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

Consumable Magic Items - For or Against?


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

51 to 100 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Azaelas Fayth wrote:
No clue... And how can someone be hated here!?
It's easier than you'd think. (^~^)
my previous account had quite the negative reputation.

Well I always liked you. :)


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Ashiel wrote:


It would be hard for me to deny that consumables are popular in my groups.

Nice document Ashiel. Interesting read.


danielc wrote:
Ashiel wrote:


It would be hard for me to deny that consumables are popular in my groups.
Nice document Ashiel. Interesting read.

Thank you Danielc. It's a work in progress, but I haven't added to it in quite a while. Hopefully soon I'll have expanded it to include tactics, and possibly a section on combat, and helpful spell / feat combinations, and/or other things. I've gotten a lot of positive feedback, and what has made many of my recent days is when I get PMs from board members thanking me for the guide and telling me how much it has done for their groups.

That really makes it worth it. ^-^


It really is an excellent document.

Though a little clustered together for my liking...


Azaelas Fayth wrote:

It really is an excellent document.

Though a little clustered together for my liking...

Thank you Azaelas Fayth. (^-^)


Ashiel wrote:
Azaelas Fayth wrote:

It really is an excellent document.

Though a little clustered together for my liking...

Thank you Azaelas Fayth. (^-^)

For?


Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Azaelas Fayth wrote:

It really is an excellent document.

Though a little clustered together for my liking...

Thank you Azaelas Fayth. (^-^)
For?

The compliment?


Oh I didn't realize you replied to a post... oops... ;P


Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:
They told me that it should be my responsibility as a GM to replace all that useless carp with decent magic items.

Kids these days. Back in my day, at the end of an epic adventure you would get as treasure just enough copper pieces to not starve to death and that rusty shortsword the goblin was carrying. And we were GLAD to get that rusty shortsowrd!

[/oldman]


Yosarian wrote:
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:
They told me that it should be my responsibility as a GM to replace all that useless carp with decent magic items.

Kids these days. Back in my day, at the end of an epic adventure you would get as treasure just enough copper pieces to not starve to death and that rusty shortsword the goblin was carrying. And we were GLAD to get that rusty shortsword!

[/oldman]

I'm 19 and I feel the same as you.

P.S. fixed your mistake ;P


Yosarian wrote:
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:
They told me that it should be my responsibility as a GM to replace all that useless carp with decent magic items.

Kids these days. Back in my day, at the end of an epic adventure you would get as treasure just enough copper pieces to not starve to death and that rusty shortsword the goblin was carrying. And we were GLAD to get that rusty shortsowrd!

[/oldman]

Hah, I know right? I was just in another thread earlier today where people seem to think +3 or better weapons just fall out of the and land in your laps or something. Makes me feel old when the grognard shaking its head is me. :P

In my games people get treasures. Vaults full of copper coins. Wagons of silk, iron, and spices. Enemies use things like masterwork goodies, and by god you're going to be pretty psyched when you find that +1 merciful vicious warhammer, because it's a pretty epic weapon. Boxes of potions, satchels of gems, that's our treasure troves.

Useless crap indeed. :P


Consumables become too pricey way too fast. The amount of gold you end up dumping into them means that's one less magic item you could've bought instead.

I almost never buy consumables, they're often situational and hugely impact the action economy.

For consumables to even be viable, they need to be way cheaper. Hell, they should run more along the lines of Elder Scrolls, if you invest in alchemical skills, you should be able to create consumables for free using skill checks and spending time getting the resources.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
CommandoDude wrote:
Consumables become too pricey way too fast. The amount of gold you end up dumping into them means that's one less magic item you could've bought instead.

But if you found them as part of a treasure would you use them or sell them for the gold?

I agree, there are some consumables I would not bother to "buy" but if I found them I wold place them in my bag and use them later on.


danielc wrote:
I agree, there are some consumables I would not bother to "buy" but if I found them I wold place them in my bag and use them later on.

You summed up most players attitude when it comes to consumables.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It doesn't matter how "gold efficient" you are if you're dead. Consumables save lives.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
CommandoDude wrote:
Consumables become too pricey way too fast. The amount of gold you end up dumping into them means that's one less magic item you could've bought instead.

I once created a rather extensive spreadsheet comparing the price of consumables vs permanent magic items for the career of one of my average adventurers. Just to see how the pricing ended up.

This was long ago and I no longer have that spreadsheet, plus it was at 2e prices, so perhaps things have changed slightly, but I am on the verge of grognardism and I don't feel like replicating the effort to see how things work out in the PF world. So that means I will continue to behave as if the lessons I learned from that effort are valid in a PF world with PF prices.

And what I learned is that in the vast majority of cases, the cost per use of magic items tends to be much, much cheaper if your character uses consumables.

As an example, let's look at a ring of invisibility vs a wand of invisibility. The ring costs 10,000 gp. The wand costs 4,500. Each of those costs can be reduced through crafting, but they work as baselines.

Over the course of an adventurer's career, for the ring to cost less per casting than wands, the ring would have to be used 112 times. It is unlikely that a character would need to turn invisible more than once per encounter, and even that is highly unlikely. Even my sneakiest rogues might turn invisible every third encounter or so, but let's say that your character wants to turn invisible every encounter.

A typical game that I have played in will usually level up a character every five to seven encounters. That's usually two to three play sessions. In my world that's usually at least six weeks. So 112 encounters would take the average character to at least level sixteen, perhaps all the way to level 20. So figure about two years of actual real world play time.

Now, do you really think your character is still going to be wearing a ring of invisibility at level 16? Highly unlikely. At what level would most characters replace a ring of invisibility? Probably around level 10 or so. Let's say level 12. Now, what level were you when you bought that 10,000g ring? Probably level 6. So you had it from level 6 to level 12, or roughly 33 encounters. At 33 uses of a ring costing 10,000g, you are paying 302g per invisibility, vs the 90g per casting the wand would cost.

Lower level wands are even better deals usually.

When I have played characters who use consumables, they have consistently been the most cost-effective characters in the party. The idea that consumables cost more than permanent items is a myth, pure and simple.


Also a wand is usable earlier and longer than the ring is. Since even after you would have replaced the Ring for another Ring you can still whip out your wand and cast Invisibility.


I don't, as a rule, buy consumables; I do craft consumables, which I guess is like buying them at half-price. :)

And I tend to keep almost ANY consumable that I find, on the logic that even if I can't use it, my (eventual) cohort and followers will be able to get some use therefrom...

Oh, exception to the rule above: Restorative (Keoghtom's) Ointment. I will by me a jar or three of this stuff as soon as I can, since I rarely play divine casters.


Alitan wrote:

I don't, as a rule, buy consumables; I do craft consumables, which I guess is like buying them at half-price. :)

And I tend to keep almost ANY consumable that I find, on the logic that even if I can't use it, my (eventual) cohort and followers will be able to get some use therefrom...

Oh, exception to the rule above: Restorative (Keoghtom's) Ointment. I will by me a jar or three of this stuff as soon as I can, since I rarely play divine casters.

Hmm... Good Points...


Adamantine Dragon wrote:
When I have played characters who use consumables, they have consistently been the most cost-effective characters in the party. The idea that consumables cost more than permanent items is a myth, pure and simple.

Great stuff AD. I must concur. Consumables are priced competitively and often open up avenues that you would not normally have access two, and are great ways to save money if used smartly.

For example, a +1 weapon costs +2,000 gp. Yet it only adds +1 damage over a masterwork weapon (+300 gp) and requires the weapon to be masterwork. Against the vast majority of enemies, whether a weapon is a +1 or not is not going to matter (really, the frequency of DR X/magic is pretty low if you look into it). So carrying a few 50 gp oils of magic weapon can actually save you money. If you run into the odd DR X/magic creature early in your career you can slather a weapon in oil and take the fight to them, and just use your mwk weapon in the meantime. Then you can use the saved money to shore up your defenses (for the same 2000 gp for a weapon you could have a +1 resistance to saves and a +1 enhancement to AC, or buy mwk tools and other cool trinkets).

Consumables when used responsibly save PCs money and make them more effective throughout all levels of play. Likewise, if the whole party chips in and grabs certain types of consumables for emergencies the party can survive some bad encounters more readily. For example, the cost of a 3rd level wand (11,250 gp) is a lot of money for a single PC, but divided by four PCs is only 2,812.5 gp. For spells like haste, summon monster III, and fly the wand will pay for itself in sheer usefulness. A wand of enlarge person is only 187.5 gp if split 4 ways, which makes it less expensive than a pair of tanglefoot bags, and yet even using it 1/encounter it'll last you 50 encounters (easily 2 levels on medium XP track).

Shadow Lodge

One the rare occasion that I see someone make extensive use of wands, I have the urge to give them a top hat and a white rabbit.


Oh yeah I discovered the fact that it is if you buy a Consumable from a shop it is expected to be a Wizard/Cleric crafted item.

EDIT: This is considered standard by most large scale groups, but usually only applied in the case of the good ole Magic-Mart scenario.

On-Topic: Consumables are excellent as they allow a Caster to have a spell available even if they didn't prepare it.

A Wizard with Staff-Like Wands can be super efficient. Almost to the point of being cheesy.


Azaelas Fayth wrote:

Oh yeah I discovered the fact that it is if you buy a Consumable from a shop it is expected to be a Wizard/Cleric crafted item.

On-Topic: Consumables are excellent as they allow a Caster to have a spell available even if they didn't prepare it.

A Wizard with Staff-Like Wands can be super efficient. Almost to the point of being cheesy.

the wizard/cleric expectation is only in PFS, and in games that adopt that houserule. by RAW, you can buy a wand of lesser restoration at the paladin price. because the paladin has the spell at the lowest spell level and the lowest caster level.


Yeah sorry I will be editing that to finish the statement.


PFS has that rule because buying paladin or ranger wands to cut the price of them is an acknowledged exploit that unbalances the purchase of magic items.

I use the rule in my games too.

This is just one of the many, many, many reasons Pathfinder needs to completely rewrite the magic item rules.


Adamantine Dragon wrote:

PFS has that rule because buying paladin or ranger wands to cut the price of them is an acknowledged exploit that unbalances the purchase of magic items.

I use the rule in my games too.

This is just one of the many, many, many reasons Pathfinder needs to completely rewrite the magic item rules.

not that bad of an exploit. it just makes a wand of lesser restoration or resist energy more affordable for the low level parties that need it. such as campaigns where ability damage is excessively common (carrion crown for example)


Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

PFS has that rule because buying paladin or ranger wands to cut the price of them is an acknowledged exploit that unbalances the purchase of magic items.

I use the rule in my games too.

This is just one of the many, many, many reasons Pathfinder needs to completely rewrite the magic item rules.

not that bad of an exploit. it just makes a wand of lesser restoration or resist energy more affordable for the low level parties that need it. such as campaigns where ability damage is excessively common (carrion crown for example)

All this indicates is that Carrion Crown probably has some module design flaws that should have been corrected instead of relying on an oversight in class design to make the module survivable.


Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

PFS has that rule because buying paladin or ranger wands to cut the price of them is an acknowledged exploit that unbalances the purchase of magic items.

I use the rule in my games too.

This is just one of the many, many, many reasons Pathfinder needs to completely rewrite the magic item rules.

not that bad of an exploit. it just makes a wand of lesser restoration or resist energy more affordable for the low level parties that need it. such as campaigns where ability damage is excessively common (carrion crown for example)
All this indicates is that Carrion Crown probably has some module design flaws that should have been corrected instead of relying on an oversight in class design to make the module survivable.

a CL1 wand of lesser restoration at the paladin price isn't going to break most pathfinder APs. i would have appreciated it in carrion crown, would have appreciated it in skull and shackles (where you cannot avoid drinking the rum ration in the entire first book until you commit mutiny), would have appreciated it in rise of the runelords (to quickly recover from a fight with Xanesha), would have loved it in second darkness (those drow use lots of poison), and would love it in any other Paizo AP.


The goal of balance is not purely to avoid "breaking the game". Balance is supposed to be about making the game internally consistent and somewhat predictable. So whether the wand exploit "breaks the game" is not the measure of whether or not it should or should not be allowed.

As far as "it would come in handy" is concerned, I am pretty sure a wand of wishes would have been handy in most campaigns I've been in.


I use the Wizard/Cleric rule for the randomly generated Items. If it is an item that is specifically bought from a Paladin/Ranger/Summoner/Etc. then it uses that classes pricing.

This is inspired by a F.A.Q. issued for 3.x


Azaelas Fayth wrote:

I use the Wizard/Cleric rule for the randomly generated Items. If it is an item that is specifically bought from a Paladin/Ranger/Summoner/Etc. then it uses that classes pricing.

This is inspired by a F.A.Q. issued for 3.x

And when Paizo was forced to deal with this issue in their sanctioned official play, they decided to go with wands priced at wizard/cleric prices. I agree with that ruling.


Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Azaelas Fayth wrote:

I use the Wizard/Cleric rule for the randomly generated Items. If it is an item that is specifically bought from a Paladin/Ranger/Summoner/Etc. then it uses that classes pricing.

This is inspired by a F.A.Q. issued for 3.x

And when Paizo was forced to deal with this issue in their sanctioned official play, they decided to go with wands priced at wizard/cleric prices. I agree with that ruling.

It makes the most sense. They are normally the 2 most common spellcasting classes in a given game world.

Between the two classes you have nearly every single spell in the game. Especially in a CRB-only campaign. I think in the CRB only 3 spells aren't on their combined spell lists.


When I am playing I rarely use consumables, especially on martial characters (which I tend to gravitate to) unless the concept of the character is a gadget guy. I know consumables are effective, but when I envision my characters in my head I see "big bad dude that wades into battle with a sword and ruins peoples' day" and not "that guy that waves a wand at his sword to make it sharper, then drinks a potion to make himself 9 feet tall before throwing a bag a glue at people."

It just doesn't feel right unless that's a shtick of the character. It doesn't matter to me how effective it may or may not be, it doesn't feel particularly heroic or interesting for me to play. I know a lot of people would disagree that "hit a guy with a sword real hard" is more interesting than "complex web of magic item synergies", but to each his own.

That being said, I don't turn my nose up at healing consumables.


I always seem to play the "About to whoop some @$$" characters... even my casters seem to fit that concept. Especially my Alchemists...

And does anybody turn down Healing Consumables?


The Oddity wrote:

When I am playing I rarely use consumables, especially on martial characters (which I tend to gravitate to) unless the concept of the character is a gadget guy. I know consumables are effective, but when I envision my characters in my head I see "big bad dude that wades into battle with a sword and ruins peoples' day" and not "that guy that waves a wand at his sword to make it sharper, then drinks a potion to make himself 9 feet tall before throwing a bag a glue at people."

It just doesn't feel right unless that's a shtick of the character. It doesn't matter to me how effective it may or may not be, it doesn't feel particularly heroic or interesting for me to play. I know a lot of people would disagree that "hit a guy with a sword real hard" is more interesting than "complex web of magic item synergies", but to each his own.

That being said, I don't turn my nose up at healing consumables.

but relying on permanent magical equipment doesn't feel very heroic either. unless you are playing something along the lines, King Arthur, Aragorn, Eragon Shadeslayer, or Elric. i would prefer that the inherant bonuses be a part of the Hero themselves, not the benefit of relying on some cheap trinket. i know i would have to drastically modify pathfinder to make that work. but tequilla sunrise has a good starting point and i could make tweaks from there.


I still find it funny that Excalibur is only at most a +5 Longsword though probably closer to +3. After all the major magic in the story is the fact that the Scabbard of Excalibur renders the wearer invulnerable to any mortal wounds.

The way I see it is the Magic just improves their natural skills.


Azaelas Fayth wrote:

I still find it funny that Excalibur is only at most a +5 Longsword though probably closer to +3. After all the major magic in the story is the fact that the Scabbard of Excalibur renders the wearer invulnerable to any mortal wounds.

The way I see it is the Magic just improves their natural skills.

Excalibur was a +5 sword possessed by a 10th level fighter with really high attributes across the board and 2 or 3 mythic tiers. in a world where NPCs rarely exceeded 5th level. the only race in said campaign was Human, with the exception of a few CR8 or less magical beings that had the requirement of being able to pass themselves off as humans and a bunch of animals.


I wouldn't even say he had any Stat above 15 except for CHA at 18...


Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
but relying on permanent magical equipment doesn't feel very heroic either. unless you are playing something along the lines, King Arthur, Aragorn, Eragon Shadeslayer, or Elric. i would prefer that the inherant bonuses be a part of the Hero themselves, not the benefit of relying on some cheap trinket. i know i would have to drastically modify pathfinder to make that work. but tequilla sunrise has a good starting point and i could make tweaks from there.

Obviously everyone's mileage may vary on what they think feels heroic. For myself I feel perfectly comfortable playing a low-magic campaign, but using magic items with static bonuses doesn't bother me overly much as it doesn't really change the character's MO. That is to say that if I am playing "guy who chops people up with a sword", he chops people up with a sword whether he has a non-magical sword or a +5 sword and +6 Belt of Physical Perfection. Mechanically the magical gear makes him better at what he does, but thematically and how he plays still remains the same.

To expand further on why I find consumable characters unintersting and unheroic to play, once you start dipping heavily into the consumables tactical situations start becoming less about how my character will creatively overcome disadvantageous obstacles and more about pulling contingency plan #27 out of my handy haversack and applying to solve. So, for example, when playing a melee focused martial faced with archers on a balcony, I could play:

1) The boring full-attack fighter that has to climb up a hanging tapestry while dodging arrows to leap onto the balcony and carve guys up

or:

2) the guy who made smart purchases and just pops a fly potion

Guy #2 might be more effective and perhaps even more realistic in a world with heavy magic for sale, but I still want to play Guy #1.


The Oddity wrote:
Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
but relying on permanent magical equipment doesn't feel very heroic either. unless you are playing something along the lines, King Arthur, Aragorn, Eragon Shadeslayer, or Elric. i would prefer that the inherant bonuses be a part of the Hero themselves, not the benefit of relying on some cheap trinket. i know i would have to drastically modify pathfinder to make that work. but tequilla sunrise has a good starting point and i could make tweaks from there.

Obviously everyone's mileage may vary on what they think feels heroic. For myself I feel perfectly comfortable playing a low-magic campaign, but using magic items with static bonuses doesn't bother me overly much as it doesn't really change the character's MO. That is to say that if I am playing "guy who chops people up with a sword", he chops people up with a sword whether he has a non-magical sword or a +5 sword and +6 Belt of Physical Perfection. Mechanically the magical gear makes him better at what he does, but thematically and how he plays still remains the same.

To expand further on why I find consumable characters unintersting and unheroic to play, once you start dipping heavily into the consumables tactical situations start becoming less about how my character will creatively overcome disadvantageous obstacles and more about pulling contingency plan #27 out of my handy haversack and applying to solve. So, for example, when playing a melee focused martial faced with archers on a balcony, I could play:

1) The boring full-attack fighter that has to climb up a hanging tapestry while dodging arrows to leap onto the balcony and carve guys up

or:

2) the guy who made smart purchases and just pops a fly potion

Guy #2 might be more effective and perhaps even more realistic in a world with heavy magic for sale, but I still want to play Guy #1.

or Guy #3 invest some resources into archery and shoot them with your composite bow as you close, using the cover of terrain to your advantage, until you can climb the tapestry, taking a -5 to make an accelarated climb, and just before you reach the top, grab one of the archers by the foot, yank him down and toss him multiple floors to the ground, clearing room to finish your your climb, and fight off the rest with your quickly drawn steel shafted glaive and steel cesti and following step feat. making it difficult for them to fire as you utilize your combat reflexes whenever possible.


So far, only PFS play, consumables seem to be used only for:

stuff found during adventures
stuff pregens carry
wands bought with 2pp
and some 50gp lvl 1 potions

this suggests a problem with consumables

2 things off the top of my head, at least for PFS:

let us buy wands with less than 50 charges
let us buy cheaper ammunition

also, probably for everybody, 1/2 price on 2nd level potions, 1/3 on 3rd, 1/4 on 4th... same for scrolls, wands

and go ahead and make them more abundant for BBEG

consumables change the nature of the game. do we want them to be used or not? I say yes. And currently, there seems to be a problem with their pricing.


I love consumables. I hate to buy them.

If I ever buy them I feel like "No, I don't wanna WASTE it on this, save it for when it's important".

If I find them in the treasure trove I pop 'em in the ol' Haversack and use them when they would become vaguely useful. Except healing potions, I always forget I have them (mostly because we have a healbot Cleric).

Alchemist's Fire, Magic Potions, whatever, I'll use 'em all up. As long as I don't have to pay for them. I especially like the Necklace of Fireballs, if that counts. I tend to be miserly with them more than other things, but having a melee character that can chuck Fireballs in a pinch is a godsend.


Rynjin wrote:
I especially like the Necklace of Fireballs, if that counts. I tend to be miserly with them more than other things, but having a melee character that can chuck Fireballs in a pinch is a godsend.

Grenade!

Seriously though: My group(s) tend to craft any consumables we/they need. We will especially enjoy the Grenades in UE.


^My Monk is currently carrying 5 Grenades on a Bandolier.

The other 3 spots are taken up by flasks of whiskey.

You may scream in terror now.


Rynjin wrote:

^My Monk is currently carrying 5 Grenades on a Bandolier.

The other 3 spots are taken up by flasks of whiskey.

You may scream in terror now.

Actually all I could think of is my Gunslinger inspired by the Colton White from GUN.

I still can't stop laughing...

Cheliax

voska66 wrote:
No ever buy magic arrows though.

You should always buy one adamantine arrow-even if you don't have a bow.

Break off the shaft, and keep the arrowhead in your shoe. If you're ever captured, you pull it out and use it to dig out of your cell/break out of your chains/cut open the door. Adamantine Ignores hardness. You can get out in just a few minutes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Except every time you take a step, it would puncture the sole of your shoe, and you would keep having to pick it up and replace your shoe. /trollface


@Darkholme: Adamantine Boot Knife works the same.


Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:

What about you? Do you and/or your group make effective use of consumables?

Or do you just sell them for a small amount cash to buy weaker permanent magic items?

I can only speak for the group I play with but we nearly never use consumbales. We definately never actually look for or buy them.

If we find an especially nice one in loot we'll use it but our GM runs a very high power game. Mosty consumable items are too weak to be useful during a battle.

The biggest exeption are scrolls. Scroll's go to the appropriate classes who can use them and get scribed or sold. Our GM does a psuedo spell book even for divine casters as a house rule. Any divine caster has to 'learn' a 'prayer' before being able to cast it as a spell so divine scrolls get copied into a 'prayer book' so the divine casters can 'learn' it to know later.

Oddly if the divine caster loses the prayer book they do NOT lose their knowledge of the prayers or even have to replaced the book. But you need to put the spell IN the book to ever have access.

But most wands and potions are just too weak at the default levels they are made at to justify buying them. We just save up and get a reusable item of some sort. Otherwise we feel like we are throwing away cash.

Cheliax

@Azaelas Fayth

Arrowheads are easier to hide. You can slip it in your sock without hurting yourself, you can make a sheathe for it inside the lining of your boot, you could put it in the sole of the boot if youre clever about it.

If you go with the boot knife, the handle makes it harder to conceal.

Aside from that, I'm almost certain the arrow is cheaper.

51 to 100 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Consumable Magic Items - For or Against? 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.