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

Being the only character who can use a wand of CLW...


Pathfinder Society® General Discussion

101 to 136 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Andoran ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota—St. Paul

Quote:
nosig wrote:


So to go along with this, I could create a character who his whole function is to get to a certain level and never spend money but stockpile it for potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario and then just let the character die off and start again?

Not sure I like it, but that seems to be what you are telling me.

Funny you should say that - "his whole function is to ... potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario..." is the Support character thread. Just that - Oh! and other equipment too, Alchemist fires, Anti-toxin, sunrods, etc. Check out the other thread, it's all about this character build.

So the answer to your question is yeah - that's the way the rule works. Kind of silly though. Better than the "you can't give him...

Having a support character that can do all these things, for the sake of wanting to play such a character is fine.

But if you do it, then retire it early (say 6th level or so) then build another one to do the same thing again.

That's farming, and gaming the system, and should really be frowned upon.

Andoran ****

Andrew Christian wrote:
Atrius wrote:

Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?

If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.

I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?

No, as a matter of fact you can't replace it if its used during a scenario.

Why? Lets say I have a CLW potion that you need. I offer to loan it to you until we get back to Absalom. You use it in whatever town we went to. You then buy one sometime while we are traveling back to Absalom and give it to me. I now have not used a CLW potion so my Chronicle says nothing. During this scenario, you have used one and bought one, so they both get noted on your chronicle.

Why doesn't that work? It seems to me this could cut back on a little bit of create accounting (cheating).

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

Atrius wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Atrius wrote:

Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?

If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.

I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?

No, as a matter of fact you can't replace it if its used during a scenario.

Why? Lets say I have a CLW potion that you need. I offer to loan it to you until we get back to Absalom. You use it in whatever town we went to. You then buy one sometime while we are traveling back to Absalom and give it to me. I now have not used a CLW potion so my Chronicle says nothing. During this scenario, you have used one and bought one, so they both get noted on your chronicle.

Why doesn't that work? It seems to me this could cut back on a little bit of create accounting (cheating).

Because you are not allowed to give items or gold to someone else, and have them walk out of the scenario with said item.

If you give me your potion to use, then you are making a choice to consume that consumable on my character. Its now gone.

Andoran ****

If the answer is "Because", that is fine. I'm not trying to challenge or change anything. Just trying to understand the reason behind the rule.

Qadira ****

Atrius wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Atrius wrote:

Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?

If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.

I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?

No, as a matter of fact you can't replace it if its used during a scenario.

Why? Lets say I have a CLW potion that you need. I offer to loan it to you until we get back to Absalom. You use it in whatever town we went to. You then buy one sometime while we are traveling back to Absalom and give it to me. I now have not used a CLW potion so my Chronicle says nothing. During this scenario, you have used one and bought one, so they both get noted on your chronicle.

Why doesn't that work? It seems to me this could cut back on a little bit of create accounting (cheating).

what you discribe is often the way it works - until you get to a Judge that "plays by the rules". The Potion drank by PC A was owned by PC B. PC A buys a replacement, and gives it to PC B. At the end of the adventure, the potion returns to PC A, who paid for it, because you can't walk out of an adventure with something that belongs to another PC. (again - MOST Judges wink at this).

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

Your example is a fairly innocuous one. It isn’t one I’d be overly concerned about. I would not allow such an exchange at any tables I was GM’ing for, but this example is not why the rule is in place.

Here’s an example. I’m a 7th level guy with a ton of cash, playing down to subtier 1-2 with three 1st level characters in a tier 1-7. They are all brand new 1st level characters.

I buy each of them a +1 weapon and +1 armor of their choice.

Can you see how this would be unbalancing?

So instead of making a convoluted rule that says, “you can’t do this except in these other circumstances unless something else mitigates the situation and on Tuesdays”

Its real simple. You can’t give another character an item for which they get to keep post scenario.

Silver Crusade **

Technically, you didn't borrow A potion, you borrowed THAT potion. You can't return the same potion once you've consumed it. So the new one you replace it with is a new item, and you can't buy a new item to give to someone else.

But as mentioned earlier, most judges will let you get away with it.

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

nosig wrote:
Atrius wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Atrius wrote:

Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?

If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.

I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?

No, as a matter of fact you can't replace it if its used during a scenario.

Why? Lets say I have a CLW potion that you need. I offer to loan it to you until we get back to Absalom. You use it in whatever town we went to. You then buy one sometime while we are traveling back to Absalom and give it to me. I now have not used a CLW potion so my Chronicle says nothing. During this scenario, you have used one and bought one, so they both get noted on your chronicle.

Why doesn't that work? It seems to me this could cut back on a little bit of create accounting (cheating).

what you discribe is often the way it works - until you get to a Judge that "plays by the rules". The Potion drank by PC A was owned by PC B. PC A buys a replacement, and gives it to PC B. At the end of the adventure, the potion returns to PC A, who paid for it, because you can't walk out of an adventure with something that belongs to another PC. (again - MOST Judges wink at this).

Maybe most in your area, but lets not cast a bad light on GM's who choose to go by the rules, eh?

Andoran ****

Andrew Christian wrote:


Because you are not allowed to give items or gold to someone else, and have them walk out of the scenario with said item.

If you give me your potion to use, then you are making a choice to consume that consumable on my character. Its now gone.

I guess that's the part that confused me. I was thinking that using a wand, scroll, or potion on someone that same as giving them the gold?

Thank you for the correction.

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

Fromper wrote:

Technically, you didn't borrow A potion, you borrowed THAT potion. You can't return the same potion once you've consumed it. So the new one you replace it with is a new item, and you can't buy a new item to give to someone else.

But as mentioned earlier, most judges will let you get away with it.

I think saying, "most" is being too general. I wouldn't say that "most" judges would do it, until I've either seen a fairly comprehensive survey on this, or I've played with "most" judges.

Qadira ****

Andrew Christian wrote:
Quote:
nosig wrote:


So to go along with this, I could create a character who his whole function is to get to a certain level and never spend money but stockpile it for potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario and then just let the character die off and start again?

Not sure I like it, but that seems to be what you are telling me.

Funny you should say that - "his whole function is to ... potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario..." is the Support character thread. Just that - Oh! and other equipment too, Alchemist fires, Anti-toxin, sunrods, etc. Check out the other thread, it's all about this character build.

So the answer to your question is yeah - that's the way the rule works. Kind of silly though. Better than the "you can't give him...

Having a support character that can do all these things, for the sake of wanting to play such a character is fine.

But if you do it, then retire it early (say 6th level or so) then build another one to do the same thing again.

That's farming, and gaming the system, and should really be frowned upon.

Why? - if you get your jollies from helping other people, and want to spend all your gaming time doing it... wait, this is discribing me.

let me try another track. If you play almost all your games below 6th level say... wait, still discribing me.

heck - I must be farming/gaming the system and never even noticed. '

(shrug) - I think I'm going to continue though. I enjoy the game to much, and I guess I just play different then other people.

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

nosig wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Quote:
nosig wrote:


So to go along with this, I could create a character who his whole function is to get to a certain level and never spend money but stockpile it for potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario and then just let the character die off and start again?

Not sure I like it, but that seems to be what you are telling me.

Funny you should say that - "his whole function is to ... potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario..." is the Support character thread. Just that - Oh! and other equipment too, Alchemist fires, Anti-toxin, sunrods, etc. Check out the other thread, it's all about this character build.

So the answer to your question is yeah - that's the way the rule works. Kind of silly though. Better than the "you can't give him...

Having a support character that can do all these things, for the sake of wanting to play such a character is fine.

But if you do it, then retire it early (say 6th level or so) then build another one to do the same thing again.

That's farming, and gaming the system, and should really be frowned upon.

Why? - if you get your jollies from helping other people, and want to spend all your gaming time doing it... wait, this is discribing me.

let me try another track. If you play almost all your games below 6th level say... wait, still discribing me.

heck - I must be farming/gaming the system and never even noticed. '

(shrug) - I think I'm going to continue though. I enjoy the game to much, and I guess I just play different then other people.

<eyeroll>

Really? Come on, why is everytime someone says, “that’s against the spirit of the rule,” you, or someone else, comes up with some example on why that’s how you play and have fun and it shouldn’t be frowned upon.

If the intent is to create a useful character, have fun, and help others have fun. Then game on. Just be aware, that if you never play past level 6, eventually you will run out of scenarios to play.

If the intent is to farm or game the system. Then that should be frowned on.

I think you’ll know the difference when you see it, as it will be quite obvious.

I have no inkling or thought in my head that you would be gaming the system nosig.

Andoran ****

Andrew Christian wrote:

Your example is a fairly innocuous one. It isn’t one I’d be overly concerned about. I would not allow such an exchange at any tables I was GM’ing for, but this example is not why the rule is in place.

Here’s an example. I’m a 7th level guy with a ton of cash, playing down to subtier 1-2 with three 1st level characters in a tier 1-7. They are all brand new 1st level characters.

I buy each of them a +1 weapon and +1 armor of their choice.

Can you see how this would be unbalancing?

So instead of making a convoluted rule that says, “you can’t do this except in these other circumstances unless something else mitigates the situation and on Tuesdays”

Its real simple. You can’t give another character an item for which they get to keep post scenario.

Based on what you told me this is legal as long as they give it back, right?

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Atrius wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

Your example is a fairly innocuous one. It isn’t one I’d be overly concerned about. I would not allow such an exchange at any tables I was GM’ing for, but this example is not why the rule is in place.

Here’s an example. I’m a 7th level guy with a ton of cash, playing down to subtier 1-2 with three 1st level characters in a tier 1-7. They are all brand new 1st level characters.

I buy each of them a +1 weapon and +1 armor of their choice.

Can you see how this would be unbalancing?

So instead of making a convoluted rule that says, “you can’t do this except in these other circumstances unless something else mitigates the situation and on Tuesdays”

Its real simple. You can’t give another character an item for which they get to keep post scenario.

Based on what you told me this is legal as long as they give it back, right?

Yes, if the 7th level PC wants to spend ~4k gold per ally on gear that he himself won't use, then get it back at the end of the scenario and at best sell it for half price or keep it to loan to future "firsties" when he plays down AGAIN, he can do so.

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

Jiggy wrote:
Atrius wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

Your example is a fairly innocuous one. It isn’t one I’d be overly concerned about. I would not allow such an exchange at any tables I was GM’ing for, but this example is not why the rule is in place.

Here’s an example. I’m a 7th level guy with a ton of cash, playing down to subtier 1-2 with three 1st level characters in a tier 1-7. They are all brand new 1st level characters.

I buy each of them a +1 weapon and +1 armor of their choice.

Can you see how this would be unbalancing?

So instead of making a convoluted rule that says, “you can’t do this except in these other circumstances unless something else mitigates the situation and on Tuesdays”

Its real simple. You can’t give another character an item for which they get to keep post scenario.

Based on what you told me this is legal as long as they give it back, right?
Yes, if the 7th level PC wants to spend ~4k gold per ally on gear that he himself won't use, then get it back at the end of the scenario and at best sell it for half price or keep it to loan to future "firsties" when he plays down AGAIN, he can do so.

Although it would be a colossal waste of resources to do so, whether you sell them back or not. Not to mention the major loot you'd be out for playing so far down.

But these are the types of things that happen in MMO's, and believe it or not in previous Organized Play campaigns. So this rule is in place to keep someone from creating a character simply to get a bunch of 1st level characters mongo loot.

If you have a 4 guys who all do this for one another, then you end up with a bunch of 1st level characters with crap loads of loot they couldn't possibly afford at that level, and will entirely blow up the wealth by level curve that tries to keep the game balanced.

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

Not to mention, as a GM, I would tell the person playing the 7th level to play a 1st level pregen or create a new 1st level character.

I wouldn't let it happen like that at my tables.

Qadira ****

The example given above is of a potion of CLW used early in an adventure.

Player A used Potion BB owned by Player B.
Player A in the adventure buys a Potion AA which he gives AS A REPLACEMENT for Potion BB and gives it to Player B.

While against RAW, some judges (IMHO "most" that I have gamed for, and most posting on this thread) would "wink" at this and let Player A mark a potion paid for and NOT added to his equipment, and let Player B retain the potion he had listed on his equipment.

IMHO to do otherwise would be like giving someone a speeding ticket for doing 65.2 MPH, in a 65 MPH zone - with no other factors. Yes, officer he was speeding.

Qadira ****

I have a Rogue/Wizard who carefully scribes every spell he can into his spell book - even though I have no intention of ever taking a second level of wizard. I do this so that wizards that adventure with me can gain access to these spells (and thus are better wizards if I play with them a 2nd time). I spend my PC resources on something that my PC is not gaining an adventage from directly. I've had 2 9th level wizards play down to tier 7-8 to get access to my 6-7th level PCs book (as well as several Alchemist and lower level wizards).

Is this gaming the system too? am I gaming it UP level then?


Andrew Christian wrote:

Not to mention, as a GM, I would tell the person playing the 7th level to play a 1st level pregen or create a new 1st level character.

I wouldn't let it happen like that at my tables.

Sorry, I just want to jump in here.

You are saying that if someone plays a level 7 character in a 1-7 game and happens to be playing with several level 1s.

And if that character happened to have 2300 extra gold you would not let them buy an extra +1 weapon and loan it out? (getting it back at the end per the rules)

You would make them play a level 1?

While I agree that it would be stupid to play like this, what rule would they be breaking?

Shadow Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Washington—Eastern Washington aka WalterGM

I'd just like to mention that if a player at my table tells another player to heal them, in a rude, demanding or otherwise smug and superior fashion, they get one heck of a talking to from me. That is not cool.

There's a severe difference between calling out for aid when you're hurting, and feeling entitled to it after you play your character foolishly. No one at the table is ever required to clean up your mess after you fall down the stairs. You are. You're a big kid now, time to make mistakes and live with the consequences. If it's a situation where you need some triage or you're going to die after a fight, I hope that you've played in a mature and respectful fashion while at the table and your teammates will see the value in keeping you alive.

Otherwise, may Pharasma guide your path into the next life.

It's time to grow up, people.

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

nosig wrote:

I have a Rogue/Wizard who carefully scribes every spell he can into his spell book - even though I have no intention of ever taking a second level of wizard. I do this so that wizards that adventure with me can gain access to these spells (and thus are better wizards if I play with them a 2nd time). I spend my PC resources on something that my PC is not gaining an adventage from directly. I've had 2 9th level wizards play down to tier 7-8 to get access to my 6-7th level PCs book (as well as several Alchemist and lower level wizards).

Is this gaming the system too? am I gaming it UP level then?

Are you intending to play the character and enjoy playing him because he's your character?

Are you giving anyone an unfair advantage?

Are you purposefully trying to game the system?

If your answers are Yes, No, No... then game on.

But if your intent is to give anyone an advantage that they wouldn't normally get at their level, then you probably shouldn't do it.

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

Thefurmonger wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

Not to mention, as a GM, I would tell the person playing the 7th level to play a 1st level pregen or create a new 1st level character.

I wouldn't let it happen like that at my tables.

Sorry, I just want to jump in here.

You are saying that if someone plays a level 7 character in a 1-7 game and happens to be playing with several level 1s.

And if that character happened to have 2300 extra gold you would not let them buy an extra +1 weapon and loan it out? (getting it back at the end per the rules)

You would make them play a level 1?

While I agree that it would be stupid to play like this, what rule would they be breaking?

Mostly playing the 7th level character that far down would break the scenario, so I'd ask them to play a new character or lower level one, so as to not break the encounters.

Andoran *****

Andrew Christian wrote:
Mostly playing the 7th level character that far down would break the scenario, so I'd ask them to play a new character or lower level one, so as to not break the encounters.

You dont need to worry about it at all, because a character cannot play up or down more than one subtier. So they could all play subtier 3-4, the levle 1 guys would play level 7 pregens, or the level 1 guy could play a level 1 pregen, but thats about it.

Andoran *****

Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
nosig wrote:
(again - MOST Judges wink at this).

Really? Most? I have never met one who has.

Qadira ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Tennessee—Murfreesboro

I have a simple response to the "why don't you heal me" question. I don't heal stupid... for me stupid also includes not helping out with your own healing.

I "get" that you're the frontline fighter and that you're taking all the damage so that others don't have to. My fighter carried a wand and healing potions and anti-toxin etc. I provided my own way to keep me alive.

There is no reason that anyone should expect someone else to provide for them, we cannot assume that others are always going to be there with healing. What happens if the cleric's/healer's wand runs out half way thru the scenario?

*****

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I actually played a character that was a front-liner with only 12 con and never had any way to heal herself. That was one of her schticks. Of course I realized that I wouldn't always find party members willing to heal me. ;-)

*

My cleric is happy to provide healing from channels and spells to everyone, and even from his wand to a certain point, but he does object to total freeloading, especially when it comes in the form of "You do your job as the cleric by healing me with your wand or I'm not going to fight/cast spells/do my job"

There are ways that you can barter various resources back and forth though, even if transferring items or gold is technically against the rules. Maybe a party member who uses up a bunch of my wand charges can cast a spell into my vibrant purple ioun stone from their wand or pay the material component costs of a spell I need to cast later.

Just a note, the example of the lvl7 coming down into tier 1-2 cant happen because I'm pretty sure that you can only play up of down by one subtier, so a lvl5 could do this but not a lvl7.

*****

Saint Caleth wrote:


Just a note, the example of the lvl7 coming down into tier 1-2 cant happen because I'm pretty sure that you can only play up of down by one subtier, so a lvl5 could do this but not a lvl7.

While a level 5 could play down, the advent of them doing so is highly unlikely and only if there isn't a tier 3-4

Shadow Lodge ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My next character is going to spend all his gold on ale and whores. Screw you all and your "cure me this, cure me that" and wanting me to "swing my sword". You're on your own.

*****

Ryan Bolduan wrote:
My next character is going to spend all his gold on ale and whores. Screw you all and your "cure me this, cure me that" and wanting me to "swing my sword". You're on your own.

Amen ... I say we go wenching and whoring ... I'll collect the moneies for you while you're umm... busy

Silver Crusade **

Ryan Bolduan wrote:
My next character is going to spend all his gold on ale and whores. Screw you all and your "cure me this, cure me that" and wanting me to "swing my sword". You're on your own.

A cleric of Cayden?

Shadow Lodge *** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Silicon Valley aka JohnF

Fromper wrote:
Ryan Bolduan wrote:
My next character is going to spend all his gold on ale and whores. Screw you all and your "cure me this, cure me that" and wanting me to "swing my sword". You're on your own.
A cleric of Cayden?

Why would a cleric of the faith waste good drinking money on whores?

*****

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I approve the new direction of this thread. Please continue.

Sczarni ***

Dragnmoon wrote:
nosig wrote:
(again - MOST Judges wink at this).
Really? Most? I have never met one who has.

nosig, you say "MOST," but I wonder just how many "most" really is. This is not something I would allow at my table, and I'd expect not to see it at any table I play at.

Obviously, unless it's brought to my attention, what a GM does privately with another player or players is not something I try to concern myself with. When something like this happens at the table, it's outright advocation of bending or breaking the rules. I believe the old platitude goes, "Actions speak louder than words."

Let me provide an alternate solution to this puzzle:

  1. Character A owns Potion Q1.
  2. Character B can benefit from Potion Q1.
  3. Character A gives Potion Q1 to Character B.
  4. Character B quaffs Potion Q1.
    • Scenario ends.
  5. Character B buys Potion Q2 for herself and also Potion Q3.
  6. Rather than giving Potion Q3 to Character A, Character B holds onto it to return the favor to Character A, or perhaps later helps Character C, Character D, or Character ZZ.

*****

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Matthew Pemrich wrote:

Let me provide an alternate solution to this puzzle:

  1. Character A owns Potion Q1.
  2. Character B can benefit from Potion Q1.
  3. Character A gives Potion Q1 to Character B.
  4. Character B quaffs Potion Q1.
    • Scenario ends.
  5. Character B buys Potion Q2 for herself and also Potion Q3.
  6. Rather than giving Potion Q3 to Character A, Character B holds onto it to return the favor to Character A, or perhaps later helps Character C, Character D, or Character ZZ.

There is a fatal flaw with your solution. Everyone hates Character ZZ.

Sczarni ***

I start every scenario with players I don't know with : "so everybody has healing wands yeah?"
if they don't I suggest they buy them, if they don't bother too, I don't bother healing them. It's 2PA

101 to 136 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Society® / General Discussion / Being the only character who can use a wand of CLW... 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.