Additional Resources update rant


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 109 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.

(Decided to start a new thread to avoid the clogging of the updates thread as was suggested)
Long rant incoming…
I’m very disappointed by the latest updates from the Additional Resources. Many things were banned, apparently with no rhyme or reason I can see. I’m going to go over the ones that I read and stuck out in my mind.

Races of the Inner Sea:

  • Eclipse Strike: I don’t see why, with all the dirty tricks that do the same thing? Especially with Tieflings getting rarer.
  • True Breed: Sad to see that a ‘must be first level’ feat is added. I mean yes, you can take the three feats that allow you to do this from other books, but it’s not like we’ve not seen a feat that bypasses other feats making them ‘better’ (Hi Dirty Fighting!) This is why my Arcanist has been sitting at first level, FWIW.
  • Elven Arrogance: I could see this in the ‘disruptive table’ attitude, but really the character will be so hosed if they don’t spend a skill point on linguistics and take Taldane that I don’t worry much about it.
  • Disciplined Body: Really? A once a day stat switch is banned?
  • Weapon Training: Because a +1 to damage is so unbalancing (Axe to grind, blade of the society, havoc of the society, dirty fighter, vengeful..) or because it shares a name with another class ability *coughSKALDcough*
  • Weathered Patience: Because if you ready an action, once a day getting a bonus to be the big damn hero might ruin the game
  • Innovative: Because we can’t have missionaries and diplomancers?
  • Isolated: See Elven Arrogance, above. The worth of the trait is a different topic.
  • Tribalistic: Umm, I don’t see any reason for this to be banned, unless a) someone worried about an all Kellid party or b) someone worried about a group of Tribalistic humans, Isolated Oreads and Arrogant elves walking into a scenario (hey, makes for a quick 0xp 0gp 0pp sheet for me as GM)
    (Positive, glad to see the nipped ‘obsessed with success vs day job argument in the bud)
    (Aside, might want to add ‘blood of X’ to the phrasing “The racial heritages section from page 236–254 is a legal resource when qualifying to play a character of a different race, much as if the player owned a copy of the corresponding Bestiary or Advanced Race Guide.”)

    Blood of the moon

  • Completely off topic, but I think you *should* be able to choose the “If you associate with” feats if you have a Prince of Wolves chronicle sheet, but that’s just me 

    Dirty Tactics Toolbox

  • Wasp Familiar: Um, why? It’s not like we don’t have religion specific traits, fighting styles and deity specific feats. (Iomedean Sword Oath, Pantheistic Blessing) Or that it’s better than the ‘three feats to a familiar’ trick (Oh, hi Dirty Fighting that allows me to qualify for all sorts of stuff I’d need stats and other feats to get normally. And I can trade out a +2 to not essentially pull all the improved combat maneuvers out of my hat when I’m flanking?) I mean this is campaign setting specific, and very flavourful. And this is coming from the guy whose bard has a 100 gp ‘tramp stamp’ holy symbol tattoo of Calistra. Not for mechanical advantage, but because it’s flavourful.
  • Alchemical Pheromones: See Calistra, follower of.

    Heroes of the Streets

  • Illustrious Urbanite: Because we can’t have that +4 bonus on day job checks. I mean you’d need to be an arcane caster to get a +5 or an Alchemist or a bard with a 6pp vanity to do things like that. No, Dwarves just need to hit things harder.
  • Eldritch Archer: A ranged magus that works? Can’t have that.
  • Cunning Caster: Because Pathfinders are murder hobos, so they can’t subtly do anything.
  • Guild Emissary: Hey, heaven forbid those exchange characters actually belong to a guild and have another way to do the gather information. I mean a feat that replaces another that’s unheard o- oh, hello Dirty Fighting.
  • Subtle devices: See Cunning Caster, above.
  • Underworld connections: See Guild Emissary above.
  • Cat Burglar’s kit: I’m guessing that it’s because of the Masterwork Backpack. I mean we can’t just change things as they’re written. Oh, hi true breed feat. Have we met?
  • Diminishing sash: Because 2500 in components for 5000 gp is unbalancing, I guess. Or 100 GP for a +1 Caster level is game breaking (hides his alchemical components)
  • Eerie disappearance: No, you can’t be Batman.
  • Coin Shot: No idea why. Is throwing gold at the target only for gunslingers?
  • Ears of the city: Hey, it’s a way to make those annoying gather information checks. We can’t have that!
  • Secret Coffer: Why yes, it can be unbalancing to have a tiny space where things can’t be detec- oh I can buy a pathfinder pouch that does the same thing, is twice the size, and doesn’t have a chance of spilling my stuff into the ether? For only twice the price?
  • Wiscrani ear: Because taking 10 is so game breaking. I’d better hide my bards.

    Aside: I’m sad to see we still can’t use the fixed version of the scorpion whip. And that blood transcription is still illegal.

    To sum up, I’m very disappointed in the lack of rhyme or reason seeming in these decisions. Some things were banned that were flavorful (Tribalistic, Illustrious Urbanite) Campaign setting friendly (Wasp Familiar) or just plain useful (ears of the city). I do think the ban hammer was used too liberally on these recent additions, and needs to be revisited.

  • Grand Lodge 5/5 *

    I will just comment on your last line... it is much, MUCH easier to open a thing than it is to take it away. Also, the updates just posted were being vetted during the period that our Campaign Coordinator slot was unfilled - a number of items likely were given an initial 'not legal' tag for future consideration once we had a single campaign head again. It may not be immediate, as Tonya has a whole buffet load (bigger than her plate!) to both catch up on AND new things both. But I wouldn't rule out some of this getting a nod /later/ once the vision of the campaign going forward is more visible to us.

    I wouldn't rule any of this out permanently, even if it isn't available to us immediately.

    (Edit to note: This is not intended to imply a rebuke for commenting on your disappointment - that's a very valid point to make - just noting that these choices are likely less permanent than most of our updates have been in the past.)

    Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Thank you for the reply Sean. I'm just really annoyed about a couple of the things I saw.

    OTOH, I was sorting the basement this morning and found my wayward oread boon, so I at least can play that concept :-)

    Liberty's Edge 1/5

    Matthew Morris wrote:

    ............

  • Elven Arrogance: I could see this in the ‘disruptive table’ attitude, but really the character will be so hosed if they don’t spend a skill point on linguistics and take Taldane that I don’t worry much about it.
    .................
  • So the problem I see with this one is that the Current society rules grant Common to every character that does not already have it, so Elven Arrogance has "no" cost. It becomes an always take option because you are granted Common anyway.

    4/5

    Here's the mystery for me from DTT:

    Quote:
    the Kitsune Tricks and Kitsune's Vengeance feats are not style feats

    That line mystified me last night. I have no concept of what the rationale for this was other than MoMS wildcarding. That is some really weird campaign houseruling, IMO.

    Silver Crusade 5/5

    Serisan wrote:

    Here's the mystery for me from DTT:

    Quote:
    the Kitsune Tricks and Kitsune's Vengeance feats are not style feats
    That line mystified me last night. I have no concept of what the rationale for this was other than MoMS wildcarding. That is some really weird campaign houseruling, IMO.

    Well, based on pretty much all of the other styles, typically only the first feat in the line of styles is actually a "style feat." Check out UC, Crane Style is a style feat, whereas Crane Wing and Riposte are not. So, that made sense to me.

    Edit: I looked at some player companions that also have style chains, and that does not actually appear to be a consistent thing, which is somewhat annoying.

    Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***** Venture-Captain, Texas—Austin

    UndeadMitch wrote:

    ...

    Yeh I agree with this one. In general, only the first feat in the chain should have the style descriptor, since things like the unarmed fighter get 1 free style feat with ignoring pre-reqs.

    Also, I am very sad to see that coin shot didn't make it in. It was great flavor and not terribly powerful either.

    Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

    Coin shot annoys me because I had the concept of archaeologist who has the telekinetic attack knack via two worlds magic and coin shot. So he can go all gambit with pocket change.

    Sigh next additional resources update will likely say that you can't use two worlds magic to get knacks...

    Sovereign Court

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    The only one I cared about was coin shot, I love the idea and was really hoping it'd get in. That being said, I'm not surprised. It's not only possibly having to track your players' individual coin loss during the game, but requires tracking what kind of coins they carry. That's probably more than they wanted to bother the GM with.

    Of course, I'd gladly start splitting my money evenly between all four coin types if Coin Shot ever gets legalized.

    Silver Crusade 2/5 RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

    Just came in here to say I'm also very unhappy to see Wasp Familiar is not legal. I'll definitely be pushing hard to see that one legalized.

    Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***** Venture-Captain, Texas—Austin

    Matthew Morris wrote:
    Illustrious Urbanite:

    Just as a heads up, what was banned was the elf alternate racial trait gave you spell focus in exchange for loses keen senses, not the dwarf one (thats Industrious Urbanite)

    Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

    Thanks for the catch. It is too late to edit now :-(

    Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

    7 people marked this as a favorite.

    I won't begrudge anyone a good rant, especially since there was a fair amount in Heroes of the Streets that was initially tagged as not legal.

    That said, when it comes to changing the content of the Additional Resources page, the team tends to make changes based on a reasoned argument made in good faith. A little later today I might be able to discuss the team's reasoning for some of these options.

    Silver Crusade 3/5 5/5

    I'm curious as to why purchasable exotic animals are still allowed such as a tiger. My thought is that you can only have a combat animal if it's 1) used as a mount or 2) a class feature.

    Being able to just outright buy a tiger at level 5, to me, ruins the specialty of classes that get an animal companion.

    3/5

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pennydude wrote:

    I'm curious as to why purchasable exotic animals are still allowed such as a tiger. My thought is that you can only have a combat animal if it's 1) used as a mount or 2) a class feature.

    Being able to just outright buy a tiger at level 5, to me, ruins the specialty of classes that get an animal companion.

    Animal companion classes still get to handle animal as a free action or push as a move... Any bought pet does not have that advantage, does not get any class-related bonuses, and can never progress just being that static statblock of a pet. Most characters without animal companions also typically have to struggle to raise their handle animal.

    I honestly feel the new change of pet CR = character level - 1 is absolutely spot on.

    4/5

    UndeadMitch wrote:
    Serisan wrote:

    Here's the mystery for me from DTT:

    Quote:
    the Kitsune Tricks and Kitsune's Vengeance feats are not style feats
    That line mystified me last night. I have no concept of what the rationale for this was other than MoMS wildcarding. That is some really weird campaign houseruling, IMO.

    Well, based on pretty much all of the other styles, typically only the first feat in the line of styles is actually a "style feat." Check out UC, Crane Style is a style feat, whereas Crane Wing and Riposte are not. So, that made sense to me.

    Edit: I looked at some player companions that also have style chains, and that does not actually appear to be a consistent thing, which is somewhat annoying.

    Ahh, so that's fixing an editing error more than a houserule. Got it.

    5/5 5/55/55/5

    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    Constable.....why on earth did that get banned

    Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

    John,

    Give me time and I'll come up with a much more reasoned and less snarky argument for the stuff I want. :-) I just wanted to get it off my chest and look forward to some of the reasoning.

    Liberty's Edge 4/5

    I noticed myself that a lot of these choices were rather odd.. the only one I particurarly wanted was Wasp Familiar, and I really don't understand how that one got banned. Sure, it might only take one feat to get a familiar instead of two or three, but it's restricted to a single choice and flavor.

    Maybe they plan to put it on a chronicle?..

    Scarab Sages 5/5

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I know many of the players in my area will be disappointed that the magus archetype didn't make the cut. They've been looking forward to that one for over a month.

    Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

    shadowhntr7 wrote:
    Maybe they plan to put it on a chronicle?..

    This is my assumption for most things that are banned that are a) not overpowered and b) very flavorful.

    2/5 *

    Putting Wasp Familiar on a Chronicle Sheet seems silly since its already so restricted the odds of you playing it with the proper character are astronomical unless its done as it unlocks it for all characters like a few other the rare boons do.

    Silver Crusade 4/5

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Gamerskum wrote:
    Putting Wasp Familiar on a Chronicle Sheet seems silly since its already so restricted the odd of you playing it with the proper character are astronomical unless its done as it unlocks it for all characters like a few other the rare boons do.

    It wouldn't have to be on an adventure chronicle. It could be a convention boon, like the race boons, that could be applied to a new PC.

    Really, I'm surprised they haven't done stuff like improved familiars that aren't usually available or intelligent items as convention boons. They've been on the occasional adventure, but putting them on a convention boon would be more popular than the non-race boons they give out at conventions now.

    3/5

    You had me at 'flavorful tramp stamp.'

    Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

    3 people marked this as a favorite.

    I had the opportunity the morning to discuss design philosophies, the organized play campaign, and several specific character options currently not allowed through the Additional Resources. I there are some of these that the Pathfinder Society team might revisit in the near future following some clarifications on how certain features work.

    1/5

    Is the archer magus one that might get a review and allowed? I haven't read the archetype yet but I've heard a lot of excited talk about it.

    Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

    thank you for the updates. Still want arguments for the inclusion of stuff, or should I shut up and wait to see if the wasp familiar makes it ;-)

    Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Matthew Morris wrote:
    thank you for the updates. Still want arguments for the inclusion of stuff, or should I shut up and wait to see if the wasp familiar makes it ;-)

    You're welcome to make a case for any rules element.

    4/5

    OK, I pledge to work on drafting a compelling good-faith argument for the Constable, but it probably won't be posted tonight. Any particular features I should focus on?

    Sovereign Court 5/5

    Id still like to see clarification on the skinwalker batform vrs dire batform.

    5/5 5/55/55/5

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Eric Ives wrote:
    OK, I pledge to work on drafting a compelling good-faith argument for the Constable, but it probably won't be posted tonight. Any particular features I should focus on?

    Definitely hard to come up with an argument for why something should be included when you don't know why it got hit with the ban hammer.

    Liberty's Edge 5/5

    BigNorseWolf wrote:
    Eric Ives wrote:
    OK, I pledge to work on drafting a compelling good-faith argument for the Constable, but it probably won't be posted tonight. Any particular features I should focus on?
    Definitely hard to come up with an argument for why something should be included when you don't know why it got hit with the ban hammer.

    Try to think like campaign leadership and judge the archetype on power, interaction with other abilities and feats, how it interacts with campaign specific rules (e.g. evil, crafting, leadership, etc.)

    If you can't think of a single reason after legitimately playing devil's advocate with yourself, then use that as your argument. But list the various reasons you think it might be illegal and explain why that reason doesn't apply.

    Shadow Lodge

    Matthew Morris wrote:
  • Eldritch Archer: A ranged magus that works? Can’t have that.
  • Wait, what? Dangit, I have a magus I'm playing as an arcane archer that can't use most of his class features that would have loved a better archetype than myrmidarch...

    4/5

    Andrew Christian wrote:
    BigNorseWolf wrote:
    Eric Ives wrote:
    OK, I pledge to work on drafting a compelling good-faith argument for the Constable, but it probably won't be posted tonight. Any particular features I should focus on?
    Definitely hard to come up with an argument for why something should be included when you don't know why it got hit with the ban hammer.

    Try to think like campaign leadership and judge the archetype on power, interaction with other abilities and feats, how it interacts with campaign specific rules (e.g. evil, crafting, leadership, etc.)

    If you can't think of a single reason after legitimately playing devil's advocate with yourself, then use that as your argument. But list the various reasons you think it might be illegal and explain why that reason doesn't apply.

    Thanks. The question was intended for John.

    I used to make my living arguing with a certain government agency that doesn't always articulate its rejections well, so I'm in familiar territory.

    5/5

    3 people marked this as a favorite.

    Reasons for Wasp familiar being banned.

    Imp stat line mauler familiar that can use manufactured weapons, enough said.

    Honestly if that were legal every one of my spell casters with familiars would worship Calistra(the goddess of super easy to follow). Why? Because it is a superior improved familiar that doesn't piss off paladins. I could seriously go on for hours about the ill thought the mechanics of this feat were for game balance. Thank you for banning it.

    Grand Lodge 4/5

    Eric Ives wrote:
    Andrew Christian wrote:
    BigNorseWolf wrote:
    Eric Ives wrote:
    OK, I pledge to work on drafting a compelling good-faith argument for the Constable, but it probably won't be posted tonight. Any particular features I should focus on?
    Definitely hard to come up with an argument for why something should be included when you don't know why it got hit with the ban hammer.

    Try to think like campaign leadership and judge the archetype on power, interaction with other abilities and feats, how it interacts with campaign specific rules (e.g. evil, crafting, leadership, etc.)

    If you can't think of a single reason after legitimately playing devil's advocate with yourself, then use that as your argument. But list the various reasons you think it might be illegal and explain why that reason doesn't apply.

    Thanks. The question was intended for John.

    I used to make my living arguing with a certain government agency that doesn't always articulate its rejections well, so I'm in familiar territory.

    Eric, one suggestion: Look for the thread on Magical Knack that got it unbanned, and you will see one of the best formats and concepts to follow for this kind of request. Post was in the thread named Balance by Jiggy, around post 16.

    Liberty's Edge 4/5

    Mahtobedis: It has the statistics of an imp, not it's form. So no manufactured weapons. They also won't be proficient in them, so you'd have to spend a feat on it- which I don't think you can. Granted, I've yet to play a character with a familiar, so I'm not sure about the PFS rulings on that particular part.

    Also, your familiar wouldn't gain the at-will invisibility or the ability to speak/use UMD which makes imps so good.

    Shadow Lodge

    shadowhntr7 wrote:
    They also won't be proficient in them, so you'd have to spend a feat on it- which I don't think you can.

    The eldritch guardian's familiar shares the master's combat feats that its form is compatible with; if they're physically capable of wielding weapons, then that would include weapon proficiencies.

    Grand Lodge

    I was shocked about Cunning Caster.

    Being discreet seems like a thing that a Pathfinder might actually want to do, from time to time.

    I am just scratching my head, trying to figure out why it is no something wanted in PFS.

    2/5 *

    James Wygle wrote:
    shadowhntr7 wrote:
    They also won't be proficient in them, so you'd have to spend a feat on it- which I don't think you can.
    The eldritch guardian's familiar shares the master's combat feats that its form is compatible with; if they're physically capable of wielding weapons, then that would include weapon proficiencies.

    And a Wasp isn't physically capable.

    Grand Lodge

    Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
    Matthew Morris wrote:


    Tribalistic: Umm, I don’t see any reason for this to be banned, unless a) someone worried about an all Kellid party or b) someone worried about a group of Tribalistic humans, Isolated Oreads and Arrogant elves walking into a scenario (hey, makes for a quick 0xp 0gp 0pp sheet for me as GM)

    It might be hard to imagine a truly tribal person submitting to the Absalom Boot Camp all Pathfinders go through, or remaining tribal after those years of training.

    4/5

    Public Apology to John.

    It was no way my intention to imply that John was in any way similar to a government agency of questionable skill at articulating issues. I fully understand that John has very good reasons for not discussing some of the logic behind the decisions. I have great respect for John and obviously he has excellent communication skills. I merely meant that I have had experience in advocating for something when the issues had not been clearly articulated to me, and I was looking forward to the challenge. I'm very sorry that what I wrote could be read as disrespectful and am very sorry for any negative feelings I may have caused.

    4/5

    LazarX wrote:
    Matthew Morris wrote:


    Tribalistic: Umm, I don’t see any reason for this to be banned, unless a) someone worried about an all Kellid party or b) someone worried about a group of Tribalistic humans, Isolated Oreads and Arrogant elves walking into a scenario (hey, makes for a quick 0xp 0gp 0pp sheet for me as GM)

    It might be hard to imagine a truly tribal person submitting to the Absalom Boot Camp all Pathfinders go through, or remaining tribal after those years of training.

    This falls under the "you give up Common as a language" ban. It is one of the most justifiable RP bans the Society has.

    Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

    blackbloodtroll wrote:

    I was shocked about Cunning Caster.

    Being discreet seems like a thing that a Pathfinder might actually want to do, from time to time.

    I am just scratching my head, trying to figure out why it is no something wanted in PFS.

    If you look closely you'll see that the other feats that make spellcasting and magic item activation inconspicuous were also banned. Maybe it has something to do with the ongoing dispute about how visible spellcasting is in itself?

    It is an inconsistent policy however with allowing Secret Signs, which does something similar.

    Grand Lodge

    This was a rules-hassle-free way of going about inconspicuous casting.

    Is that not the opposite of disruptive?

    5/5

    shadowhntr7 wrote:

    Mahtobedis: It has the statistics of an imp, not it's form. So no manufactured weapons. They also won't be proficient in them, so you'd have to spend a feat on it- which I don't think you can. Granted, I've yet to play a character with a familiar, so I'm not sure about the PFS rulings on that particular part.

    Also, your familiar wouldn't gain the at-will invisibility or the ability to speak/use UMD which makes imps so good.

    By the RAW, which in this case is silly, the familiar gains the statistics of an imp(two levels early I might add) except for some spell like abilities that change. It does not mention a different body type so the wasp also gets the body type of an imp including the ability to use manufactured weapons.

    Was that intended? I certainly hope not, but it is the RAW for that feat.

    Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

    I think you have Illustrious Urbanite mixed up with Industrious Urbanite (understandably). The one that got banned is the elf's virtually free Spell Focus, not the dwarf's Craft bonus. ^_^

    I'd like a Wasp Familiar too, but I understand why they might have had concerns - one feat for an even better greensting scorpion may have been a bit much for campaign leadership. The free Improved Initiative is like the cherry on top.

    I have an elf conjurer that would really like to start with Augment Summoning, so I hope Illustrious Urbanite becomes legal. Not exactly holding my breath though.

    Also, I'm curious what it was about Constable that got it banned - that's another one that I wouldn't mind giving a whirl sometime.


    I have to second those who are arguing that Wasp Familiar is too good. Familiars are a somewhat unbalanced mess and with the right archetype can equate to something like 3 feats in power level.

    I am also in the camp of those not going d'accor with the banning of Constable. My reasoning being that I've been trying to break it since the book came out and I couldn't come up with a build that overachieves compared to other Cavalier Archetypes or the Samurai. Now maybe the campaign leadership (in contrast to 99% of players) is of the opinion that the Cavalier is actually a really strong class then I might understand but just by looking at the Archetype I don't see anything that is overpowered only one ability that is very poorly worded and might lead to some confusion.

    Also from a business perspective the outright banning of the Eldritch Archer seems a poor decision. It's one of those things very many people have been wanting for years and I suppose one of the motivations for a lot of folks to buy the book. However from a mechanical perspective is not well executed (i.e. too good) and is subsequently banned for understandable balance concerns. However this decision leaves those eager to play it and who shelled out dollars to do so somewhat disappointed and questioning whether they should make this sort of investment in the future.

    5/5 5/55/55/5

    Alex Mack wrote:
    . However this decision leaves those eager to play it and who shelled out dollars to do so somewhat disappointed and questioning whether they should make this sort of investment in the future.

    Its triage. Its not a good solution but its a better solution than having people get roflcoptered and walk away from the game.

    5/5 5/55/55/5

    Walter Sheppard wrote:
    shadowhntr7 wrote:
    Maybe they plan to put it on a chronicle?..
    This is my assumption for most things that are banned that are a) not overpowered and b) very flavorful.

    Labeling those would be really handy. PC planned chronicle, * it , or something.

    1 to 50 of 109 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Additional Resources update rant All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.