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

RPG Superstar 2015

What if Israel bombed Iran?


Off-Topic Discussions

51 to 100 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
The Exchange

Icyshadow wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
IcyShadow wrote:
Did you know that the three main places for Neo Nazis in the world are Germany, Russia and Finland?

Yes, yes on disliking the jews no on actualy neo nazis, and no.

Any reason you wound up with so many?

Quote:
And really, the jewish are hated everywhere. It's always been that way, and looks to me like it always will be.
If you're seeing it everywhere you're probably seeing something else.

Are you one of those people who say the Holocaust never happened?

And yes, perhaps I exaggerated. But it is known there are neo-nazis in Korso, and I have received legitimate death threats just because I am jewish.

I've seen death threats for being white in the wrong part of town in the USA, can i have my own special country?

Grand Lodge

thejeff wrote:
Actually, what a nuke gives them is what it gives all of the minor nuclear powers: insurance against attack.

Correct, it also gives them that, to a degree. One small nuclear program wont help you if you're completely unprepared for a larger, more technically and tactically capable country that wants to dismantle you. And in Irans case it would happen before they could react with certainty.


Andrew R wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
IcyShadow wrote:
Did you know that the three main places for Neo Nazis in the world are Germany, Russia and Finland?

Yes, yes on disliking the jews no on actualy neo nazis, and no.

Any reason you wound up with so many?

Quote:
And really, the jewish are hated everywhere. It's always been that way, and looks to me like it always will be.
If you're seeing it everywhere you're probably seeing something else.

Are you one of those people who say the Holocaust never happened?

And yes, perhaps I exaggerated. But it is known there are neo-nazis in Korso, and I have received legitimate death threats just because I am jewish.

I've seen death threats for being white in the wrong part of town in the USA, can i have my own special country?

They never stopped at death threats when it came to the pogroms, the destruction of the temples, the Holocaust etc...

The Exchange

Icyshadow wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
IcyShadow wrote:
Did you know that the three main places for Neo Nazis in the world are Germany, Russia and Finland?

Yes, yes on disliking the jews no on actualy neo nazis, and no.

Any reason you wound up with so many?

Quote:
And really, the jewish are hated everywhere. It's always been that way, and looks to me like it always will be.
If you're seeing it everywhere you're probably seeing something else.

Are you one of those people who say the Holocaust never happened?

And yes, perhaps I exaggerated. But it is known there are neo-nazis in Korso, and I have received legitimate death threats just because I am jewish.

I've seen death threats for being white in the wrong part of town in the USA, can i have my own special country?
They never stopped at death threats when it came to the pogroms, the destruction of the temples, the Holocaust etc...

Gays and gypsies got the same, where are their nations?


Maccabee wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Actually, what a nuke gives them is what it gives all of the minor nuclear powers: insurance against attack.
Correct, it also gives them that, to a degree. One small nuclear program wont help you if you're completely unprepared for a larger, more technically and tactically capable country that wants to dismantle you. And in Irans case it would happen before they could react with certainty.

It massively raises the stakes of attacking them. Even with only a couple of bombs, they have a good chance of causing incredible destruction in retaliation.

It doesn't mean they'd win a war, if that's what you mean. It just means potential enemies are much less likely to start one.


Yeah, they inspected the shiznit out of Iraq for how many years before they decided it was safe to invade again? As opposed to North Korea, who's been thumbing their noses at them for how long?

Grand Lodge

thejeff wrote:
Maccabee wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Actually, what a nuke gives them is what it gives all of the minor nuclear powers: insurance against attack.
Correct, it also gives them that, to a degree. One small nuclear program wont help you if you're completely unprepared for a larger, more technically and tactically capable country that wants to dismantle you. And in Irans case it would happen before they could react with certainty.

It massively raises the stakes of attacking them. Even with only a couple of bombs, they have a good chance of causing incredible destruction in retaliation.

It doesn't mean they'd win a war, if that's what you mean. It just means potential enemies are much less likely to start one.

I agree 100%, just saying there's alot of variables and benifits for Iran. To go with all those pitfalls of going nuclear...


Andrew R wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
IcyShadow wrote:
Did you know that the three main places for Neo Nazis in the world are Germany, Russia and Finland?

Yes, yes on disliking the jews no on actualy neo nazis, and no.

Any reason you wound up with so many?

Quote:
And really, the jewish are hated everywhere. It's always been that way, and looks to me like it always will be.
If you're seeing it everywhere you're probably seeing something else.

Are you one of those people who say the Holocaust never happened?

And yes, perhaps I exaggerated. But it is known there are neo-nazis in Korso, and I have received legitimate death threats just because I am jewish.

I've seen death threats for being white in the wrong part of town in the USA, can i have my own special country?
They never stopped at death threats when it came to the pogroms, the destruction of the temples, the Holocaust etc...
Gays and gypsies got the same, where are their nations?

1. Ever seen the gypsies being chased before or after that?

2. Being gay was okay back in Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece. It was also okay to kill jews during those times.

3. It's easier to hide your sexual orientation than your "religion you are born to", that applied in the past and applies today.

The Exchange

Iran will never win, it is just a question of how messy their loss will be

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Yeah, they inspected the shiznit out of Iraq for how many years before they decided it was safe to invade again? As opposed to North Korea, who's been thumbing their noses at them for how long?

NKorea has China backing it, 100%. Thats makes a huge difference. Plus, NKorea has nothing the US wants. That also makes a difference, sadly.

Dark Archive Star Voter 2013

Icyshadow wrote:


1. Ever seen the gypsies being chased before or after that?

2. Being gay was okay back in Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece. It was also okay to kill jews during those times.

3. It's easier to hide your sexual orientation than your "religion you are born to", that applied in the past and applies today.

1. gypsies have been chased, excecuted, ect before that, hell at one point they were the whipping boy of europe, anything went wrong kill the gypsy

2. homosexuality has always been a tough one in terms of acceptablilty, sure greeks and romans allowed it, but what about after the chrisitan movement? how many other societies have discrimitated and killed gays?

3. you sure about that? while you can't hide your "race" (which by the way is a terrible term to use) I'm sure you can always say "no I'm christian/muslim/ect" hell if its a problem I'm even sure that religeion is easier to fake since its a belief and not an emotional based instinct


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Icyshadow wrote:


1. Ever seen the gypsies being chased before or after that?

2. Being gay was okay back in Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece. It was also okay to kill jews during those times.

3. It's easier to hide your sexual orientation than your "religion you are born to", that applied in the past and applies today.

Seriously?

1) Yes. Gypsies have been discriminated against before and after the Holocaust. They've often been assumed to be thieves and con-men. Where do you think the term "gypped" comes from? They're simply not as widely known as Jews, for a number for reasons. Historically, because they don't feature in the Bible. More recently because they haven't had the same cultural success many Jews have had, nor do they have a country which is at the flashpoint of world events. They're still discriminated against in many countries where they have a significant population.

2) The Ancient Greeks had little interaction with the Jews. The Romans treated them pretty much like any other conquered people. I'm not at all sure what you mean by "It was also okay to kill jews during those times."

3) Religion is not that much harder to hide than sexual orientation and both are much easier than race. And you have the benefit of not having to hide it from family. Not that any of that justifies anything.

Why are we playing "Who's been more oppressed?" anyway? It's a stupid game.


Maccabee wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Yeah, they inspected the shiznit out of Iraq for how many years before they decided it was safe to invade again? As opposed to North Korea, who's been thumbing their noses at them for how long?

NKorea has China backing it, 100%. Thats makes a huge difference. Plus, NKorea has nothing the US wants. That also makes a difference, sadly.

North Korea has also had, since long before it went nuclear, the entire population of Seoul as hostages. They could easily reach it with conventional missiles and artillery.


What is North Korea doing at the moment anyway?

They seemed to have kept a low profile for a while now...

Grand Lodge

thejeff wrote:
Maccabee wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Yeah, they inspected the shiznit out of Iraq for how many years before they decided it was safe to invade again? As opposed to North Korea, who's been thumbing their noses at them for how long?

NKorea has China backing it, 100%. Thats makes a huge difference. Plus, NKorea has nothing the US wants. That also makes a difference, sadly.
North Korea has also had, since long before it went nuclear, the entire population of Seoul as hostages. They could easily reach it with conventional missiles and artillery.

NKorea has nothing but mechanized crap with no fuel, and no actionable resources for ist forces(i.e. food). I've been to Seoul, served in the ROK for over 2 years on the border and down south. That is not a hostage nation by any sense of the word. Point of fact one of the primary reasons we (the US) are there is to keep the ROK forces from going North, wiping the floor with NKorea, and pissing off the Chinese.

Grand Lodge

Icyshadow wrote:

What is North Korea doing at the moment anyway?

They seemed to have kept a low profile for a while now...

Starving. And executing/torturing citizens that flee north to China, after China summarily sends them right back down south, after some of their own torture.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"What is North Korea doing at the moment anyway?"

That's a good question.

And how come you never hear about anything going on in Turkey? And where are those nuclear missile silos pointed these days?

Anyway, my understanding is that as co-signees of the NPT (which, I believe Israel, who has 300+ nukes, never signed), the Iranians have been in accordance with their terms in building its nuclear energy program, been inspected by the IAEA, and even acted in accordance with the terms set by Obama in 2010. And yet, still, Mossad agents keep bumping off Iranian nuclear scientists.

Don't get me wrong. Ahemajiwhatever is not a groovy dude. He's a fundie and an anti-Semite, no doubt. But, you know, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been around for almost a quarter of a century and I don't think they've attacked anybody yet. Unlike others I could think of.

Grand Lodge

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

"What is North Korea doing at the moment anyway?"

That's a good question.

And how come you never hear about anything going on in Turkey? And where are those nuclear missile silos pointed these days?

Anyway, my understanding is that as co-signees of the NPT (which, I believe Israel, who has 300+ nukes, never signed), the Iranians have been in accordance with their terms in building its nuclear energy program, been inspected by the IAEA, and even acted in accordance with the terms set by Obama in 2010. And yet, still, Mossad agents keep bumping off Iranian nuclear scientists.

Don't get me wrong. Ahemajiwhatever is not a groovy dude. He's a fundie and an anti-Semite, no doubt. But, you know, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been around for almost a quarter of a century and I don't think they've attacked anybody yet. Unlike others I could think of.

Well you can thank the CIA and the British for that. We pretty much shot ourselves in the face after WWII as far as "allies in the middle east".


Maccabee wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Maccabee wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Yeah, they inspected the shiznit out of Iraq for how many years before they decided it was safe to invade again? As opposed to North Korea, who's been thumbing their noses at them for how long?

NKorea has China backing it, 100%. Thats makes a huge difference. Plus, NKorea has nothing the US wants. That also makes a difference, sadly.
North Korea has also had, since long before it went nuclear, the entire population of Seoul as hostages. They could easily reach it with conventional missiles and artillery.
NKorea has nothing but mechanized crap with no fuel, and no actionable resources for ist forces(i.e. food). I've been to Seoul, served in the ROK for over 2 years on the border and down south. That is not a hostage nation by any sense of the word. Point of fact one of the primary reasons we (the US) are there is to keep the ROK forces from going North, wiping the floor with NKorea, and pissing off the Chinese.

It's not their mobile forces mostly, but long range artillery targeting Seoul. They couldn't invade and win, but they could open fire and do a lot of damage in the beginning of any fight.

Exactly how much is debatable, but it's a risk no one wants to take.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16

In some ways, the current situation in the Middle East is a product of the Nazis. Prior to World War II, regions like the Lebanon and Palestine had a substantial Jewish population and little conflict between the Jewish and Arabic populations.

In the wake of World War I, Britain took control of Palestine from Turkey. Soon after they rose to power, the Nazis devoted substantial resources toward winning friends and allies in the Middle East. Courting local dignitaries and unleashing a propaganda offensive, they hoped to increase their influence in the region. In addition to spreading propaganda about their racist doctrines (edited to downplay their hostility toward Arabic cultures) and funding local firebrands, the Nazis successfully aggravated local tensions by dumping thousands of desperate, impoverished Jewish refugees into Palestine.


.

I thought the situation in the Middle East was caused by England, and
Lawrence of Arabia ?

.

.

.


I blame Alec Guinness and his fake nose.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

IIRC Britain and France managed to harbor lot of ill will in the region even before Nazis came to power.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

British imperialist:

You see, what we do is, we take this Kurdish province over here, and this Sunni province over here, and this Shi'ite province over there and bang! we call it Iraq. What could go wrong?

Liberty's Edge

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

Yeah, a lot of the issues stem from Britain and France ignoring T.E. Lawrence about how to break up the Ottoman Empire.

Much like how France ignoring Wilson and Keyes helped set the stage for WWII.

Shadow Lodge Dedicated Voter 2014

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

British imperialist:

You see, what we do is, we take this Kurdish province over here, and this Sunni province over here, and this Shi'ite province over there and bang! we call it Iraq. What could go wrong?

Thats the entire point. If they can't unite against you you can set whatever terms you want for their oil.


Well, I only know what I see from around where I live. I live in Arkansas, United States. This part of the US is called the Bible Belt because there are more church going or active believers in this region (or so it's believed). It's also a very conservative area, with many people espousing right wing views on politics and even incorporating their fundamentalist brand of Christianity into their politics. Many of the really extreme ones, the "Christian Tea Partiers" actually hope for Iran to attack Israel because in their view this will hasten Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ.

Yup. I was told that just today by a friend who's one of those extreme Christian Tea Party guys.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Those are the ones that worry me. They seem more concerned about the next world than this one.

The Exchange

Icyshadow wrote:

What is North Korea doing at the moment anyway?

They seemed to have kept a low profile for a while now...

Apparently they discovered they have oil and are trying to keep it from Americans.

The Exchange

Andrew R wrote:
Iran will never win, it is just a question of how messy their loss will be

They don't need to fight to Win - they can build a rock causeway across the straights of Hormuz to the edge of their territorial water claim. Reduce the Straits of Hormuz to half its width.


yellowdingo wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Iran will never win, it is just a question of how messy their loss will be
They don't need to fight to Win - they can build a rock causeway across the straights of Hormuz to the edge of their territorial water claim. Reduce the Straits of Hormuz to half its width.

I like it!


meatrace wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Iran will never win, it is just a question of how messy their loss will be
They don't need to fight to Win - they can build a rock causeway across the straights of Hormuz to the edge of their territorial water claim. Reduce the Straits of Hormuz to half its width.
I like it!

That's it's own kind of genius. One wonders why it hasn't been tried before.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Because it would cut into their own shipping and trade?

Because it probably violates the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea?

Because it would be taken as a provocation?

Because blocking half the Strait really wouldn't accomplish much, other than make it easier to block the other half in time of war?

Because it would be a major engineering undertaking to build. 10 miles long and up to 200' deep?

Because it be relatively easy to destroy?

Because it's a yellowdingo suggestion?


thejeff wrote:

Because it would cut into their own shipping and trade?

Because it probably violates the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea?

Because it would be taken as a provocation?

Because blocking half the Strait really wouldn't accomplish much, other than make it easier to block the other half in time of war?

Because it would be a major engineering undertaking to build. 10 miles long and up to 200' deep?

Because it be relatively easy to destroy?

Because it's a yellowdingo suggestion?

1. Meh. Not really.

2. I'd need to see that law.
3. I think that would be the point. And a relatively peaceful form of protest to boot.
4. Again, meh. People have accomplished stupider things for better reasons, and vice versa.
5. I don't think it would be perfect, but enough people working on it would cause a noticeable change.
6. I'd buy this, actually.
7. I try not to judge suggestions by their source. Stopped clocks and all that.

The Exchange

Freehold DM wrote:
meatrace wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Iran will never win, it is just a question of how messy their loss will be
They don't need to fight to Win - they can build a rock causeway across the straights of Hormuz to the edge of their territorial water claim. Reduce the Straits of Hormuz to half its width.
I like it!
That's it's own kind of genius. One wonders why it hasn't been tried before.

Because the west would reduce them to a smoldering ruin for threatening them on such a level before they could do much

Shadow Lodge Dedicated Voter 2014

yellowdingo wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Iran will never win, it is just a question of how messy their loss will be
They don't need to fight to Win - they can build a rock causeway across the straights of Hormuz to the edge of their territorial water claim. Reduce the Straits of Hormuz to half its width.

The US doesn't exactly have a record of acknowledging land claims contrary to its economic interests.

Holding something that close to the water when the US can park 15 destroyers off shore and bombard you with impunity is going to be pretty rough.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32 , Star Voter 2014

I removed a post.


Some pretty f@++ed up shiznit.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, woah.

The Exchange

BigNorseWolf wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Iran will never win, it is just a question of how messy their loss will be
They don't need to fight to Win - they can build a rock causeway across the straights of Hormuz to the edge of their territorial water claim. Reduce the Straits of Hormuz to half its width.

The US doesn't exactly have a record of acknowledging land claims contrary to its economic interests.

Holding something that close to the water when the US can park 15 destroyers off shore and bombard you with impunity is going to be pretty rough.

Remind me to build an Island off the Coast of the USA - just outside its waters.

The Exchange

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Some pretty f$~~ed up shiznit.

That's why the US pooched that Afghanistan job - They needed to make the USA a safe haven for Women from countries where Women are killed for wanting an education or speaking out.

Get off you worthless butts and evac their female population to the USA.


Well, if they all look like Hina Rabbani Khar, I say this is one Citizen Dingo plan with which I concur.


Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Well, if they all look like Hina Rabbani Khar, I say this is one Citizen Dingo plan with which I concur.

Meh. She's, like, a 7. Tops.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is just the pre-rally for a R$ win. He's a Mormon, and if we are to believe he holds Israel in the highest regard that most Mormons do, the result is inevitable.

If R$ wins, we will bomb Iran. Maybe nukes. Bibi wants a war, and Obama's against it, at least for now.

The sad part of that scenario is that Iran is teeming with young people who are sick of their theocratic, oligarchic dictatorship. They'd change things all by themselves in the next decade.

The whole "Iran's working on nukes. Preemptive strike!" BS is the same war drum that had most of our country slavering for war with Iraq.

Conservatives have yet to acknowledge that they were suckers for that propaganda.


meatrace wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Well, if they all look like Hina Rabbani Khar, I say this is one Citizen Dingo plan with which I concur.
Meh. She's, like, a 7. Tops.

As far as international politicians go, she sure beats Golda Meir!

'Cuz it would suck to fill up the USA with 7's!

Dedicated Voter 2013

It seems that a big element is being unspoken. Iran seeks to join the nuclear club not only to have the "biig bang" available to chuck at Israel, it also sets them very near or at the top of the regional power structure. Demonstrating nuclear weapons capability will (at least from the theocrats' point of view) give them the presence that proves that the end goal of worlwide Islam has taken its next crucial step forward. They can bend the Middle Eastern theocratic states to their ear to present a united front against the rest of the world. This also sets the stage for exporting this knowledge to non-geographically-connected Islamic states such as are in the Pacific Rim and throughout Africa.

If the Arab Spring would have spurred the Iranian/Persian youth to action, it would have done so already. The Persian rulers are more than willing to wage war against their own - q.v. the wars with Iraq - so squashing a civilian uprising would not go any better than the bloodbath in Syria. The Iranian poplace knows this and currently are unwilling to take that risk as a population.

This "issue" demonstrates why petroleum independance MUST happen, and very very soon. Not in 10 or 20 years, but 5 or less - my guess is on less.

I hope that events prove me wrong ... but so far, we're boiling along at good speed towards the next major international military conflict in the next few years' time.

So many world leaders have only their ear tips sticking out of their rears it's gone from bad comedy to a Greek tragedy in the making. Let us hope that this tragedy doesn't get performed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Turin the Mad wrote:
If the Arab Spring would have spurred the Iranian/Persian youth to action, it would have done so already. The Persian rulers are more than willing to wage war against their own - q.v. the wars with Iraq - so squashing a civilian uprising would not go any better than the bloodbath in Syria. The Iranian poplace knows this and currently are unwilling to take that risk as a population.

They DID take that risk when the they were robbed of their elections, and they DID get squashed.

Don't say they didn't try : they just failed to topple their government. Until next time.

Shadow Lodge Dedicated Voter 2014

1 person marked this as a favorite.
turin the mad wrote:
Demonstrating nuclear weapons capability will (at least from the theocrats' point of view) give them the presence that proves that the end goal of worlwide Islam has taken its next crucial step forward. They can bend the Middle Eastern theocratic states to their ear to present a united front against the rest of the world. This also sets the stage for exporting this knowledge to non-geographically-connected Islamic states such as are in the Pacific Rim and throughout Africa.

This assumes that iran buys its own party line, which i highly doubt.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
A highly regarded expert wrote:

This is just the pre-rally for a R$ win. He's a Mormon, and if we are to believe he holds Israel in the highest regard that most Mormons do, the result is inevitable.

If R$ wins, we will bomb Iran. Maybe nukes. Bibi wants a war, and Obama's against it, at least for now.

The sad part of that scenario is that Iran is teeming with young people who are sick of their theocratic, oligarchic dictatorship. They'd change things all by themselves in the next decade.

The whole "Iran's working on nukes. Preemptive strike!" BS is the same war drum that had most of our country slavering for war with Iraq.

Conservatives have yet to acknowledge that they were suckers for that propaganda.

Indeed. This is one of the reasons why I hope he doesn't win.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Turin the Mad wrote:
It seems that a big element is being unspoken. Iran seeks to join the nuclear club not only to have the "biig bang" available to chuck at Israel, it also sets them very near or at the top of the regional power structure. Demonstrating nuclear weapons capability will (at least from the theocrats' point of view) give them the presence that proves that the end goal of worlwide Islam has taken its next crucial step forward. They can bend the Middle Eastern theocratic states to their ear to present a united front against the rest of the world. This also sets the stage for exporting this knowledge to non-geographically-connected Islamic states such as are in the Pacific Rim and throughout Africa....

I don't know; they're not regional (and they're Sunni), but Pakistan has a few years' head start on being the first majority-Muslim nuclear power, and Pakistan has already been exporting the technology elsewhere. I also note that most of the other theocratic states in the Middle East are likewise Sunni, which does not exactly make them natural allies to even a nuclear-armed Iran.

51 to 100 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Off-Topic Discussions / What if Israel bombed Iran? 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.