Just an FYI to other PFSers. Personally, this is a welcome change, but I know there were a good number of PFSers on the forums with a universal Masterwork Use Magic Device Tool or a universal Masterwork Diplomacy Tool. Given the emphasis in the text on the power of the individual GM to decide on a case-by-case basis for MW Tools, that probably means that any individual MW Tool won't be PFS legal unless approved by Mark or Mike on a case-by-case basis, and in any case Diplomacy and Use Magic Device are called out specifically as not having universal tools:

I really like the clarification on this, but worry about trying to enforce that in PFS play (speaking as someone who once played a rogue who had 500gp-worth of masterwork tools so he could handle anything with the right preparation...).

I wonder if there will be a blanket ruling for Masterwork Tool in the FAQ or Additional Resources.

Eether way, thanks for posting - very good points!

How about profession masterwork tools for Sailor and Soldier: Cheliax Navy Boarding Harness and Cheliax Drill Instructor's Swagger Stick.

(Yes, my Aspis-hunting polearm fighter has two masterwork profession tools and two within-one-of-max-rank professions to go with his Ship vanity.)

Send the Chelish Marine trained gnolls. It'll be fun.

This is one of those rare cases where I'm actually okay with the rules being vague. We're talking about characters spending 50 gp for a +2 bonus per skill. So what? I'd rather not have to have another PFS specific ruling.

This is one of those rare cases where I'm actually okay with the rules being vague. We're talking about characters spending 50 gp for a +2 bonus per skill. So what? I'd rather not have to have another PFS specific ruling.

On the other hand, I've seen characters throw down 4500 for a Circlet of Persuasion and feel that it was worth it. Using the cheesable MW Tools, you could get nearly the same effect with 300 gold + 50 gold for each Perform you care about. They even stacked.

Kyle Baird wrote:

This is one of those rare cases where I'm actually okay with the rules being vague. We're talking about characters spending 50 gp for a +2 bonus per skill. So what? I'd rather not have to have another PFS specific ruling.

On the other hand, I've seen characters throw down 4500 for a Circlet of Persuasion and feel that it was worth it. Using the cheesable MW Tools, you could get nearly the same effect with 300 gold + 50 gold for each Perform you care about. They even stacked.

well... a +1 bonus on my armor was 1K gp. the second +1 (+2 final) is three times that!

but I know what you mean about the MW tools and possible abuse. I've started a few threads about it in the past - and chimed in on others...

I've not seen anything on a UE guide? where did you get the comments from? Is it available now?

The circlet is still sweet (especially when you're able to use charisma for knowledge checks). Other than gross uses of intimidate, when have you seen skills completely ruin the fun of a scenario? Even then, it's usually the player, not the skill check that makes it unfun. Thise types of players will ruin a table one way or another no matter how many arbitrary PFS rules you come up with.

THANKS !!

I was really hoping that Paizo would clean up the MW tools. In my view the MW universal tools devalued MW tools that really made sense or which you could get on a cronicle sheet.

I had discussions that resulted in - 'best don't give your tool any fluff / description as it restricts it' which just went against my sense of how it should be.

Now I hope writers will add special MW tools on chronicles as they now become useful - like the tiger mask of intimidation or maps of a certain area, etc.

Kyle

I don't think a +2 is unbalanced. But it was a pet peeve of mine that the easiest way to get a +2 was my being non-imaginative and just buy an 'univeral, nondescript MW tool'. becasue this was the safest way to ensure a GM would (not be allowed to - as I was told here) say no.

This just rubbed me the wrong way. I'm happy to hand out circumstance bonuses for creative play / ideas - not for spending 50 gp because 'you can'.

but I know what you mean about the MW tools and possible abuse. I've started a few threads about it in the past - and chimed in on others...

I remember nosig's toolchest that we just felt was so, so wrong.

My thing about the MW tools was people claiming they could have a climber's or healer's kit and also a MW tool for the same. I'm glad that got cleaned up.

Additionally, those who carried 27 MW tools for all occasions and would never actually take the tool out of their tool box for use.

The circlet is still sweet (especially when you're able to use charisma for knowledge checks). Other than gross uses of intimidate, when have you seen skills completely ruin the fun of a scenario? Even then, it's usually the player, not the skill check that makes it unfun. Thise types of players will ruin a table one way or another no matter how many arbitrary PFS rules you come up with.

+1!

I just would like the Players to say when they are using MW tool (something I try to do with my PCs). Circumstanse bonuses (which MW tools give, and which stack) are under the control of the Judge, so he should ok it. And it's as simple as "with my ACME wiz-omatic tool I get a 23!"

The circlet is still sweet (especially when you're able to use charisma for knowledge checks). Other than gross uses of intimidate, when have you seen skills completely ruin the fun of a scenario? Even then, it's usually the player, not the skill check that makes it unfun. Thise types of players will ruin a table one way or another no matter how many arbitrary PFS rules you come up with.

Honestly, my reasoning is twofold. The first is based on sense-making and is quite similar to the text in UE on that matter. I'd seen players who were claiming a bonus on Diplomacy against everything for having a silver and ruby pendant, even creatures that would be offended if you treated with them bringing silver. Then they used an old ruling by JB combined with the old MW Tool text to tell the GM "Nope, this is the perfect tool for this situation. That means the NPC has to be impressed by the pendant, at least enough to give me +2." They were basically telling the GM how to play the NPCs.

The second is based on outshining characters who didn't exploit this. For 1,300 gold (plus 50 for any Craft, Profession, and Perform) you can get a +2 bonus to every single skill in the game using the exploit in the old rules. That's less than a +1 sword. I know you say it's not much, but +2 is a significant modifier, in my opinion. It's almost as much as the bonus for having a skill be a class skill and it's as much as some feats give to two skills until level 10. So one player might say "How do you have higher in Perception and Sense Motive than I do? I know you have 2 higher Wisdom, but I took Alertness and you spent all your feats on combat." and the other player says "Sure, but my MW conch shell of perception gives me +2 and my MW mood ring of sense motive gives me +2, so that cancels out your feat."

Anyway, I'm happy to see this clarification--I love seeing creative purchase of MW tools for particular situations where they might plausibly work, rather than just saying "My mood ring gives me +2 to all Sense Motive checks".

Kyle

I don't think a +2 is unbalanced. But it was a pet peeve of mine that the easiest way to get a +2 was my being non-imaginative and just buy an 'univeral, nondescript MW tool'. becasue this was the safest way to ensure a GM would (not be allowed to - as I was told here) say no.

This just rubbed me the wrong way. I'm happy to hand out circumstance bonuses for creative play / ideas - not for spending 50 gp because 'you can'.

Basically Thod hits the nail on the head. Great post, and eloquently describes the main part of what I was trying to say.

I always forget to buy Masterwork Tools. Of the 9 or so character numbers I currently have, one of them has one MW Tool. Oh well.

The circlet is still sweet (especially when you're able to use charisma for knowledge checks). Other than gross uses of intimidate, when have you seen skills completely ruin the fun of a scenario? Even then, it's usually the player, not the skill check that makes it unfun. Thise types of players will ruin a table one way or another no matter how many arbitrary PFS rules you come up with.

charisma for knowledge checks .... thats one Ive not heard of

Kyle Baird wrote:

The circlet is still sweet (especially when you're able to use charisma for knowledge checks). Other than gross uses of intimidate, when have you seen skills completely ruin the fun of a scenario? Even then, it's usually the player, not the skill check that makes it unfun. Thise types of players will ruin a table one way or another no matter how many arbitrary PFS rules you come up with.

charisma for knowledge checks .... thats one Ive not heard of

If you can follow the twisting runes of the past and listen to the voices of the ages, the mysteries of eternity open up to you. Know that the path is wrought with peril, and only confidence in yourself and zeal to see it through shall keep your mind intact. Even I, who have trained to overcome the influx of knowledge, lose myself to the words of creation when I am distracted.

charisma for knowledge checks .... thats one Ive not heard of

Lore Keeper revelation for Oracles of Lore.

My thing about the MW tools was people claiming they could have a climber's or healer's kit and also a MW tool for the same. I'm glad that got cleaned up.

There are surgeons tools that allow stacking with the healer kit - but only a +1. You never got a +4 as stacking wasn't allowed before either. The +5 for healers kit + MW surgeons tools wasn't allowed before if you treated a healers kit as MW tools. And yes - as GM I did treat a climber kit and healer kit as MW tool already.

Additionally, those who carried 27 MW tools for all occasions and would never actually take the tool out of their tool box for use.

I have a Pathfinder Chronicler with deep pockets to be able to have a strange item or tool just somewhere hidden in my bag. The 27 tools for all occasions allowed you to buy most of the benefit for 1350 gp - provided you have carrying capacity.

I had a "Book on the Origin of Languages, Inner Sea Volume Second Edition" for a masterwork Linguistics tool. Appropriate or not? Allowable with UE or not?

I call mine "Truespeech for Dummies". I also have "Fundaments of Applied Theurgy" for Spellcraft.

Just the fact that you have to consult a book is limiting, though.

I'd treat it like a Knowledge book MW tool, Kyle - your check is minutes, not rounds or conversational.

It might be 2d4 time units (minutes/hours) complex, rather than a straight minute, depending on how the skill was being applied.

It would... be a judgment call.

EDIT: What Mark says below.

I had a "Book on the Origin of Languages, Inner Sea Volume Second Edition" for a masterwork Linguistics tool. Appropriate or not? Allowable with UE or not?

Sounds like if you have time to consult, it would give you a +2 on Linguistics checks to identify the origins and roots of languages from the Inner Sea region and to decipher script in those languages (so not eastern or planar languages). It wouldn't work on codes, forgeries, or reading lips. This is probably limited in scope as per UE and thus allowable, though you should expect table variation.

The only non-core MW Tool I've ever had one of my characters purchase was a book on the burial practices of the Inner Sea, for a +2 on religion regarding that area of knowledge. This was for the explicit purpose of completing my faction mission, then I sold it back at the end of the module for half price.

Is paying a net sum of 25gp for what amounts to a +2 bonus on your faction mission skill check too cheesy?

I had a "Book on the Origin of Languages, Inner Sea Volume Second Edition" for a masterwork Linguistics tool. Appropriate or not? Allowable with UE or not?

Depends on the language

Tien - no
Undercommon - no

Azlanti - maybe

Non-human languages - likely no

And it takes time to use. Similar to a Pathfinder Chronicle I would rule. Having it in the backpack is not doing any good.

Edit: This is my personal opinion. Other GMs will rule differently.

Andrew Christian wrote:

My thing about the MW tools was people claiming they could have a climber's or healer's kit and also a MW tool for the same. I'm glad that got cleaned up.

There are surgeons tools that allow stacking with the healer kit - but only a +1. You never got a +4 as stacking wasn't allowed before either. The +5 for healers kit + MW surgeons tools wasn't allowed before if you treated a healers kit as MW tools. And yes - as GM I did treat a climber kit and healer kit as MW tool already.

Quote:

Additionally, those who carried 27 MW tools for all occasions and would never actually take the tool out of their tool box for use.

I have a Pathfinder Chronicler with deep pockets to be able to have a strange item or tool just somewhere hidden in my bag. The 27 tools for all occasions allowed you to buy most of the benefit for 1350 gp - provided you have carrying capacity.

and thus was born Nosigs' Tool Kit - put all those in a Handy Haversack... A real deal at that price! (plus the minor percentage passed back to me... not sure what I am going to do with the GP thou...)

One of my characters wears "shady sunglasses" that hide his eyes, making him a better bluffer. I wouldn't apply it to passing a secret message or feinting, however. Is this kosher, or should I toss my shades?

One of my characters wears "shady sunglasses" that hide his eyes, making him a better bluffer. I wouldn't apply it to passing a secret message or feinting, however. Is this kosher, or should I toss my shades?

Did you pay 50 gold for those sunglasses? Also, I would rule that the sunglasses effectively reduce the light levels for you in an area by one level, and that they must be worn to work.

With the caveat that the sunglasses only work when you're trying to lie to someone, then it seems reasonable to me. However, check with your table GM.

Not that I mind putting some restrictions on the masterwork tool, but all table variation does is leave a bad taste in a player's mouth for whose GM said "no" to their +2. Even for something like this, I would prefer a hard, fast ruling for PFSOP, instead of relying on your ability to explain the limitations of your masterwork tool to your GM, or just hoping that your GM is in a pleasant mood at the time.

Instead of limiting mwk tools I would just raise their price or reduce bonus to +1 or even remove them.

While I understand that anyone can buy 25+ tools it's pointless to limit players that much and to be honest that entire very, very, long explanation is just hard to even read.

Simplify explanations and items, that's my answer.

Now I hope writers will add special MW tools on chronicles as they now become useful - like the tiger mask of intimidation or maps of a certain area, etc.

Thod indeed has it right.

Due to table variation and the "clarification" from UE, the creative and unexpected MW tool is just plain dead.

At least for the players.

Now, we can only hope for the writer's whim and remember the time when we could use non-magical equipment as yet a different way to make our character useful.

I love my whim.

Mergy wrote:

One of my characters wears "shady sunglasses" that hide his eyes, making him a better bluffer. I wouldn't apply it to passing a secret message or feinting, however. Is this kosher, or should I toss my shades?

Did you pay 50 gold for those sunglasses? Also, I would rule that the sunglasses effectively reduce the light levels for you in an area by one level, and that they must be worn to work.

With the caveat that the sunglasses only work when you're trying to lie to someone, then it seems reasonable to me. However, check with your table GM.

Well of course I spent 50 gp on them. Of course they must be worn to work as well. As for light conditions, he's a dhampir, so you would be doing him a favour with that ruling.

In the case of any masterwork tools I'm using, I just inform the GM before the game. If he has a problem with it, I just won't use it.

Well of course I spent 50 gp on them. Of course they must be worn to work as well. As for light conditions, he's a dhampir, so you would be doing him a favour with that ruling.

In the case of any masterwork tools I'm using, I just inform the GM before the game. If he has a problem with it, I just won't use it.

Don't take it personally, Mergy. In over a decade of organized play, I don't assume anything when answering these kinds of questions. The kinds of things some players have tried...

Not that I mind putting some restrictions on the masterwork tool, but all table variation does is leave a bad taste in a player's mouth for whose GM said "no" to their +2. Even for something like this, I would prefer a hard, fast ruling for PFSOP, instead of relying on your ability to explain the limitations of your masterwork tool to your GM, or just hoping that your GM is in a pleasant mood at the time.

MW tools give a circumstance bonus.

circumstance bonuses are dependant on the circumstances and under the judgement/control of the Judge. I tend to let him do what he's there for, make the judgement call.

circumstance bonuses are an appeal to the judge to alter the "hard, fast ruling" given by static rules - due to circumstances that are not taken into account by those rules.

"Hay judge, I'd be lost right now, but I've got a street map - does that help?" gets boiled down to
"with my street map, I've got a 16 survival - am I still lost?" - vs.
"16 - am I still lost?"

MW tools work great - if we remember they are circumstance bonuses.

So what? I'd rather not have to have another PFS specific ruling.

Personally, I don't think "you can't make up your own custom tool" is any worse than "you can't make up your own custom magic item" as a PFS-specific rule.

One of my characters wears "shady sunglasses" that hide his eyes, making him a better bluffer. I wouldn't apply it to passing a secret message or feinting, however. Is this kosher, or should I toss my shades?

That depends--if you bluff while invisible or hidden, am I supposed to / allowed to give you an even higher bonus in PFS? I sometimes do so in home games, by the way, so this is an honest question, not a trick. If the answer is yes, I would give it to you against creatures that primarily use sight as their means of seeing and that have eyes (a creature that uses Tremorsense and is statted up with high Sense Motive probably reads the vibrations or trembling in people to tell that they are lying, for instance). Also, an opponent with high Sense Motive who fails only by the +2 from the sunglasses might realize that you were intentionally covering your eyes and might have done so to help your bluffing so be a bit more generally suspicious, though still incapable of telling exactly which of your statements are bluffs.

One of my characters wears "shady sunglasses" that hide his eyes, making him a better bluffer.

Sounds to me...

*puts on sunglasses*

...like a shady character.

YEEEAHHHH.

Mergy wrote:

One of my characters wears "shady sunglasses" that hide his eyes, making him a better bluffer. I wouldn't apply it to passing a secret message or feinting, however. Is this kosher, or should I toss my shades?

That depends--if you bluff while invisible or hidden, am I supposed to / allowed to give you an even higher bonus in PFS? I sometimes do so in home games, by the way, so this is an honest question, not a trick. If the answer is yes, I would give it to you against creatures that primarily use sight as their means of seeing and that have eyes (a creature that uses Tremorsense and is statted up with high Sense Motive probably reads the vibrations or trembling in people to tell that they are lying, for instance). Also, an opponent with high Sense Motive who fails only by the +2 from the sunglasses might realize that you were intentionally covering your eyes and might have done so to help your bluffing so be a bit more generally suspicious, though still incapable of telling exactly which of your statements are bluffs.

You have some good points here.

What I try to do, along with telling my GM in advance about the tool, is add up the base roll and then add circumstance bonuses:

"I'm taking 10 to Bluff for 22; 24 with the sunglasses." This gives the GM the chance to veto it by telling me that the customs inspector is blind.

Wouldn't your ears and nose get sore after wearing a 1 lb. pair of sunglasses all day?

Wouldn't your ears and nose get sore after wearing a 1 lb. pair of sunglasses all day?

On the contrary sir. It's given me a very muscular nose.

Wouldn't your ears and nose get sore after wearing a 1 lb. pair of sunglasses all day?

The 1 lb. weight includes the snazzy padded case and cleaning cloth... :)

Here's one
Companion Chow

Here's one

Companion Chow
** spoiler omitted **

Ha! That's hilarious. I'd give fewer uses to keep it in line with Disguise Kits, Healer's Kits, and the like.

Here's one

Companion Chow
** spoiler omitted **

The name needs work. "Would you do if for a Companion Chow?" just doesn't roll off the tongue.

@Rogue Eidolon: Since it only works when pushing your animal companion, I don't think lowering the amount of uses is necessary. A healer's kit has ten charges because it works for all heal checks.

Bacon!

Universal tool +2 to EVERYTHING!

Matthew Morris wrote:

Here's one

Companion Chow
** spoiler omitted **

The name needs work. "Would you do if for a Companion Chow?" just doesn't roll off the tongue.

@Rogue Eidolon: Since it only works when pushing your animal companion, I don't think lowering the amount of uses is necessary. A healer's kit has ten charges because it works for all heal checks.

Ah that's true. I take it back!

Bacon!

Universal tool +2 to EVERYTHING!

Only if you actually bring your GM bacon.

Bacon!

Universal tool +2 to EVERYTHING!

Actually, bacon simply adds +2 to Profession: Pathfinder.

Of course, that skill can be applied to most situations....

;-)