds of wrong. And it's not "bowing to his will" for them to acknowledge that they shouldn't have done something like this in the first place. The GM should have seen--and maybe did see--this conflict coming a mile away. Which means that they're going out of their way to disrespect him and his play style.
Asking him to tolerate that for the sake of fun prioritizes their fun over his. Which shouldn't be necessary, because there are billions of options that would have resulted in everyone having equal amounts of fun.
The OP isn't causing the strife. The strife was dropped in his lap. Asking him to ignore that for the sake of friendship is unreasonable, because that's a crappy friendship.
You're right, they're wrong. I personally couldn't play that character in that party. Options include, but are not limited to:
1) Rolling a new character (easiest, probably, but not the most satisfying).
2) Killing the horse and pointing out that they really should have seen this coming (more appropriate, all told, but not necessarily what people would enjoy).
3) Finding a new group to game with (if you want to play consistently RPed characters and this is symptomatic of their unwillingness to allow you that option).
I reserve the right to roll perception checks and saving throws. I don't do it often, but it's good sometimes when I don't want to spoil a surprise. Plus it's fun to just sit there rolling dice and watch them panic even when nothing's going on.
It just feels like its us 3 against the DM, and his favorite, but your right..
That would imply that it's 3 to 2 against the current situation. To my mind, that (a) provides external validation for your opinion (times two!), (b) prevents the GM from just saying you personally have a problem, and (c) means that a majority would like the situation to change, and since the situation is a game that you're all playing voluntarily, majority rule really should carry when it comes to things like "having fun" and "not having fun."
I bring all this up because your response, "It just feels like its us 3 against the DM, and his favorite," would imply that was somehow a bad thing, which I'm having trouble understanding.
