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

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play 4.0 Errata


Pathfinder Society® General Discussion

Andoran *

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata.

Anyone else notice that Rogue is missing from Table 2-2 Hit Points?

Paizo Employee * Webstore Gninja Minion

Moved thread.
Yup, already notated!

Grand Lodge **

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata.

[rant]As for the Hit Dice per level table, please, please, please can we just remove the express class listings from it? It saves future confusion on addition of new classes, prevents dropage (Rogue), prevents misplacement (Ranger), and removes the need for footnotes as to which book that class is found in. Cleaner, simpler, future-proof, and less lines.[/rant]

Now for the real reason for my post =)

The Guide, pg. 24 wrote:
You should always round this number down.

Fine, but the APL example needs to be fixed:

The Guide, pg. 24 wrote:
For example, if a table consists of six players, two of whom have 4th-level characters and four of whom have 5th-level characters, the group’s APL is 6th (divide 28 total levels by six players, round up, and add +1 to the final result).

Under this change of wording, 28 (total levels)/6 (num players)= 4 (rounded down)+ 1 (due to size) = 5. This also impacts some of the follow-on wording.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Quote:
With the introduction of five new factions in Season 3, players characters may change factions one time at no cost to Prestige Points (though you still loose any Prestige Awards accumulated as part of your old faction).

After you loose [sic] your Prestige Award, can you catch it again? ;-)

Also...

Quote:

For the sake of simplicity, there is no difference between

an arcane and divine scroll or wand in Pathfinder Society
Organized play.

The words "or wand" should be removed, since they only add unnecessary confusion; there's no such thing as an arcane or divine wand in the first place.

**** Venture-Lieutenant, Canada—Ontario aka Feegle

hogarth wrote:
Quote:
With the introduction of five new factions in Season 3, players characters may change factions one time at no cost to Prestige Points (though you still loose any Prestige Awards accumulated as part of your old faction).

After you loose [sic] your Prestige Award, can you catch it again? ;-)

Also...

Quote:

For the sake of simplicity, there is no difference between

an arcane and divine scroll or wand in Pathfinder Society
Organized play.
The words "or wand" should be removed, since they only add unnecessary confusion; there's no such thing as an arcane or divine wand in the first place.

So, I came to post a snarky response to Hogarth, and when I hit reply it seems that half of his post isn't visible. On my iPad, his post ends after the emoticon in his first response. When I hit reply, the whole post shows.

Oh, right - the snarky response:

Only if it loves you; then it will come back on it's own. :)

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
page 6 wrote:

Characters choose their traits from six different

categories: basic, campaign, race, region, and religion.

Looks like 5 categories to me.

page 25 wrote:

Seasons 1 & 2 (Scenarios #29--#56 and #2-01--20-26):

These scenarios all include two faction missions. For
characters using the standard advancement track, one of
these should be considered the faction mission and the
other the success condition for the scenario, maintaining
the 2 Prestige Point maximum.

1) I would remove the whole standard advancement track thing, since this should apply to all PCs, since the slow advancement track needs to complete both missions to get their 1 PP anyhow.

2) Maybe better phrasology? The above is incredibly confusing.
[edit]Seasons 1 & 2 (Scenarios #29--#56 and #2-01--20-26):
These scenarios all include two faction missions. One of
these should be considered the faction mission and the
other should be considered to replace the normal success
condition for the scenario, maintaining the 2 Prestige
Point maximum limit.[/edit]

And, finally, since the Tier list no longer includes the 1-7 group, does that mean that all the old Tier 1-7 modules are being:
a) Retired
b) Retiered (just to 1-5 or 3-7?)
c) The table was incomplete

Andoran ***

Reposted from another thread, since it appears to need errata:
There appears to be a change to table 5-3 which I want to make sure I understand, since it would make for a bit of difference:

Fame Score - Maximum Item Cost
4 or less - 500 gp

Does this mean that a character with no Fame at all can now buy, say, a potion of Invisibility at 300 gp or a Feather Token (Whip) at 500 gp if they have the gold for it?

An example of a time a PC could have enough gold without any Fame: After completing the module The Master of the Fallen Fortress, which gives money but no Prestige Points/Fame.

It also gives a question on the rest of the table, since the numbers, before, always seemed to be the minimum needed to unlock that gp limit, but that entry confuses the issue for me. The next entry is:

9 - 1,500 gp

Now, it used to be that you needed to have 9 Fame minimum to purchase items over 500 gp, but now, it is unclear if the entry implies 5-9 (from the 4 or less) or 9-12 (how it appeared to be in the past).

Might be an idea to make the chart give the range of Fame for the purchase limit, instead of just the single number, now.


Callarek wrote:
page 6 wrote:

Characters choose their traits from six different

categories: basic, campaign, race, region, and religion.
Looks like 5 categories to me.

Maybe they missed "equipment"?

Grand Lodge * Venture-Lieutenant, Ireland—Newtownabbey aka Ampersandrew

hogarth wrote:
Callarek wrote:
page 6 wrote:

Characters choose their traits from six different

categories: basic, campaign, race, region, and religion.
Looks like 5 categories to me.
Maybe they missed "equipment"?

Shouldn't combat be one of those categories?


Ampersandrew wrote:
hogarth wrote:
Callarek wrote:
page 6 wrote:

Characters choose their traits from six different

categories: basic, campaign, race, region, and religion.
Looks like 5 categories to me.
Maybe they missed "equipment"?
Shouldn't combat be one of those categories?

I think that's a subcategory of "basic" (along with social, magic and faith).

Grand Lodge *

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

Shadow Lodge Traits:

"Fortified: Some members of the Shadow Lodge aren’t
completely convinced of the Decemvirate’s sincerity and
fear potential reprisals. Through alchemical techniques
and endurance training, you gain the ability to negate a
critical hit or sneak attack scored against you once per
day. This functions as the fortification armor quality
with a 20% chance of success."

Does this mean they have a 20% chance to negate any critical hit or sneak attack until they successfuly negate one? Or does it mean they have a 20% chance once per day to possibly negate a critical hit or sneak attack?

Can they choose to not to invoke this protection in order to save it for a later attack? (At low levels, I am far more worried about critical hits than sneak attacks.)

Taldor ***

Mark Garringer wrote:

[rant]As for the Hit Dice per level table, please, please, please can we just remove the express class listings from it? It saves future confusion on addition of new classes, prevents dropage (Rogue), prevents misplacement (Ranger), and removes the need for footnotes as to which book that class is found in. Cleaner, simpler, future-proof, and less lines.[/rant]

Now for the real reason for my post =)

The Guide, pg. 24 wrote:
You should always round this number down.

Fine, but the APL example needs to be fixed:

The Guide, pg. 24 wrote:
For example, if a table consists of six players, two of whom have 4th-level characters and four of whom have 5th-level characters, the group’s APL is 6th (divide 28 total levels by six players, round up, and add +1 to the final result).
Under this change of wording, 28 (total levels)/6 (num players)= 4 (rounded down)+ 1 (due to size) = 5. This also impacts some of the follow-on wording.

I personally don't understand why you'd even have to round anything up or down when calculating APL. The APL would be 5 2/3, and by normal math rules it'd round up. So it's closer to 6 than 5, I'd rule it's APL 6.

Besides the combats in scenarios tend to be laughlingly easy so it's just a good thing you play up more than down. ;)

sieylianna wrote:

Shadow Lodge Traits:

"Fortified: Some members of the Shadow Lodge aren’t
completely convinced of the Decemvirate’s sincerity and
fear potential reprisals. Through alchemical techniques
and endurance training, you gain the ability to negate a
critical hit or sneak attack scored against you once per
day. This functions as the fortification armor quality
with a 20% chance of success."

Does this mean they have a 20% chance to negate any critical hit or sneak attack until they successfuly negate one? Or does it mean they have a 20% chance once per day to possibly negate a critical hit or sneak attack?

Can they choose to not to invoke this protection in order to save it for a later attack? (At low levels, I am far more worried about critical hits than sneak attacks.)

Once per day you may roll a d% (with 20% chance) to try and negate a sneak attack/critical hit damage.

*

Is the "wizards and their spellbooks" section missing on purpose?

Either that or wizards no longer get "free" spells of off the scrolls they find?


That will probably be in the online FAQ, once it is finished, like a lot of the other situational items that were removed with the new version of the Guide.

Andoran **

I also noticed that the alignment of the factions is not listed nor are classes that particularly work well or badly with a faction. Was this intentional?

Grand Lodge ****

William Ronald wrote:
I also noticed that the alignment of the factions is not listed nor are classes that particularly work well or badly with a faction. Was this intentional?

Seems likely. Alignment tended to give the wrong idea about factions, especially the Andoran faction which was listed as good but still had you killing people the faction didn't like. Ditto on classes which work well - I think the intention was that those classes would be able to accomplish the faction missions more easily based on skills, etc. but the faction missions didn't seem to stick too close to this outline anyway. Now, play what you want - even a Paladin if you must - there's a faction for you.


Deussu wrote:


I personally don't understand why you'd even have to round anything up or down when calculating APL. The APL would be 5 2/3, and by normal math rules it'd round up. So it's closer to 6 than 5, I'd rule it's APL 6.

You don't understand why you would round up or down because you should round up? That doesn't make any sense.

Grand Lodge *

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber
Lamplighter wrote:
Seems likely. Alignment tended to give the wrong idea about factions, especially the Andoran faction which was listed as good but still had you killing people the faction didn't like. Ditto on classes which work well - I think the intention was that those classes would be able to accomplish the faction missions more easily based on skills, etc. but the faction missions didn't seem to stick too close to this outline anyway. Now, play what you want - even a Paladin if you must - there's a faction for you.

I also felt strange with my Cheliax Barbarian, even though that was one of the suggested classes. Just the idea of a chaotic good character following the precepts of a lawful evil community was atretch. Plus, I was under the impression that you could only have one PC per faction, so my options were extremely limited. He's almost certainly going to change factions now that the new ones are out.

Grand Lodge **

sieylianna wrote:
Plus, I was under the impression that you could only have one PC per faction, so my options were extremely limited.

I trust by your choice of words that you are no longer under this (incorrect) impression.

Andoran ***

Deussu wrote:

I personally don't understand why you'd even have to round anything up or down when calculating APL. The APL would be 5 2/3, and by normal math rules it'd round up. So it's closer to 6 than 5, I'd rule it's APL 6.

Besides the combats in scenarios tend to be laughlingly easy so it's just a good thing you play up more than down. ;)

All I can do is recommend playing UP in any of several Season 2 modules.

I hope all the people playing up have their 16 PA already.

Spoiler:
Scenarios to play up in:
2-09: The Heresy of Man—Part III: Beneath Forgotten Sands
2-21: The Dalsine Affair
2-25: You Only Die Twice

Probably not instantly fatal, but all offer easy opportunities to make a party playing up above their level regret it.

Then again, some of the Season 1 modules can do the same:
39: The Citadel of Flame
47: The Darkest Vengeance

Some of these modules are no cakewalk at the appropriate subtier, so playing over your head is going to be bad. Really, really bad.

Grand Lodge *

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber
Mark Garringer wrote:
sieylianna wrote:
Plus, I was under the impression that you could only have one PC per faction, so my options were extremely limited.
I trust by your choice of words that you are no longer under this (incorrect) impression.

Yes, I don't know where that idea came from, unless it was in reaction to the replay rules that didn't permit replay by the same faction. Since replay is no longer a viable option, it's a moot point.

Taldor ***

hogarth wrote:
Deussu wrote:


I personally don't understand why you'd even have to round anything up or down when calculating APL. The APL would be 5 2/3, and by normal math rules it'd round up. So it's closer to 6 than 5, I'd rule it's APL 6.
You don't understand why you would round up or down because you should round up? That doesn't make any sense.

My example was flawed. Personally I don't think you'd even need to round them up or down. APL 5.667... should be suffice to say "play tier 5-6 or 6-7".

Grand Lodge **

Deussu wrote:
My example was flawed. Personally I don't think you'd even need to round them up or down. APL 5.667... should be suffice to say "play tier 5-6 or 6-7".

This example also does not illustrate the point. This choice would never exist as sub-tier 5-6 and sub-tier 6-7 would not be found in the same scenario.

Back to the original point (the example in the Guide), if you are going to include an example of how something works, make sure it's clear, concise and correct. :)

Grand Lodge **

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata.
The Guide, pg. 21 wrote:
A character’s Fame score determines the maximum gp value of any items she can purchase from her faction, as detailed in Table 5–2 below.

The table it's referring to is 5-3, not 5-2. Thanks!

The Guide, pg. 21 wrote:
In addition to the generic Prestige Awards available to all Pathfinders regardless of faction (listed in Table 5–3), each faction offers specific Prestige Awards available on to members, which are listed with each full faction description presented in the Pathfinder Society Field Guide.

Also table reference here is wrong, should be 5-4, not 5-3.

The Guide, pg. 22 wrote:
The currently available Pathfinder Society Organized Play shirts are:

The Venture-Captain shirts need to be added to this list please.

Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

William Ronald wrote:
I also noticed that the alignment of the factions is not listed nor are classes that particularly work well or badly with a faction. Was this intentional?

Yes, even in the faction guide, the mostly just give one alignment descriptor.

"Andoran pathfinders are most often good aligned," or "Chelaxian pathfinders are most often lawful aligned."

They also don't give a list of classes that work well, but rather have a paragraph of what type of missions that faction might most likely have to do. You get to pick if your character likes that kind of mission.

Qadira ***** Venture-Captain, England—Cambridge aka Wintergreen

Mark Garringer wrote:


The Guide, pg. 22 wrote:
The currently available Pathfinder Society Organized Play shirts are:
The Venture-Captain shirts need to be added to this list please.

Are they available?

Grand Lodge **

David Harrison wrote:
Mark Garringer wrote:


The Guide, pg. 22 wrote:
The currently available Pathfinder Society Organized Play shirts are:
The Venture-Captain shirts need to be added to this list please.
Are they available?

All the Venture-Captains at Gen Con got them. They are the awesome red shirts if you've been watching people facebook pics and such.

TNG red shirts, not TOS red shirts. :D

Qadira ***** Venture-Captain, England—Cambridge aka Wintergreen

Mark Garringer wrote:
David Harrison wrote:
Mark Garringer wrote:


The Guide, pg. 22 wrote:
The currently available Pathfinder Society Organized Play shirts are:
The Venture-Captain shirts need to be added to this list please.
Are they available?

All the Venture-Captains at Gen Con got them. They are the awesome red shirts if you've been watching people facebook pics and such.

TNG red shirts, not TOS red shirts. :D

Yeah, hopefully not TOS style ;)

I guess my question was more: outside of GenCon attendees, are they available? Currently it doesn't seem so, which I guess is why they are not mentioned in the guide.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Liz Courts wrote:

Moved thread.

Yup, already notated!

It's being corrected by removing all hit points from Rogues. :)

Taldor ***

Quote:


The Guide, pg. 22 wrote:
The currently available Pathfinder Society Organized Play shirts are:
The Venture-Captain shirts need to be added to this list please.

And please remove the Andoran shirt. Those freedom lovin hippies don't deserve a re-roll.

Thanks!

Grand Lodge **

5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ.

The Pathfinder Society FAQ still lists Seekers of Secrets as part of the Core in one of it's answers. This should be updated.

The current v4 Guide does not even include the word 'archetype' and thus does not correctly explain in PFS how you can potentially pick up an archetype for a character.

Shadow Lodge

Mark Garringer wrote:
The current v4 Guide does not even include the word 'archetype' and thus does not correctly explain in PFS how you can potentially pick up an archetype for a character.

Does it need to? Almost all of the Advanced Player's Guide is available, and archetypes are fully explained in there...

Andoran *****

Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
ArVagor wrote:
Mark Garringer wrote:
The current v4 Guide does not even include the word 'archetype' and thus does not correctly explain in PFS how you can potentially pick up an archetype for a character.
Does it need to? Almost all of the Advanced Player's Guide is available, and archetypes are fully explained in there...

There are special Rules for Archetypes related somewhat to rebuild for PFS.


It was not really rebuilding that the PFS house rule on archetypes refers to.

The standard rule starting with the APG is that you can only choose archetypes for a character at the 1st level of a class. Period. But the PFS rule that is here somewhere in the forums, is that a player can add an archetype to their character so long as the character is not higher in level than the level of the first replaced ability. That is not really rebuilding, but rather is adding on.

Grand Lodge **

ArVagor wrote:
Mark Garringer wrote:
The current v4 Guide does not even include the word 'archetype' and thus does not correctly explain in PFS how you can potentially pick up an archetype for a character.
Does it need to? Almost all of the Advanced Player's Guide is available, and archetypes are fully explained in there...

As it relates to it's implementation in PFS, yes.

Shadow Lodge

Enevhar Aldarion wrote:

It was not really rebuilding that the PFS house rule on archetypes refers to.

The standard rule starting with the APG is that you can only choose archetypes for a character at the 1st level of a class. Period. But the PFS rule that is here somewhere in the forums, is that a player can add an archetype to their character so long as the character is not higher in level than the level of the first replaced ability. That is not really rebuilding, but rather is adding on.

That's kind of ... odd, that that's in question. I mean, how can you add something to your character at first level, if there's nothing to add to your character at first level??? ;-p

And as far as replacing abilities once you're past them, I'd say ditto; how can you replace something that you've been using all along -- it's like being 6th level and deciding you want to swap out the fighter level you took at level 2 for rogue...

**

Slow Advancement with Full PP and Gold?

I've looked but I can't find anything that states you take half gold and half PP for going on the slow XP path. Nothing about if you get a day job roll each time on the slow path. Nothing about teaching animal tricks on the slow path.

My main character hit 8th level at GenCon and I switched to the slow path. Still got full gold and PA.

-Swiftbrook

Cheliax ****

Swiftbrook wrote:

Slow Advancement with Full PP and Gold?

I've looked but I can't find anything that states you take half gold and half PP for going on the slow XP path. Nothing about if you get a day job roll each time on the slow path. Nothing about teaching animal tricks on the slow path.

My main character hit 8th level at GenCon and I switched to the slow path. Still got full gold and PA.

-Swiftbrook

Guide to PFS Organised Play has the following rules:

Page 17 - Slow Advancement: In the slow advancement track, for every scenario that your Pathfinder successfully completes, you receive 1/2 XP.

Page 20 (cont Page 21) - To maintain balance between characters on both advancement tracks, those PCs utilizing the slow advancement track may only earn 1 Prestige Point per scenario. This point is dependent on completing both the overall scenario objective and the character’s faction mission.

Page 25 - Slow Advancement Track: The slow advancement track option was introduced in Season 3; therefore, Chronicle sheets from Seasons 0–2 do not include wealth tables for both progressions. The maximum gold a slow advancement track PC can earn from any scenario that does not list a wealth value for the slow advancement track is half the listed amount rounded down. Similarly, a Pathfinder using the slow advancement track that plays an older scenario offering 2 Prestige Points may only earn a
maximum of 1 Prestige Point for completing both mission objectives. The pre-entered +1 XP on Chronicles sheets from scenarios predating Season 3 should be changed to +1/2 for PCs using the slow advancement track.

I would suggest that you correct any chronicle sheets where the rewards have been listed incorrectly for the 'slow' progression, or else your character is inadvertantly cheating.

I do concede that there's nothing in the guide about training animals or the Day Job roll with regards to how they interact with the slow path, so as far as I'm aware you'd still get them once per chronicle sheet.

**

Ninjaiguana wrote:

Page 20 (cont Page 21) - To maintain balance between characters on both advancement tracks, those PCs utilizing the slow advancement track may only earn 1 Prestige Point per scenario. This point is dependent on completing both the overall scenario objective and the character’s faction mission.

Page 25 - Slow Advancement Track: The slow advancement track option was introduced in Season 3; therefore, Chronicle sheets from Seasons 0–2 do not include wealth tables for both progressions. The maximum gold a slow advancement track PC can earn from any scenario that does not list a wealth value for the slow advancement track is half the listed amount rounded down. Similarly, a Pathfinder using the slow advancement track that plays an older scenario offering 2 Prestige Points may only earn a
maximum of 1 Prestige Point for completing both mission objectives. The pre-entered +1 XP on Chronicles sheets from scenarios predating Season 3 should be changed to +1/2 for PCs using the slow advancement track.

I would suggest that you correct any chronicle sheets where the rewards have been listed incorrectly for the 'slow' progression, or else your character is inadvertantly cheating.

I do concede that there's nothing in the guide about training animals or the Day Job roll with regards to how they interact with the slow path, so as far as I'm aware you'd still get them once per...

Thanks, I'm blind (I did look). It would be easier if all the slow advancement stuff was in the same place. As for day job rolls, I think slow advancement should get the full day job values. It's not that much to fuss with and they could be using twice the consumables.

-Swiftbrook

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Also note that the season 3 chronicle sheets themselves list separate gold amounts based on which track you're on.

Paizo Employee ** Developer

Mark Garringer wrote:
The Guide, pg. 21 wrote:
A character’s Fame score determines the maximum gp value of any items she can purchase from her faction, as detailed in Table 5–2 below.

The table it's referring to is 5-3, not 5-2. Thanks!

The Guide, pg. 21 wrote:
In addition to the generic Prestige Awards available to all Pathfinders regardless of faction (listed in Table 5–3), each faction offers specific Prestige Awards available on to members, which are listed with each full faction description presented in the Pathfinder Society Field Guide.

Also table reference here is wrong, should be 5-4, not 5-3.

The Guide, pg. 22 wrote:
The currently available Pathfinder Society Organized Play shirts are:
The Venture-Captain shirts need to be added to this list please.

All done.

Paizo Employee ** Developer

Mark Garringer wrote:

[rant]As for the Hit Dice per level table, please, please, please can we just remove the express class listings from it? It saves future confusion on addition of new classes, prevents dropage (Rogue), prevents misplacement (Ranger), and removes the need for footnotes as to which book that class is found in. Cleaner, simpler, future-proof, and less lines.[/rant]

Now for the real reason for my post =)

The Guide, pg. 24 wrote:
You should always round this number down.

Fine, but the APL example needs to be fixed:

The Guide, pg. 24 wrote:
For example, if a table consists of six players, two of whom have 4th-level characters and four of whom have 5th-level characters, the group’s APL is 6th (divide 28 total levels by six players, round up, and add +1 to the final result).
Under this change of wording, 28 (total levels)/6 (num players)= 4 (rounded down)+ 1 (due to size) = 5. This also impacts some of the follow-on wording.

The quoted text now instructs to round to the nearest whole number, and to round down in cases where the average falls directly between two levels (ie. 4.5). This will appear in version 4.01 of the Guide, which is currently waiting in the editing queue behind several other, larger books.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Society® / General Discussion / Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play 4.0 Errata All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©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.