Discussion on content from Occult Mysteries in PFS


Pathfinder Society


In order to not clog the Harrow Blog thread here, I'm going to start up the discussion in this thread.

So what logically shouldn't be included in PFS? Off the top of my head, Sacred Geometry. It adds too many dice and too much number crunching to the table, which means it eats up time from the game. Too much time for something that might not even work.

Arithmancy is somewhat okay, but there are going to be some severe limitations. First, player has to have the book on hand. Second, player will have to have done the work ahead of time. I mean they will have to determine the numeric value of the spell before considering using Arithmancy to improve it, and they will have to provide the proof on that. The check afterwards is simple and has already defined results and drawbacks.


Yeah, I just discovered the Sacred Geometry feat. I have no idea what it's supposed to do, other than be a dream feat for anyone who likes to hog the spotlight.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Looks like math of power! to me.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I have been training for Sacred Geometry my whole life.

Dark Archive 4/5 5/55/5 ****

James McTeague wrote:
I have been training for Sacred Geometry my whole life.

I had the same thought when I saw it, and it made me want to make a character that used it so I had a reason to play 24 (or x) again.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

I want the Numerology stuff to be included, because it adds a good deal of flavor, but I can understand why it wouldn't be allowed.

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

DrParty06 wrote:
James McTeague wrote:
I have been training for Sacred Geometry my whole life.
I had the same thought when I saw it, and it made me want to make a character that used it so I had a reason to play 24 (or x) again.

I immediately thought it looked awesome. Then I realized that there were an awful lot of permutations. Then I thought about the math skills of some of the players I have met. Then I actually started figuring out the possible permutations.

As soon as I realized that 5 dice had 1,382,400 permutations, I said to myself "There is no way this should ever see PFS play. It's too dependent on the player instead of the character."

Spoiler:
You have to use a timer. And at that point you are penalizing player ability, not character choices.

Also, it actually gets easier as you get more dice. It's the 5-7 dice range or so that's going to be the roughest as players struggle to get close to one of their target numbers, then find they have only one or two dice left that don't work together to hit the mark.

Shadow Lodge *

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

I'd *love* to see Sacred Geometry approved. But then, I competed in high-speed math computation. :)

If it is approved, it should have a timer, something in the 30 - 60 sec range.

But actually, I think my favorite are the I Ching Path of Numbers spells. Those look seriously awesome, and an alternative to Harrow-themed randomicity.

4/5

Simply put, you can't wait until your own turn to decide to use Sacred Geometry. You have to decide the spell, roll the dice and at least start the calculations while other players are doing their turns, then announce the results on your own turn.

If I have a player using it at my table, I'll let them announce what they're doing, then give them 6 seconds to start explaining the math. If they haven't started explaining by the time I count to 6, I'll put them in delay. I will, on some character (PFS or not), at some point in time use this feat, and that's how I'll play it myself.

There's usually plenty of time to do whatever calculations you want while everyone else is doing there thing. You've just got to use that time productively. And yeah, things will change, and you might have spent a ton of time calculating out a selective dazing Fireball only to have to change to Dispell Magic at the last moment. That happens, it happens to your character, too. Adapt, overcome, and quit yer whining.

But yeah, I think this has potential to be at least as slow and disruptive as Master Summoners and likely not a good candidate for PFS.

Shadow Lodge 3/5

Don't you have until the beginning of your next turn to determine if it works or not?

If I was GMing with a player who had that feat, I'd ask to read the feat before the game started. When combat comes and it's their turn, they have to declare what metamagic feats they want to apply and what level that'll up the spell to - then get started on their rolls and working out the equation. If they haven't got it by the time their turn comes around again, they'd lose the spell etc as if there's no combination.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Avatar-1 - only if they are a spontanteous caster. For prepared casters it takes a full-round action. (and if it's quickened, then this is still a swift action.)

And really, this doesn't take as long as people think it does if you know what you're doing. A couple of tests earlier today for me had me taking an additional 30 seconds on the hard ones. It's like summoning - if you're going to take the feat, you need to sit down and be prepared to resolve your turn quickly.

2/5

Sacred Geometry looks cool, on paper, but I too am a bit worried about how it would work out in actual execution... For PFS in particular.

4/5

I have to go with this not being great for PFS play. I think it would be both difficult to compute, and difficult to check for a GM.
This is a feat that would be contentious in a home game. Doing it in Society just sounds like it would just be painfully overcomplicated.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

In short, while I love the flavor of Arithmancy and Sacred Geometry, they are perhaps the most unwieldy game mechanics I have ever witnessed from a d20 system. Most of the spells are not as bad, but would still require several moments to roll out, compare to the chart, and assign.

I believe that adding them to PFS's additional resources would not be wise decision for maintaining the time slot issues.

Shadow Lodge *

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Lormyr wrote:

In short, while I love the flavor of Arithmancy and Sacred Geometry, they are perhaps the most unwieldy game mechanics I have ever witnessed from a d20 system. Most of the spells are not as bad, but would still require several moments to roll out, compare to the chart, and assign.

I believe that adding them to PFS's additional resources would not be wise decision for maintaining the time slot issues.

Given that Harrowing feats have just been legalized for PFS, do you think that the spells would be appreciably slower than those? (Just talking about the spells, now -- as much as I love Arithmancy & Sacred Geometry I agree with you on those.)

5/5 *****

Arithmancy looks fine provided the player does the working out before the actually start to play. The feat is OK from a mechanical point of view, +1 caster level for a relatively low spellcraft DC check might be worth a feat slot.

Sacred Geometry is just madness in every conceivable way. It's like the authors ignored everything anyone learned about giving away free metamagic from 3.0 and 3.5. I can only think someone had some sort of aneurism when writing this. Added to that it potentially adds a significant amount of table handling time to the game if you have a less than proficient player.

I can only hope it is never allowed into PFS as it has the potential to wreck an entire tables experience as every combat encounter either grinds to a shuddering halt or is trivially eliminated with some abusive metamagic combination.

Silver Crusade 4/5

I think the key to making Sacred Geometry work without slowing down the table would just be to discuss it with the GM and make your first few rolls before the session even starts. You know how many dice you'll be rolling whenever you use it, so why not roll in advance to get your numbers for the first 3-5 times you use it in a session? Then you can spend the next hour doing the math to calculate prime numbers based on those rolls, so you're all prepared before it comes up in combat.

Silver Crusade 4/5 5/55/55/5 RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8

I personally don't think that this would slow down the table much more than a high level character calculating their damage (with the caveat as previously posted that the math is done before your turn comes up). Also, just like I've almost never seen a GM check a player's math when calculating damage I don't see why they would chaeck a player's math when using these feats.

Dark Archive 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

Precomputation tables of "dice results, numbers, done" are entirely achievable.

2/5

I feel like letting people pre roll the dice is a little too generous on an already pretty ridiculous feat. There is no set time limit but having to figure out the math is the limiting element to the feat and the more time you allow the stronger the feat becomes.
I cant see the feat being legal but if somehow it slips through I personally will just take players at their word. "Okay your feat worked and your wayang spellhunter magical lineage empowered fireball is now also persistent? And dazing from a rod? No, none make the save. Alright well in the room you find..."

Lantern Lodge 3/5

pH unbalanced wrote:
Given that Harrowing feats have just been legalized for PFS, do you think that the spells would be appreciably slower than those? (Just talking about the spells, now -- as much as I love Arithmancy & Sacred Geometry I agree with you on those.)

Do you refer to the numerology spells from Occult Mysteries? If so, I think most of them could be completed relatively quickly. That is dependent on the player having the chart in front of them and sorting their dice rolls quickly, though. I do believe that it would be noticeably longer than casting another spell for even a very quick player, however.

All in all, my personal opinion is the entire numerology section, spells included, are just too clunky in execution.

Silver Crusade 4/5 5/55/55/5 RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8

Chris O'Reilly wrote:
I feel like letting people pre roll the dice is a little too generous on an already pretty ridiculous feat.

Pre-rolling dice (attack and damage) is a pretty common method to help speed up high level play. I don't see how this is any different. It is speeding up play, it isn't making the feat more powerful unless the GM is going to impose a time limit which doesn't appear anywhere in the rules.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Discussion on content from Occult Mysteries in PFS All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Society