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

rainzax's page

2,017 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 2 wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,017 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

5th level is Earth max.

Some people have taken feats to learn to speak more than five languages.

Pathfinder characters level too fast.

Ergo, Linguistics is realistic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wraithguard wrote:
I'm looking forward to the 'Scholar' Ssalarn hinted at earlier.

Ditto


Scàthach Ulster wrote:

Personally, I think actions boil down into 5 basic types per axis.

Saintly: This is good taken to the extreme. This is being a 20th level paladin with leather armor and a longsword because he donated all his money.
Helpful: This is good that costs you little, or is tempered by law or chaos. Helping the little old lady across the street. "Good" falls between this and saintly.
Neutral: You brush your teeth.
Sketchy: This is unpleasant. It borders on evil, but has some redeeming factor. Passively sacrificing (i.e. allowing them to die) 20 to save 200.
Vile: Eating babies for pleasure. "Evil" comes into play between here and Sketchy.

Paladins, in my opinion, should perform 15% Saintly actions, 40% Helpful actions, 30% Neutral actions, 5% Sketchy actions (at most), 0% Vile actions.

Rigid: The letter of the law. If eating ice cream on Tuesday is illegal, then you MUST arrest the offender.
Legal: The spirit of the law. If a law is either obsolete or ridiculous, it can be ignored or lobbied for change.
Neutral: You brush your teeth.
Erratic: Doing your own thing. It doesn't bother you if other people are lawful, but if you want ice cream on Tuesday, you're gonna eat ice cream. This is the type of chaos that most CG characters are, I find.
Anarchic: Rage against the machine. Do what you want. And everybody should do what they want.

Paladins, in my opinion, should perform 15% Rigid actions, 40% Legal actions, 30% Neutral actions, 5% Erratic actions and 0% Anarchic actions.

I like this perspective.


Request

Spoiler:

The PCs are recruited for a mission to assist the Bellflower Network with a rescue. Their contact has a ship, and the PCs are to sail to the estate of a noble who lives on the coast just outside of a large city, break into the well-guarded estate, evacuate the halflings that live there, and escape.

Dangers include navigation through suddenly bad weather, sea monsters, the noble's mini-army of land and boat bound soldiers, and the noble family themselves who have some sort of supernatural secret.

Designed for a full party of characters 4th or 5th level.


Raynulf wrote:

HALFLINGS

Physical Description: Halflings rise to a humble height of 4 feet. They prefer to walk barefoot, leading to the bottoms of their feet being roughly calloused. Tufts of thick, curly hair warm the tops of their broad, tanned feet. Their skin tends toward a rich almond color and their hair toward light shades of brown. A halfling's ears are pointed, but proportionately not much larger than those of a human.

Height (male): 3 ft. 8 in. +2d4 in. (Average 4 ft. 1 in.)
Weight (male): 75 lbs + 2 lbs./in. (Average 85 lbs.)
Height (female): 3 ft. 6 in. +2d4 in. (Average 3 ft. 11 in.)
Weight (female): 65 lbs + 2 lbs./in. (Average 75 lbs)

Ability Scores: +2 Dexterity, +2 Charisma, -2 Strength: Halflings are nimble and strong-willed, but their small stature makes them weaker than other races.
Size: Halflings are medium creatures and gain no bonuses or penalties associated with their size.
Type: Halflings are humanoids with the halfling subtype
Base Speed: Halflings have a 30ft base speed
Senses: Normal. Halflings have no special senses
Languages: Halflings can speak, read and write Common and one other language of their choice - typically a regional dialect. Halflings with a high Intelligence can choose from: Dwarven, Elven, Gnome and Goblin.
Halfling Luck: Halflings gain a +1 racial bonus on all saving throws.
Keen Senses: Halflings gain a +2 racial bonus to Perception checks.
Little Folk: Halflings are barely large enough to count as medium creatures and do not suffer penalties while squeezing through a space that is at least half as wide as their normal space.
Nimble: Halflings gain a +2 racial bonus to Acrobatics, Escape Artist and Stealth checks

I think I like this and will run it by my players. I am now curious to see your Gnome stats. I assume, similarly, you merely turn the "Small Size" into the "Little Folk" trait and call it done.

How long have you been doing this for?


Raynulf wrote:

I like how Pathfinder has handled the flavor and culture of gnomes (and halflings) in Golarion. It works well.

I just have an extreme dislike of the Small sized character mechanics*, so tend to house rule them to be on the short-and-light end of Medium and typically clocking 80-120 lbs, and aren't dwarfed by my three-year-old.

** spoiler omitted **

Again. Love the background and flavor of gnomes in Pathfinder. Hate the mechanics.

How would you change the mechanics?


Cydeth wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

Kinetic cover is seeming more and more like a useless a wild talent with every reply. Surely it wasn't intended to be so weak/circumstantial!

The text doesn't reference cover anywhere, just total cover. Seems like it would be an all or nothing proposition to me.

By many of your interpretations, it is strictly inferior to a tower shield, even though a tower shield isn't 5x5 feet--and that's not even accounting for its immobility and fragile nature--just how cover is determined.

I ask you this: Why shouldn't it work as advertised? It says it grants total cover, yet, by your interpretations, it would grant total cover virtually never.

It, in my opinion, grants total cover in an approximately cone-shaped direction that slowly expands the farther a creature gets from you. The farther away they are, the harder it'll be for them to get past your cover, thus it's ideal for blocking ranged attacks against an enemy a long distance away from you, but less useful against an adjacent opponent. And it's also almost useless against larger creatures because they can reach over a 5-foot x 5-foot wall.

It also would work well if you readied an action to put it up before an opponent attacked, which could block particular attacks (putting it up in front of a disintegrate, for instance).

This makes sense to me.


One more point I want to make and then I'll back down.

I feel like your proposal, as-written, doesn't really "feel" like a poison. It's basically just a re-flavored bomb. The cool thing about the concept of recurring damage is that it differentiates the mechanics in such a way that it changes the "feel" as well.

If the Toxicicist uses a recurring-damage mechanic, then instead of getting instant burst damage, their victim eventually "succumbs" after a few rounds (and failed saves) which "feels" more like a poison-laced victory for our Toxicicist.

Either way, good luck writing your class!


Ssalarn wrote:
We could even potentially do an "Unleashed Juggernaut" monster sphere...

So let's say this Monster Sphere concept comes to fruition by virtue of the size of the kickstart being able to stretch it. What would we be looking at here? Like, five special Monster Spheres, general rules/suggestions for advancing monsters using Spheres, and twenty sample monsters CR 1-20?

Something like that?


You know, I kind of like the idea where higher level slots are granted but without corresponding spells known. This leaves it in the DM's purview to control access to higher level "game-changer" spells without impeding terribly on the progression.

If I were to do something like this, I would still keep the Wizards and Clerics in the game as masters of metamagic with the spells that are still available.

Perhaps gate spells I wanted to control behind some kind of "ritual" mechanic - perhaps as X/week abilities that allowed the Wizard or Cleric to sacrifice high level spell slots for the week in order to have occasional, controlled uses of spells that typically "game-change" narratives.

To me, it's being able to cast these spells with incredible frequency that poses the biggest challenges for higher level play - and less the existence of the spells themselves.

This kind of project seems to have the same motives that springboarded inspiration for E6, E8, or E12.


Swift016 wrote:
This is horrible.

Care to elaborate?


Ssalarn wrote:
Yeah, a lot of the monsters we've been playing with doing SoM conversions for are monsters that should be awesome, but frequently lack the punch they should have.

Larger monsters (like Giants) and smaller monsters (like Fey) come to mind here.


As a DM, I run that "believable" < "unlikely" < "far-fetched" < "impossible" and that only one can apply to a specific con.

That said, I could imagine a situation where a lack of needed convincing proof could stack against a believability penalty on a single Bluff check - even though no such penalty exists on the table (but could be inferred from it's opposite).

And ultimately, perhaps your DM's frustration is that there is no automatic way that the difficulty of Bluffing (or using Diplomacy to influence) his NPCs increases with their level? I share this frustration and implemented a house rule that NPCs add their level, their WIS, and their CHA to a base DC of 10. Any attempts to Bluff, Diplomacy, or Intimidate them must succeed against this DC. If using Bluff, then one of the believability penalties applies. And this works well at our table.


For Teleport, why a 25/75 pass/fail ratio?

I could see a 75/25 as still a strong deterrent, without effectively rendering it useless.


Do you have a plan for converting race-, class-, or ability- based resistance to these new energy types?

Perhaps a table?


Friendly to Amanuensis' suggestion, I could see your poison being "frequency-fied" like so:

A Toxicicist's poison deal 1d6 damage plus his Intelligence modifier once per round for one round, plus one round for every two Toxicicist levels he possesses, and requires a single successful save to throw off the effects. Multiple poisons in a single victim stack damage and virulence - the victim only makes a single save each round, and each successive dose increases the Fortitude DC by +2.


What are you going to do about the following discoveries:

Concentrate poison: The alchemist can combine two doses of the same poison to increase their effects. This requires two doses of the poison and 1 minute of concentration. When completed, the alchemist has one dose of poison. The poison's frequency is extended by 50% and the save DC increases by +2. This poison must be used within 1 hour of its creation or it is ruined.

Sticky poison: Any poison the alchemist creates is sticky—when the alchemist applies it to a weapon, the weapon remains poisoned for a number of strikes equal to the alchemist's Intelligence modifier. An alchemist must be at least 6th level before selecting this discovery.

?


Dunno if this helps.


Well. I vote Monsters!


The kickstart announced that the development team can do one but not both of:

1) Creating extra DM Monster material ("Mighty Sphere Monsters")
or
2) Expanding up intersectional material between SoP (Spheres of Power) and SoM (Spheres of Might).

I for one would be a a proponent for the former. But that is because my primary role is a DM right now.

That said, I am unclear where the "voting by backers" (?) for this will be...


Ssalarn wrote:
rainzax wrote:
There are a lot of new effects that are FAEWINYTs, or "free action even when it's not your turn."
Not a terrible idea at all (I also like the Celtic sounding acronym).

I imagine it's pronounced "fay-win"


Also, for all those grumpy grognards out there, you may consider a Fighter feat chain (or addendum) akin to the Disruptive chain for "interrupting your Puny Mighty Martial's Fragile Focus" to force "concentration checks" when they try to Expend Focus...


Reviewman wrote:
Any other strange stuff in Pathfinder such as spells or subsystems you guys wish your character could interact with?

This is a good idea. Perhaps a list of problematic spells that detract from interactivity (to start)?


Ssalarn wrote:
rainzax wrote:
I think it'd be cool if a Dedicated Athlete could activate their Martial Focus as part of the Withdraw action. For those times when you really need to GTFO.
Ooh, I like that! Seems like it could be a good talent, maybe with a little bit of an extra rider on it to make it just a smidge more sexy as something to spend a talent on.

I was thinking it'd bake right into the Athletics sphere. Because, primarily, the sphere is about movement in several modes - climbing, jumping, running, and swimming - and the Withdraw action is essentially about tactical movement through those modes. So like:

Spoiler:
Athletics Sphere

Kinesthetic Focus
While you are currently dedicated to this sphere, you may achieve martial focus as part of using the withdraw action.

Admittedly, I'm having a hard time differentiating linguistically between "dedicated focus + focus expended" and "dedicated focus + focus unexpended" - the language is incredibly tricky to convey and perhaps needs some clean up...

Athletics Training
When a character gains the Athletics sphere, he chooses and gains one of the following training packages, with its included abilities. A character may gain the Expanded Training talent to gain additional packages.


More feedback.

There are a lot of new effects that are FAEWINYTs, or "free action even when it's not your turn." Two pieces of feedback here.

One, perhaps they need their own name. Free-immediate?

Two, there seems to be a lot of them. And because of that, they might risk slowing a combat round down even more than attack of opportunity already do - don't get me wrong, I love AoOs! - but you may want to consider economizing them.

Like, a Mighty Martial can take one FAEWINYT (or free-immediate action) per round at 1st level, plus one at BAB 6, 11, and 16.


Pretty new to Googledocs, so I'll post feedback here.

I think it'd be cool if a Dedicated Athlete could activate their Martial Focus as part of the Withdraw action. For those times when you really need to GTFO.


"Crossbow only"

Because I never liked that Crossbows could "be just like bows" if they put in the extra feat or two (Rapid Reload, and Crossbow Mastery if heavy) to drop their reload time.

Instead, I'd like to see Crossbows carve out their own niche - and not just by taking an archetype, but actually having their own special feats/talents. I think any player would be okay with extended loading times if that one shot per round packed a wallop and had it's own special chain of abilities that kept it competitive yet distinct from other ranged weapons. Bonus points of the "feel" of light, heavy, and hand crossbows are all slightly different!


I may get away with being able to playtest Mighty NPCs against my PCs. Because, until the final product comes out, I would hesitate to give my players access to abilities that may be in flux. Perhaps just in conjunction with monsters? Not sure yet...


Yeah my posting here is a reflection of my excitement. I have a feeling that as good as SoP was to improving the casting system (which was a lot), SoM will be an even greater improvement to the martial system by comparison!

What about additional Crossbow support?

(Like, as distinct from the other ranged styles)


I have no problem homebrewing solutions.

I just wanted to be helpful by pointing out something that may slip through the cracks.

Nothing like a self-contained subsystem that expands upon existing systems and plays well with the standing rules including provisions (sidebars, added rules text, etc) for potential problems of interaction/implementation as needed.


Last question for reals:

Will Spheres of Might feature mechanical incentives for building martial characters with high mental ability scores?

Spoiler:

Because I would love to be able to rock a combat with a martial character who boasted one of the following arrays:

INT > ST/DX/CON > others
or
WIS > ST/DX/CON > others
or
CHA > ST/DX/CON > others


Ssalarn wrote:
rainzax wrote:
N. Jolly wrote:
rainzax wrote:

Do you expect to inherit the difficulties of "timing windows" that many card games have?

It would seem to me that a system built on Triggers and Board-Altering Effects might clash when two Triggers fire simultaneously for two different Mighty Martials whose Effects would be sequentially mutually exclusive. This could perhaps be mostly settled with initiative count, but in the instance of readied actions, I could see this being a potential wrench in the pace and flow of Mighty Combat.

Having been a CCG player for nearly a decade (retired in the middle), I understand these kinds of issues and will do my hardest as literally the most heroic person in human history to avoid situations like that.

Clever design can mitigate this greatly, yes.

But what if, for example, two Mighty Martials who have the same Talent ready the same Trigger - say, both trigger off "prone" and both expect to move the target 10 feet closer - what will be the process for ordering resolution?

The concept of the "stack" from CCGs should be easily mitigated with existing structures like initiative; obviously the most simple (and possibly least elegant) solution is to have starting initiative decide order of precedence, so we'll always have that as an option. Ehn and I will kick a few other possibilities back and forth though, especially considering that this is really a core system problem; the same issue would come up if two non-SoM characters readied an action to drag an opponent, for example.

This is indeed a core system problem, but one I would argue that has been able to go unaddressed because of the "inertia" around making combat maneuvers "work" for martial characters. Part of the reason I am so exited for this project is because you stuck your design flag in this underexplored-but-potentially-rich section of the combat rules. As a consequence, I might expect this longstanding problem to crop up with greater frequency - and I know the last thing you want is for all your lovely design to incidentally slow the pace of play with easily-fixable rules kerfuffles.

Off the top of my head, there is Initiative and Order of Declaration (for ready actions); but also perhaps CMB or BAB?

Congratulations on being funded btw! Can't wait to get my hardcopy in like a year, when my (mostly new-ish) players will be ready for some added martial complexity.


N. Jolly wrote:
rainzax wrote:

Do you expect to inherit the difficulties of "timing windows" that many card games have?

It would seem to me that a system built on Triggers and Board-Altering Effects might clash when two Triggers fire simultaneously for two different Mighty Martials whose Effects would be sequentially mutually exclusive. This could perhaps be mostly settled with initiative count, but in the instance of readied actions, I could see this being a potential wrench in the pace and flow of Mighty Combat.

Having been a CCG player for nearly a decade (retired in the middle), I understand these kinds of issues and will do my hardest as literally the most heroic person in human history to avoid situations like that.

Clever design can mitigate this greatly, yes.

But what if, for example, two Mighty Martials who have the same Talent ready the same Trigger - say, both trigger off "prone" and both expect to move the target 10 feet closer - what will be the process for ordering resolution?


Last relevant question for now:

Do you expect to inherit the difficulties of "timing windows" that many card games have?

It would seem to me that a system built on Triggers and Board-Altering Effects might clash when two Triggers fire simultaneously for two different Mighty Martials whose Effects would be sequentially mutually exclusive. This could perhaps be mostly settled with initiative count, but in the instance of readied actions, I could see this being a potential wrench in the pace and flow of Mighty Combat.


Fisticuffs?

Will there be a rewrite to how Combat Maneuvers in general work? For example, a common house rule is that maneuvers only provoke an a failed attempt (as opposed to pre-emptively). If not, and if certain "styles" are centered around certain maneuvers, how will these interact with the current feat system (like Improved Trip, Greater Trip, etc)?

Building off that question, how will Combat Maneuvers be made relevant at later levels? For example, if I build a Mighty Martial whose Talents Triggers off of the prone condition, will my toolkit be rendered obsolete against a flying enemy?

And building off that question more generally, with the prospect of Mighty Monsters getting my Evil DM side excited, how will these interact across the various size and movement mode discrepancies of PCs and Monsters?

Finally, concerning Counters, aside from using Talent selection to leverage better positioning (which is really cool!), will there be any sort of Rock-Paper-Scissor dynamics? If so, what might some of these look like?


Ssalarn wrote:
rainzax wrote:
Perhaps from this we can deduce that instead of "might points" each Talent has a Trigger (ex. "enemy is prone"), an Action Cost (ex. "attack of opportunity"), and an Effect (ex. "damage plus area effect") to balance it's daily use?
That is pretty much exactly correct.

Cool.

Will there be Counters?

Say for example I know my opponent's "style" triggers off of knocking me prone. Will there be alternative ways (aside CMD) for me to prevent her from being able to do that? If so, what might that look like?


Baval wrote:
The SoM system is more about chaining together cool combos of moves rather than using the same ones repeatedly.

This describes the feel of the system. My question is about the actual mechanics.

Perhaps from this we can deduce that instead of "might points" each Talent has a Trigger (ex. "enemy is prone"), an Action Cost (ex. "attack of opportunity"), and an Effect (ex. "damage plus area effect") to balance it's daily use?


Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
* For those unfamiliar with Spheres of Power, can you clarify the way the system works. Right now it seems cool, and obviously SoP is popular, but I have no idea how the system works.

Basically in Spheres of Power, casters get daily spell points, and each Talent gives you a Sphere that unlocks "at-will" abilities and/or "spell point" abilities.

One big question is will there be "might points" or some equivalent in Spheres of Might?


Ssalarn wrote:
...creating a T-Rex who could use his bite to throw an adventurer into the air before homerun hitting them across the battlefield with his tail...

Nice.


Sign me up for both hardcovers!

Btw the name "Spheres of Might" is so much better...

Will there be any kickbacks to Rogue Glory in this?


LuniasM wrote:
...they'd have to cast Summon [Marimba] at the start of every combat...

This would be fabulous to see!

One thing I find very interesting is the disconnect between "components" and "displays" - maybe if we explicitly acknowledge that they aren't always the same thing, we could open up design space.

For example, playing an instrument requires Movement, Vocal or Somatic components, whereas susceptibility to bardic performance requires experiencing Visual or Audio displays.


Ssalarn wrote:
It was brought up earlier in this thread that the title "Spheres of Combat" might be a little imprecise and not the best possible title for the book; based on what we've said so far, would "Spheres of Might" appeal to you more as a title?

Damn fine ring to it.


So like, the Bard Tunes a few Moxie points into his Instruments.

Thereafter, while he actively plays the Tuned Instruments, effects happen.

And, he may use un-Tuned Moxie to do the standard Bardic Performance stuff.

An Instrument can have a maximum Tuning equal to his ranks in the associated skill. And each effect requires an amount of Moxie equal to thrice-minus-two the level of the effect (scaling parallel with his acquired spell slots).

How do skills like Sing and Dance stay as relevant?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord Mhoram wrote:
...partial martial...

Cheeky.

Why the name "Spheres" of "Combat" - I would think a more parallel name would choose a different shape like "Forms of Power" or somesuch (ok that's bad). Perhaps the english language ran out?


N. Jolly wrote:
rainzax wrote:

Hey community!

Which KoP (I, II, or III) has the best low-level Earth Talents?

I'd like to buy that one before I consider getting the trilogy.

Thanks!

Here's the spreadsheet for everything, hopefully this helps!

Thanks for that.

I see that *** means Occult Adventures.

What are the other markers?


Hey community!

Which KoP (I, II, or III) has the best low-level Earth Talents?

I'd like to buy that one before I consider getting the trilogy.

Thanks!


Luthorne wrote:

Kineticists of Porphyra, a series of books created by the same people who made this one, but for a different publisher. Don't really want to get too off-track, though, since that's a different product description, so I'll just post it in spoilers.

** spoiler omitted **

Omigod there is 3 of them. All highly reviewed, no less. Ok gang, which one has the best low-level Earth Talents?


Onyx Tanuki wrote:
I'll have to go through the talents more, though; there's quite a few which simulate spells, and some of those may work with stone vandal as well.

Pretty sure that's it. Let me know if you find something else.

I noticed the 2nd level Druid spell Soften Earth and Stone and, while mechanically similar to Entangling Infusion, targets an area as opposed to a person. And as the spell effects "all natural, undressed earth or stone" in it's area it is an example of a spell that could be converted to a talent that could work with Stone Vandal.

What is KoP? Those abilities sound cool.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If there is not then this is all you get, so make it count.

Happy New Year folks.


Maybe a Panache pool.

But instead of "deeds" they get "dirty deeds" at the appropriate levels. Then you could use that to design what you want them to be able to do at 1st, 3rd, 7th, 11th, 15th, and 19th.

Spoiler:

Pawns in my Game
-While you have one or more panache in your pool, creatures you threaten are also considered threatened by other creatures you consider enemies. This ability sets up a few class features of the warmonger, and affected creatures are hereafter referred to as "pawns."

Cunning Redirect
-As an immediate action when a pawn attacks you, you may attempt to redirect the attack to another pawn by expending one panache. Make an attack roll. If your attack roll exceeds the attack roll of the pawn that attacked you, the attack misses. If you also roll higher than the AC of the second pawn, the attack is instead resolved as if it was made against the second pawn.

Incite Confusion
-As a full-round action you may attempt to incite a creature within 30 feet of you who can see and hear you by expending one panache. The creature makes a Will saving throw against a DC of 10 + half your warmonger level + your Charisma modifier, and if it fails becomes confused for a number of rounds equal to your Charisma modifier. This is a language-dependent, mind-affecting effect.

Into the Fray
-As a swift action you may gain a defensive bonus by expending a point of panache. Until the end of your next turn, you gain a dodge bonus to AC equal to the number of pawns adjacent to you.

...

The idea being that each of these types of dirty deeds could scale by level - for example becoming the abilities Gather Crowd and Incite Violence (as the Demagogue Bard) upon reaching appropriate levels (perhaps 3rd then 7th). Cheers!

1 to 50 of 2,017 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.