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

twells's page

FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 130 posts (135 including aliases). No reviews. 6 lists. No wishlists. 9 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 130 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Lantern Lodge

This is where the sorcerer/arcanist has some punch ... Piercing Spell applied on the fly can be a lifesaver.

Lantern Lodge

Nicos wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Maybe it's not RAW, but strictly speaking, how is an illusion NOT mind-affecting by it's very definition? It's not there, you only perceive it to be there, and perception is all an affect of the mind.
there could be illusions that create the image per se, like an hologram.

Figments and glamours work more or less like holograms. Figments create a "hologram" out of thin air (like Silent Image). Glamours make a thing look like something else, put a "hologram" around a creature or object (like Disguise Self). Every creature, if it has the senses to detect them, can see and experience them - it is not specifically happening in the mind of the beholder.

Lantern Lodge

andreww wrote:
twells wrote:
Keep in mind .. mindless means just that ... without the ability to think or remember anything, or the ability to develop tactics beyond what it has been specifically instructed to do. Also keep in mind that instruction have to be simple, per the creation rules of such automatons.

Citation required. Mindless does not mean unable to think or remember anything. In fact Golems often have perfectly decent Wisdom scores which suggests otherwise. The Golem section describes mindless as:

Quote:
Being mindless, golems do nothing without orders from their creators. They follow instructions explicitly and are incapable of complex strategy or tactics. A golem's creator can command it if the golem is within 60 feet and can see and hear its creator. If uncommanded, a golem usually follows its last instruction to the best of its ability, though if attacked it returns the attack. The creator can give the golem a simple command to govern its actions in his absence, or can order the golem to obey the commands of another, but the golem's creator can always resume control by commanding the golem to obey him alone.

They are only incapable of complex strategy or tactics, not any form of thought at all and nothing suggests they cannot recall information.

Personally if you silent image a Golem in a game I am running while you are fighting it then it will try and break it down getting a Will save due to interaction.

Well, you cited the same section from golems that I (attempted) to paraphrase. I also added the definition from the Intelligence Ability score - "Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons." No INT = no ability to learn or reason. I was aware that they have OK WIS scores - just saying it is not unfair to call them stupid.

And maybe there is some confusion in that I did not mean to suggest that you attack through a silent image wall .. just that you put it up and walk around or away, or use it to divide and conquer if there is more than one enemy.

Lantern Lodge

Berinor wrote:
twells wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
twells wrote:
True, you did. The only difference is in your world, golems are programmed to go through walls in pursuit of their prey.
Actually, no. Golems are diverse opposition and will react according to their instructions. Which may or may not involve pursuit.

Since you did not let this issue lie ...

In your example refuting my statement that a silent image is often all that is needed to shut down a golem (or other mindless creature), you specifically mentioned that golems would simply walk through the wall Kool-Aid style. Are you now reversing you tack?

To clarify, which is your position:

A. All golems will walk through a silent image of a wall, ignoring what there eyes tell them. Because that's what golems do.

B. Some golems will walk through a wall (fake or not), because they have been specifically instructed to walk through barriers in pursuit of some triggering condition.

C. Golems typically will not walk through a wall (image or otherwise), because it is a barrier which prevents them from seeing any threat.

D. Some other explanation.

Keep in mind .. mindless means just that ... without the ability to think or remember anything, or the ability to develop tactics beyond what it has been specifically instructed to do. Also keep in mind that instruction have to be simple, per the creation rules of such automatons.

You are a 5-star judge for PFS, and a venture-lieutenant, so with the 150+ games you have sat over, I would assume that this has possibly come up once or twice.

My reading of TOZ's post (and more importantly to me, my own interpretation) is B and C. There's a certain level of, for lack of a better word, cunning or instinct that tells it whether to attempt to jump over pits, ignore them and walk over, or find a way around. This would likely be based on whether it can make it across and whether its existence changed within its "memory". Same applies to walls.

That would depend in part...

See, I interpreted his response as "A" ... I could not see where he gave any indication "B" or "C" would be considered.

I agree with your interpretation, BTW.

The reason I was trying to get a more descriptive answer is that more than a few GM's do not interpret the illusion school of spells properly. For example, do not understand that mind-affecting immune creatures are not immune to figments.

Lantern Lodge

TOZ wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:

Wow I have never seen anyone call out someones stars like that.

Can't say I agree with it.

Some people place more relevance on those things than is warranted.

Whether I like it or put relevance on it is immaterial ... TriOmegaZero is a Venture Lieutenant for PFS, and has administered at least 150 games to get 5-stars, so his opinion matters at least a little with respect to the influence it has over his area.

How would pointing that out be inappropriate?

Lantern Lodge

TriOmegaZero wrote:
twells wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
twells wrote:
True, you did. The only difference is in your world, golems are programmed to go through walls in pursuit of their prey.
Actually, no. Golems are diverse opposition and will react according to their instructions. Which may or may not involve pursuit.

Since you did not let this issue lie ...

In your example refuting my statement that a silent image is often all that is needed to shut down a golem (or other mindless creature), you specifically mentioned that golems would simply walk through the wall Kool-Aid style. Are you now reversing you tack?

No, I said it would try to smash through the illusionary wall. The same as it would a wall of stone.

twells wrote:

You are a 5-star judge for PFS, and a venture-lieutenant, so with the 150+ games you have sat over, I would assume that this has possibly come up once or twice.

Nope. Never has.

So when you say "Which is what I said." in response to Jiggy's "Or more to the point, it will react to the illusory wall in the same way as it would react to a real wall, regardless of what that reaction might be." you meant, "All golems will try to smash through the illusion wall, because all golems would try to smash through a normal wall."

Is this then correct?

If so, then it is not the same, as the creator's instructions would make golem's reaction conditional.

Lantern Lodge

TriOmegaZero wrote:
twells wrote:
True, you did. The only difference is in your world, golems are programmed to go through walls in pursuit of their prey.
Actually, no. Golems are diverse opposition and will react according to their instructions. Which may or may not involve pursuit.

Since you did not let this issue lie ...

In your example refuting my statement that a silent image is often all that is needed to shut down a golem (or other mindless creature), you specifically mentioned that golems would simply walk through the wall Kool-Aid style. Are you now reversing you tack?

To clarify, which is your position:

A. All golems will walk through a silent image of a wall, ignoring what there eyes tell them. Because that's what golems do.

B. Some golems will walk through a wall (fake or not), because they have been specifically instructed to walk through barriers in pursuit of some triggering condition.

C. Golems typically will not walk through a wall (image or otherwise), because it is a barrier which prevents them from seeing any threat.

D. Some other explanation.

Keep in mind .. mindless means just that ... without the ability to think or remember anything, or the ability to develop tactics beyond what it has been specifically instructed to do. Also keep in mind that instruction have to be simple, per the creation rules of such automatons.

You are a 5-star judge for PFS, and a venture-lieutenant, so with the 150+ games you have sat over, I would assume that this has possibly come up once or twice.

Lantern Lodge

TriOmegaZero wrote:
twells wrote:
What he said.
Which is what I said.

True, you did. The only difference is in your world, golems are programmed to go through walls in pursuit of their prey. Which is perfectly okay.

I choose to play them differently. Which is also okay.

Lantern Lodge

Jiggy wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
twells wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
twells wrote:
While that is technically true, a GM who directs a mindless creature to question what is before their eyes isn't really playing a mindless creature correctly now, are they.
Mindlessly Kool-Aid-Manning the illusory wall is playing correctly.
I do not get your response. Are you saying that it is guarding the illusion wall, or breaking through it a-la Kool-Aid style?
I am saying that if you throw up an illusionary wall to stop it, it will attempt to break through the wall to get to you the same as if you used wall of stone.
Or more to the point, it will react to the illusory wall in the same way as it would react to a real wall, regardless of what that reaction might be.

What he said.

Lantern Lodge

TriOmegaZero wrote:
twells wrote:
While that is technically true, a GM who directs a mindless creature to question what is before their eyes isn't really playing a mindless creature correctly now, are they.
Mindlessly Kool-Aid-Manning the illusory wall is playing correctly.

I do not get your response. Are you saying that it is guarding the illusion wall, or breaking through it a-la Kool-Aid style?

If it is breaking through Kool-Aid style, then it would probably have had to been instructed to do so, such as "If you see anything approach this area, follow it until you destroy it" or some other (simple) condition. In which case, it should also attempt to go through normal walls as well.

Lantern Lodge

Blakmane wrote:
twells wrote:
Silent Image works even better for shutting down golems (and constructs, and mindless non-incorporeal undead). Mindless = no chance they interact with a wall-type illusion.
This isn't true. As written, there is nothing stopping a golem from interacting with an illusion. 'Mindless' simply means they have no feats or skills and are immune to mind-affecting effects, RAW.

While that is technically true, a GM who directs a mindless creature to question what is before their eyes isn't really playing a mindless creature correctly now, are they.

And figments are not mind-affecting effects, so that does not apply. ( mind-affecting effects = charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects)

Now, if you do not have eyes and are mindless, that is a different story ...

Lantern Lodge

Silent Image works even better for shutting down golems (and constructs, and mindless non-incorporeal undead). Mindless = no chance they interact with a wall-type illusion.

Lantern Lodge

One thing interesting to note is that deities MAY have the power to change worlds, but there are other deities to contend with who would resist that change, maybe even catastrophically. This would probably be the main challenge for character in that they have to deal with other divine powers. Most likely, in VERY subtle way ... upsetting the balance of power in the good and evil planes of existence could make one a dead god.

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Sorcerer > Wizard as casting stat is based on CHA, hence said sorcerer will have much better luck with the opposite-sex, which is the true measure of power.

My logic is flawless ... you lose.

Lantern Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have played a few casters in PFS. I stated them all out a 1st level. None of them died. None of them ha anything special at frist level to survive other than the normal full-caster stuff. This was all before re-training was allowed at second level.

Survivability is about putting yourself in the right position and not having some bad luck - not about stacking a first level character with a bunch of tools just to survive first level. Besides, any close calls are good character-builders in developing background and attitude.

Just make sure to get some healing in terms of a potion after the first adventure, and/or a wand of CLW after the second. Everything else is gravy.

Lantern Lodge

Just my $0.02, having played with familiars .... Diplomacy IS an often used skill check in PFS. Behind Perception, diplomacy is the most used skill, so keep that in mind. And a talking familiar is handy for delivering messages.

However, a squirrel sock puppet would be something to behold ....

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wold rule that it would work, because of this statement:

"Swarms made up of Diminutive or Fine creatures are susceptible to high winds, such as those created by a gust of wind spell. For purposes of determining the effects of wind on a swarm, treat the swarm as a creature of the same size as its constituent creatures."

I do not see why cloudkill would not work (AOE that can easily kill most diminutive/fine creatures in 6 secs), while gust of wind would, other than the fact that RAW, that is what it says.

Again, my $0.02.

Lantern Lodge ***

Wow, I am late in the ovation, but no less enthusiastic. You GM style and storytelling has been thoroughly enjoyable. Well played.

Lantern Lodge ***

Want:

Research Specialist
Extra Hours

Have:

Oread
Mounted Tradition
A few more available ... let me know what you need!

Lantern Lodge

I would concur .. you can only force perspective when you can completely control where they view the image from.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
anthonydido wrote:

For a while I was curious where everyone was getting the "12" maximum number from but after a few more posts I think I know where the confusion comes from for those thinking the cap can be raised.

The parenthesis is placed after the part that says +1 per 3 caster levels so you are thinking that the maximum is a figure of the caster level. In other words you think it is 1d4 + (1 per 3 CL (maximum 8)).

I would say that is a valid argument except for one word that they have that you are missing. It says "maximum 8 images total". Total means it is the sum of something. The only things that are added together within the spell are the dice result and the bonus images based on caster level.

So, the equation would be 1d4 + (1 per 3 CL) = X. X is the total and that total cannot exceed 8. Therefore you can never have more than 8 images.

Empowered equation would be (1d4 + 50%)+(1 per 3 CL)= X. X is still a maximum of 8.

That is not how empower works. The spell effect subject to Empower is (1d4 + 1 per 3 CL) x 1.5. What we are saying is that the MAX function is inside the parenthesis in the previous example, therefore it is subject to the Empower function.

This is supported by the structure of the sentence of the spell description, where the maximum is in parenthesis right after the equation. This would imply that it is a maximum cap of the variable function. A separate clause or sentence stating the maximum by itself would strongly support that there can never be more than 8 images - ever.

As it is written, it supports a reading wither way. I just happen to think, and I am not alone, that there is a stronger argument that empower applies to the entire variable, with the max cap included in the multiplying by a half.

Until someone of game authority steps in to clarify otherwise, you can expect table variation.

Lantern Lodge

seebs wrote:

There are two readings on the table.

Reading #1: The number of images created is a variable effect of the spell. It is "1d4 + L/3, to a maximum of 8".
Reading #2: The maximum is a non-variable, and the effect which is variable is a number which is not actually an effect, but rather, which is computed and then shoved through a filter to produce an effect. So the numeric variable is "1d4 + L/3", which would then be subject to effects like maximize or empower, and then the result of that subjected to a maximum of 8.

I think it's easier to say "1d4+L/3, maximum of 8" is the variable numeric effect, in which case you compute this value (producing a value which is at most 8), then multiply it by 1.5.

I would concur that Reading #2 is the correct interpretation. The MAX function is a property of the variable & bonus effects of the spell, which is then multiplied by the Empower feat.

Lantern Lodge

Remy Balster has it correct .. the 8 max. is intrinsic to the original spell effect, which is then multiplied by the Empowered feat.

Lantern Lodge ***

Wow, that 150th kinds snuck up on me. Way to go! SD is better off with you in the mix!

Lantern Lodge ***

Want: Research Specialist

Have: A lot available ... let me know what you need!

Lantern Lodge

Sorcerers are much more scary to a party. Just because you saved last time vs. the glitterdust doesn't mean you will be able to do it again. A sorcerer can spam a lot more nastier stuff than a wizard and make it stick.

Lantern Lodge

Quick search found the following:

James Jacobs on Pits

There might be a better FAQ, but my search foo needs work.

Lantern Lodge

How did a huge creature (scarlet worms) fit in a large pit?

Lantern Lodge

As a player who prefers magic-users (both sorcerers and wizards), here is my $0.02 on metamagic and the arcanist.

Sorcerer’s still have one advantage in metamagic in that metamagic takes spells slots – your highest ones usually. Sorcerer’s have more of these, and will continue to have more of these. I do not think that the designers will allow a double-dip on the slot-reducing metamagic traits (Magical Lineage and Wayjang Spellhunter) – it will be an overall reduction of the final spell level cast.

Being able to prep them beforehand is handy, but applying metamagic on the fly will still be a full-round action. Also, you still have to spend the feats to get the metamagic, so there is no bonus to either class on that front.

So there you go.

Lantern Lodge

If you are talking about the Bloodline Arcana ability, then no .. not without a dip. The bloodline powers are available (as mentioned by Towerfall) through the Eldritch Heritage Feats.

Lantern Lodge

Back on OP point: I would never drop illusion. Mirror Image is the single best defensive buff for a fighter at almost any level.

Lantern Lodge ***

I wish I were better at names, but I am not.

My favorite names from others to date are:

Mewanna Snusnu - Female Barbarian from Miwangi
Dunderklumpen - Name is just too kool.

Lantern Lodge ***

Lamontius wrote:

elixir of spirit sight

probably saved my party from a tpk in redacted due to redacted
but while my party was going 'awesome job bro dude' I did not respond with 'yeah okay now give me gold for my 1k elixir i just drank'

...redacted

wait sorry this is about wands

ugh my head hurts

I believe I played -redacted- and used the Elixir of Spirit Sight for the exact same reason to prevent the exact same consequence.

Lantern Lodge ***

SCPRedMage wrote:
redward wrote:

In case it isn't actually clear to people, the point isn't to make sure that every expense is split evenly down to the last copper piece.

The point isn't to make sure that each HP restored is paid in full by the person that lost it.

The point is to have enough respect for your fellow players to not show up intentionally un- or under-prepared.

The point is to not expect your party to provide resources that you could easily have brought yourself.

And you can any of the above with some arbitrary "value" system where your contributions or role are somehow worth more than another player's, such that they should be paying for your services (with healing, etc.). But to me, it comes off as a pretty flimsy excuse to have others pay for stuff because you can't be bothered.

I'm sorry wands of CLW aren't as fun as potions of Enlarge Person or Fly. You should probably still consider getting one.

Dear lord, a thousand times THIS.

I would concur. THIS is the essence of what is being said.

Lantern Lodge ***

Congrats Athurva,

Your tables are always enjoyable.

I do not know why everyone thinks your tables are so deadly - you have yet to even put a character of mine in the dirt (well, maybe once, but that was an un-tiered dream-fight, so it doesn't count!)

Well done, mugs held high, Trevor

Lantern Lodge ***

As a primary melee combatant, Elixir of Spirit Sight (1,000 gp) is a MUST at any middle to higher tier. This item single-handedly prevented a TPK at high tier in a recently released scenario. Gives see invisibility, as well as ghost touch on both your weapons and armor vs. incorporeal. At that moment, was worth 10 times the price.

Lantern Lodge ***

I had completely overlooked the fact that you have dented his soul ... well played sir.

Lantern Lodge ***

Congrats on both the 4th star and the VL position ... well earned on both parts.

Maybe the extra star and new position will mean you can actually put a dent in my Dragon Disciple.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I sounded like an encounter that would be formative in the development of a character. Having your behind handed to you every so often keeps the thrill relevant.

I had a character who was beaten up so bad in his early adventuring days by a huge earth elemental that even at level twelve, I fear them as a player. Every time they are summoned, I panic a little until they actually hit me ... then I see that my memory of that beating was much harsher than the actual beating.

Dragons can be tough, especially if they either have terrain advantages (think black dragon in a swamp or bog where all movements is restricted except his) or ability to use their aerial mobility. The last is especially true for huge or larger dragons with their fly-by attacks. It sounds like you put yours in a cave where they are confined and at their weakest. A challenging encounter, but not too tough.

Since you gave them an out, I would say you have done everything a good GM does for his players.

Lantern Lodge ***

Some of the BEST faction missions, in terms of fluff and fun, have been Cheliax.

Some of the HARDEST faction missions to accomplish have been Taldor.

I would hate to see either of these go.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While battlefield control spells can be good, a poorly placed one REALLY will frustrate your primary damage dealers and unnecessarily extend combat time. Just keep this in mind.

Lantern Lodge

Further clarification from James Jacobs on the Oracle of appropriate level using UMD for a Revelation outside his / her mystery.

James' additional response to a similar question about the Ring of Revelation.

Quoted:

James Jacobs wrote: wrote:

Ring of Revelation: No. This ring grants access to a revelation. It does not allow the wearer to choose what revelation it grants, though; that's hardcoded into the ring. You can't Use Magic Device to change this any more than you can to change a wand of fireball into a wand of gaseous form.

Soothsayer's Raiment: Same thing.

PolydactylPolymath wrote: wrote:

Sorry, I didn't phrase that properly. What I meant was: can an Oracle of a given mystery use UMD to emulate a different mystery in order to access the revelation coded into the ring?

For example: Suppose a Nature oracle who finds a ring of revelation containing "Sacred Council" from the Ancestor mystery. Can s/he use UMD to emulate the Ancestor mystery class feature and thereby access the "Sacred Council" revelation from the ring (assuming s/he continues to make the requisite UMD checks every hour to continue emulating the Ancestor mystery)?

James Jacobs wrote: wrote:

Yes. That's using the "emulate a class feature," in this case, the class feature of having the Ancestor mystery. I guess, in theory, you could do that if you were ANY class, though. Which may not be the way I've interpreted the ability before.

As always, though, your GM has the last say.

Lantern Lodge

redward wrote:

I'm mostly going by James' response to a similar question about the Ring of Revelation. I know he's not an official rules guy, but his read is the same as mine. It's pretty clearly worded that you have to be an Oracle and you have to have the right Mystery.

Especially this:

James wrote:
Furthermore, the ring specifically says that it has no effect if worn by a non-oracle.
It also specifically says you have to have the right mystery.

Normally, I would agree with you. But James' ruling did not rule out an oracle of appropriate level using revelation outside his mystery.

Lantern Lodge

Artanthos: Interesting point. The turning your back kind of goes against the "there is no facing" part of Pathfinder.

Also, if one were to don a blindfold, one is making it impossible (for the moment) to see. I would rule that according to the Blinded condition definition, they are effectively blinded.

Per the PRD : (highlight is mine)

Blinded: The creature cannot see. It takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class, loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), and takes a –4 penalty on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks and on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) against the blinded character. Blind creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check fall prone. Characters who remain blinded for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them.

Lantern Lodge

@Ganymede: You are making the assumption that closing your eyes for 1 sec is sufficient to negate the illusionary effects. Avoiding the gaze attack scenario is a good analogy to trying to accomplish bypassing the mirror image - it takes longer than blinking you eyes to avoid a gaze attack. If you are not going to be fooled by the illusion, you have to use the force Luke - don't trust your eyes, they can deceive you.

All kidding aside, I think a good portion of the advise is that if you want to get the benefits of negating the most annoying part of Mirror Image, you have to take the penalties. The hardcore answer is that there is no way to do it unless you are really blinded or the target has total concealment from you.

You could also invest in some Dust of Appearance as suggested by Treesmasha, although I do not think the Glitterdust spell would work by itself, as the spell description explicitly says it works on revealing invisible things.

Lantern Lodge

I would argue that closing your eyes, or giving yourself the "blinded" condition, would have to be more than a blink or two in order not to be fooled by the Mirror Image spell. Hence, it would have to be long enough to suffer the consequences of that condition until your nest turn.

As it has been stated before, actions which happen simultaneously have been segregated into turns in order to facilitate game play. This would mean that the rogue behind you would be attacking while you were closing your eyes to all other dangers in order to not be tricked by the Mirror Image spell.

Having played in the Pathfinder Society now for 5 years, which takes the more stringent rule interpretations, I have not seen this tactic ruled in any other way.

If your GM buys the argument that you can get all of the benefits of being blind without any of the penalties, good for you. I would not expect that take to be universal.

Lantern Lodge

Closing eyes helps .. but remember you must suffer all the penalties for being blind.

Blinded: The creature cannot see. It takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class, loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), and takes a –4 penalty on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks and on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) against the blinded character. Blind creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check fall prone. Characters who remain blinded for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them.

Just don't let the mirror-imaged arcanist's rogue friend catch you with your eyes closed.

Lantern Lodge ***

From my PC's point of view, it would be best to just ignore these newcomers to the Pathfinder Society. Goblins by their very nature are pretty much self-extinguishing :) Of course, everything around them gores up in smoke ...

Lantern Lodge

The cracked Orange Ioun stone adds one cantrip or orison spell to user’s spells known or prepared.

Didn't see anyone mention it earlier.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd say ignore the haters and play what you want. I have a Barb/Monk/DD that I love to play and could care less if someone calls cheese.

One man's cheese is another's sandwich garnish.

1 to 50 of 130 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.