Guide 4.2 and Changes to Pathfinder Society Organized Play

Monday, August 6, 2012

With Gen Con just 10 days away, I wanted to release the new and improved Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play, Version 4.2 today so everyone has an opportunity to review it and discuss it before Gen Con. With the help of the Venture-Captains and Venture-Lieutenants, and specifically the tireless efforts of Boston Venture-Captain Don Walker to help me with wordsmithing, we have added several much-needed changes that we think will improve your experiences in Pathfinder Society play.

Most notably, the following changes will go into effect on August 16 when Season 4 kicks off at Gen Con:

  • We added three new races to character creation for all players to choose from: aasimar, tengu, and tiefling.
  • Scenarios and sanctioned module now have one unified set of rules for applying Chronicle sheets to pregenerated characters.
  • Added all hardcover rulebooks to the Core Assumption for GMs and advised that GMs can refer to the Pathfinder Reference Document for rules from any books they don’t own.
  • Updated text so GMs are now allowed to take boons when they are offered on a Chronicle sheet.

There are quite a few more changes not mentioned above, so keep an eye on the Pathfinder Society General Discussion messageboard, where we’ll be posting a complete list of changes from version 4.1 to 4.2.

As for other changes to Pathfinder Society play, over the past 6 months, I have taken a keen interest in various things that don’t fit Golarion thematically or that cause confusion with power imbalance in the context of the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign. I have talked with players that frequent the messageboards, as well players at the various conventions I have attended. I have discussed the topics below with Venture-Captains and Venture-Lieutenants, as well as with members of Paizo’s design and development teams. While some of these might work well in a home game (and I have some players that use them in my home game), they simply are not a good fit for organized play.

With that said, the following archetypes and equipment are being removed from Pathfinder Society Organized Play as legal options effective August 16, 2012:

Archetypes

Gravewalker Witch (Ultimate Magic 84)
Master Summoner (Ultimate Magic 80)
Synthesist Summoner (Ultimate Magic 80)
Undead Lord Cleric (Ultimate Magic 32)
Vivisectionist Alchemist (Ultimate Magic 20)

Equipment

Arcane bonded items must be listed as Always Available (thus, no firearms)

Added to the Additional Resources on June 20:

No Large or larger firearms available for purchase at any point.
Double hackbut (Ultimate Combat 138)
Culverin (Ultimate Combat 138)

Obviously, these changes do not reflect every problem, or cover every potential problem, in the Pathfinder Society, and we will continue to monitor, discuss, and evaluate material as it affects the format and as new material is released. We do not intend actions like this to be a regular occurrence. We did not make these changes lightly and recognize that many of you will feel like this is either too much or too little or somewhere in between. But I feel that these changes are necessary for the health and well-being of the campaign.

With that said, I understand the time investment and care put into a character’s background and the planning that goes along with making sure the character fits exactly how you envision him. If you have a character affected by the changes above, I am offering a rebuild along the following guidelines:

  • You may rebuild any class levels affected, to levels of other classes as necessary. (For example, if you have a 10th-level character with one level of rogue and nine levels of the synthesist summoner archetype, you may rebuild the nine summoner levels into any other class or another summoner archetype).
  • You may retrain any feats that directly apply to the changes above as necessary.
  • You may sell affected equipment for the full price paid when you purchased them (as listed on past Chronicle sheets).

However you feel about these changes, I ask that you remain respectful of the feelings of others when commenting below. We are a community and we all know players who probably have a beloved character affected by the changes above. Please keep discourse civil and appropriate.

I look forward to seeing folks at the show and am looking toward a bright future for the campaign. I sincerely appreciate everyone who provided feedback, whether it was for the changes to the Guide or the options being removed above, in working together to make our organized play the best it can be for the player base and GMs. Feel free to pull me aside at Gen Con to chat about any or all of the above changes.

Mike Brock
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Society
501 to 550 of 737 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>

Ryan Bolduan wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Kyle, I dare you to kill my tiefling.

After I have some prestige saved up...

Learn from Aaron...it won't be enough.

Or Bob ... I think he's died on Kyle's table 3 times now (twice in one scenario)...

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just wanted to point out I don't kill Tieflings, Right Stuart!

Spoiler:
Succubi with flameblades and hot (pun intended) dice rolls kill tieflings

Liberty's Edge 5/5

This sux... I am GMing the Wonders in the Weave series this Saturday the 11th. Because the new rules don't go into effect until next week on the 16th, the character I will apply the GM credits to still won't get the boon :(

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Hrm... Maybe don't take credit, then later run it again for credit? :P

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Actually, that's a valid question.

Mike:

Can a GM decline credit for a scenario now, and then GM it again after the 16th and take the newly boonful credit?

Silver Crusade

Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Ryan Bolduan wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Kyle, I dare you to kill my tiefling.

After I have some prestige saved up...

Learn from Aaron...it won't be enough.
Or Bob ... I think he's died on Kyle's table 3 times now (twice in one scenario)...

If I die, it will be to ensure the survival of my team. Even in death I will not be defeated by the forces of darkness!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kyle Pratt wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
That makes no sense.

Sometimes, life just doesn't make sense.

The Guide isn't made to cover every single corner-case possible. If it did, then it would bloat to 100-200 pages long. The current rule, which I personally think is a fairly good one, is that Player's can assume a GM knows things about the Core Rulebook, the Guide to PFS, and Pathfinder Society Field Guide. Other than those three sources (as well as spells/abilities derived from those sources) the player needs to bring the book.

As a courtesy however, most players should bring a Bestiary if they plan on summoning things, but it isn't required.

I would not play a summoning character at the table without my Summoner Android/IOS app. It's that good.

To be fair I also expect index cards from wildshaping druids as well. At my home campaigns, it's one of the requirements for "familiarity".

The Exchange

Chris Mortika wrote:

Actually, that's a valid question.

Mike:

Can a GM decline credit for a scenario now, and then GM it again after the 16th and take the newly boonful credit?

Not Mike but p39 para 3 "When you choose to take a Chronicle sheet for GM credit" seems to indicate you don't have to take it the first time you run it.

Scarab Sages

I was thinking that I reason the forums somewhere in the last few days that Mike had said something about this. He was talking about character creation, but he said that the 16th was a "No later than" date. I was thinking that he'd indicated that we could follow the new rules now, but they weren't binding until the 16th. I'm not certain of how that would apply to GM credit until then,though.
[Edit: Upon further reading, and searching Mike's posts, I found that he did indeed say that changes to characters could be made, but weren't binding until the 16th, but also emphasized that the changes weren't to be played 'til the 16th. He was also very adamant about saying that the Guide doesn't take affect 'til the 16th. So, I guess that since the language has changed in 4.2, and that paragraph was added, that it would go by 4.1 and even if there's the option now, I guess that it wouldn't apply 'til the 16th.

Pure speculation on my part, obviously.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
casiel wrote:

Thanks for opening up Aasimar, Tengu, and Tiefling.

In my opinion, anyone who dumpstats two or more ability scores kinda missed the point of playing a Pathfinder Society character in the first place. Pathfinders should strive for balance.

Good riddance to min-maxed characters and the all-too-numerous Munchkins who love playing them!

After re-reading my above post, I apologize for being antagonistic to Min-Maxers. Some people are competitive by nature and create the most competitive characters they can. That doesn't necessarily make them bad players. Sorry for the blanket assumption on my part. It was insensitive of me to be so harsh towards players who potentially lost their favorite characters due to this ban.


W. Kristoph Nolen wrote:
I was thinking that I reason the forums somewhere in the last few days that Mike had said something about this. He was talking about character creation, but he said that the 16th was a "No later than" date. I was thinking that he'd indicated that we could follow the new rules now, but they weren't binding until the 16th. I'm not certain of how that would apply to GM credit until then,though.

If I recall correctly, he said that in regards to characters with newly banned classes being rebuilt to be legal; the players didn't HAVE to rebuild them until the 16th, but if they wanted to rebuild them now and start playing the newly legal one they could.

This makes sense on several levels; why delay the inevitable?

On the other hand, Mike's request to not abuse the new rules was in reference to players making Tiefling or Aasimar characters now, without the boon, before GenCon.

This also makes sense.

So where does this leave us with GM Boons prior to the 16th? I'm not sure. I feel GMs should be allowed to get a boon from running prior to the 16th, because there is no reason to penalize GMs for running games in the last stretch of Season 3. However, as Season 4 hasn't started yet, it's difficult to say for sure unless M&M chip in.

The Exchange

Kyle Baird wrote:
You know, I bet Chalfon and I are pretty close. If I get to count PC deaths for Rats Part 1 and the deaths that happen at Gen Con Saturday night, I bet I've got him beat. ;-)

Good thing I won't increase that count at all.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I'm just going to poke Kyle in the eye for all those poor PCs. Seeing as how I've never met Kyle and only vaguely know what he looks like, I'll be poking people into the eye until I get the respionse of "Hey! You can't do this to me! I'm Kyle Baird!" Then I will smile and recover from the bruises I've gained from those who punched me in the noggin for poking them in the eye.

Scarab Sages

Darn it ... double-ninja'd while I was editing.
Sean H ... I agree entirely. As you point out, it makes sense, but, it also makes sense to have to wait. I'd be happy with either answer.

  • 1.)We can wait, but are free to use it since it was released.
    *or*
  • 2.)We have to wait. We can use it to make changes or updates, but it's not playable 'til the 16th.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
W. Kristoph Nolen wrote:

Darn it ... double-ninja'd while I was editing.

Sean H ... I agree entirely. As you point out, it makes sense, but, it also makes sense to have to wait. I'd be happy with either answer.
    1.)We can wait, but are free to use it since it was released. *or*
    2.)We have to wait. We can use it to make changes or updates, but it's not [i/playable[/i] 'til the 16th.

Huh, that is a different reading than I got. I already rebuilt one of my characters because I wanted to put the past behind me and didn't want to spend any more time playing a character I knew was going away. I'm not even sure where my old character sheet is. Does this mean I can't even play my new character this weekend, even though he is both season 3 and 4 legal after the rebuild?

casiel wrote:

After re-reading my above post, I apologize for being antagonistic to Min-Maxers. Some people are competitive by nature and create the most competitive characters they can. That doesn't necessarily make them bad players. Sorry for the blanket assumption on my part. It was insensitive of me to be so harsh towards players who potentially lost their favorite characters due to this ban.

Oh, and thanks for the apology. While I won't deny there were issues with characters that completely dominated tables, this wasn't true for everyone. I know my Synthesist was specifically build to trip, reposition and flank with enemies so the other melee characters such as a barbarian or rogue could easily unload their full attacks and take them down. It was always fun helping my party, so I can't say it didn't sting when others were accusing all synthesist players of being twinks and ruining the game.

Lantern Lodge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, South Dakota—Rapid City aka Black Powder Chocobo

Kyle Baird wrote:
Ryan Bolduan wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Whatever, you only survive my tables because you bake.
As another survivor, I too will add that Kyle is not full of hot air. He was OUT FOR BLOOD!
Or brownies!

So you mean to quench your blood thirst with tiny fey?!

takes notes


Sean H wrote:
Huh, that is a different reading than I got. I already rebuilt one of my characters because I wanted to put the past behind me and didn't want to spend any more time playing a character I knew was going away. I'm not even sure where my old character sheet is. Does this mean I can't even play my new character this weekend, even though he is both season 3 and 4 legal after the rebuild?

My reading of Mike's post was that characters affected by the bans and need a rebuild were welcome to do them now. The 16th was just the deadline IN CASE you wanted to give them a last whirl, etc...


CRobledo wrote:

My reading of Mike's post was that characters affected by the bans and need a rebuild were welcome to do them now. The 16th was just the deadline IN CASE you wanted to give them a last whirl, etc...

That's what I thought, too.

Grand Lodge 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes, character rebuilds for archetypes being banned come August 16 can rebuild immediately, or anytime before the 16th and be played in games between now and the 16th.

Also, GMs can choose which running of a scenario they wish to apply GM credit. So, if you run a scenario tonight, this weekend, and on the 17th, you may opt to skip GM credit tonight or this weekend and take the GM credit from running the game on the 17th.

5/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, New York—Nassau County aka VLTRokktor

Kyle Pratt wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
Todd Morgan wrote:
Remember, to play a new race, you have to have the material on hand. So go get an ARG and Blood of Angels and make those characters!
Todd, aasimars and tieflings are in Bestiary I, yes? And that's part of the core assumption?

Chris,

The Player's Core Assumption includes the Core Rulebook, Pathfinder Society Field Guide, and the Guide to Organized Play. As a player, anything outside of those three documents require the player to bring the book/rules to the game.

Tengu are both in the ARG and Dragon Empires. Either source is acceptable since it isn't in the core assumption

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Papa-DRB wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Alex Greenshields wrote:
Brendan Missio wrote:
Sounds like sitting at one of your tables Kyle.
You know, I don't know why Kyle gets such a bad reputation. I bet he hasn't killed half the PCs that Chalfon Dalsine has :)
You know, I bet Chalfon and I are pretty close. If I get to count PC deaths for Rats Part 1 and the deaths that happen at Gen Con Saturday night, I bet I've got him beat. ;-)

You guys really brag about this?

I'm sticking with my home game, bye PFS. I don't need this kind of hassle.

-- david
Papa.DRB

It's all tongue in cheek Papa, they aren't really bragging about killing characters.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

(Pssst, Andy, keep reading. ;) )

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Jiggy wrote:
(Pssst, Andy, keep reading. ;) )

Yeah, thanks! chuckle... way late and a few dollars short it seems.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Andrew Christian wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
(Pssst, Andy, keep reading. ;) )
Yeah, thanks! chuckle... way late and a few dollars short it seems.

Always read to the end of a thread before responding. Netiquette 101.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jonathan Cary wrote:
Always read to the end of a thread before responding. Netiquette 101.

Man, I miss when netiquette was emphasized. I brought it up in class the other day and my students looked at me like I was from Mars.

Scarab Sages

Michael Brock wrote:

Yes, character rebuilds for archetypes being banned come August 16 can rebuild immediately, or anytime before the 16th and be played in games between now and the 16th.

Also, GMs can choose which running of a scenario they wish to apply GM credit. So, if you run a scenario tonight, this weekend, and on the 17th, you may opt to skip GM credit tonight or this weekend and take the GM credit from running the game on the 17th.

SCHWEET! I guess it was the correct Assumption upthread! That's the option that is the most "common sense" and "fun"!! Yay for option #1 .... We can wait, but we don't have to wait!

Shadow Lodge

Joe Jungers wrote:
Joko PO wrote:
Anyone have any insight as to why the GraveWalker Witch got the axe?

Probably something to do with the flavor, as noted from the text in the PRD.

"Spell Poppet: Each gravewalker carries around a gristly, inanimate poppet stitched from human skin and stuffed with shards of bone, fingernails, and grave dirt. A gravewalker's spells come from the will of evil spirits residing in the poppet, and its ability to hold spells functions in a manner identical to the way a witch's spells are granted by her familiar."

So, why don't they just change the discription? It makes me mad now I have to drop my VooDoo Witch Doctor.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Lazorus wrote:
Joe Jungers wrote:
Joko PO wrote:
Anyone have any insight as to why the GraveWalker Witch got the axe?

Probably something to do with the flavor, as noted from the text in the PRD.

"Spell Poppet: Each gravewalker carries around a gristly, inanimate poppet stitched from human skin and stuffed with shards of bone, fingernails, and grave dirt. A gravewalker's spells come from the will of evil spirits residing in the poppet, and its ability to hold spells functions in a manner identical to the way a witch's spells are granted by her familiar."

So, why don't they just change the discription? It makes me mad now I have to drop my VooDoo Witch Doctor.

Because Pathfinder Society doesn't make changes to Pathfinder books. Only the development team for the books would make those changes.

And why would they make a change to their book just for the organized campaign?

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

Lazorus wrote:
Joe Jungers wrote:
Joko PO wrote:
Anyone have any insight as to why the GraveWalker Witch got the axe?

Probably something to do with the flavor, as noted from the text in the PRD.

"Spell Poppet: Each gravewalker carries around a gristly, inanimate poppet stitched from human skin and stuffed with shards of bone, fingernails, and grave dirt. A gravewalker's spells come from the will of evil spirits residing in the poppet, and its ability to hold spells functions in a manner identical to the way a witch's spells are granted by her familiar."

So, why don't they just change the discription? It makes me mad now I have to drop my VooDoo Witch Doctor.

One of my friends has a Witch Doctor, and the familiar works well for it too. He has a compy (the small raptor) and since he's from the Mwangi Expanse, it plays together quite nicely.

5/5

I just want to toss in that I'm against the inclusion of additional races (whether by this change or by boons), but am pleased by the general rules tightening and trimming the fat of over-powered and out-flavored options.

Shadow Lodge

I love the inclusion of new playable races. I hope they add more in the future.

Shadow Lodge

I like they added a few new races. I hope they don't add any more. I hope they reduce the number of race boons out there.

Only thing I'd have done differently is grandfather in the archetype characters (and I'm speaking as someone who hates the master summoner and likes the synthesist and hopes they do it right when Pathfinder 2.0 comes out in 8-10 years), say allowing characters to remain in play if they had reached 2nd level after the date of release of the 4.2 rules and disallowing the slow xp option for such characters.

But then again, I if that is my only gripe, oh well.

Shadow Lodge

I really don't understand why anyone is against the inclusion of additional races. How is more variety a bad thing?

I get that some GMs might get a little upset about having their specialness taken away when races previously only available as GM boons are added for everybody. I get that completely. I still want them to add more. GMs with race boons need to simply take solace in the fact that they had access before anyone else. If that's not good enough, I guess I don't know what else to say.

I eventually want to see even more races added to the list of universally available for play. I will never understand how anyone can think that more options is somehow detrimental to the game.

Just my opinion of course. Feel free to disagree.

Have a nice day.


Deadrender wrote:

I really don't understand why anyone is against the inclusion of additional races. How is more variety a bad thing?

I get that some GMs might get a little upset about having their specialness taken away when races previously only available as GM boons are added for everybody. I get that completely. I still want them to add more. GMs with race boons need to simply take solace in the fact that they had access before anyone else. If that's not good enough, I guess I don't know what else to say.

I eventually want to see even more races added to the list of universally available for play. I will never understand how anyone can think that more options is somehow detrimental to the game.

Just my opinion of course. Feel free to disagree.

Have a nice day.

Wait, what? GM Boon? GMs don't get special boons. Until this latest update, we got fewer boons than players.

The race boons come from attending conventions, and anyone who did so had the chance of obtaining one. This made conventions cool, but while I am glad they are opening up new races, I wish they chose the eastern ones instead of Aasimar and Tiefling; I feel that the Planetouched should remain special.

The Exchange

Sean H wrote:
Deadrender wrote:

I really don't understand why anyone is against the inclusion of additional races. How is more variety a bad thing?

I get that some GMs might get a little upset about having their specialness taken away when races previously only available as GM boons are added for everybody. I get that completely. I still want them to add more. GMs with race boons need to simply take solace in the fact that they had access before anyone else. If that's not good enough, I guess I don't know what else to say.

I eventually want to see even more races added to the list of universally available for play. I will never understand how anyone can think that more options is somehow detrimental to the game.

Just my opinion of course. Feel free to disagree.

Have a nice day.

Wait, what? GM Boon? GMs don't get special boons. Until this latest update, we got fewer boons than players.

The race boons come from attending conventions, and anyone who did so had the chance of obtaining one. This made conventions cool, but while I am glad they are opening up new races, I wish they chose the eastern ones instead of Aasimar and Tiefling; I feel that the Planetouched should remain special.

Actually, you got a dhampir or tiefling race boon if you were a GM for beginner's box. And I've received at least one other special race boon that was just for GMs at a convention, as well.

Shadow Lodge

Sean H wrote:


The race boons come from attending conventions, and anyone who did so had the chance of obtaining one. This made conventions cool, but while I am glad they are opening up new races, I wish they chose the eastern ones instead of Aasimar and Tiefling; I feel that the Planetouched should remain special.

Having made an 'eastern' character back in season 1 when there was no APG even, I had wished my character had remained 'exotic' with the eastern flavor had remaining rare.

I wish half orcs and elves were seen as 'special snowflakes by more people, but they're not.

I think they tried to find a balance, with the two most mentioned plane touched races and tengu. It's not perfect, but it is fair.


teribithia9 wrote:
Sean H wrote:
Deadrender wrote:

I really don't understand why anyone is against the inclusion of additional races. How is more variety a bad thing?

I get that some GMs might get a little upset about having their specialness taken away when races previously only available as GM boons are added for everybody. I get that completely. I still want them to add more. GMs with race boons need to simply take solace in the fact that they had access before anyone else. If that's not good enough, I guess I don't know what else to say.

I eventually want to see even more races added to the list of universally available for play. I will never understand how anyone can think that more options is somehow detrimental to the game.

Just my opinion of course. Feel free to disagree.

Have a nice day.

Wait, what? GM Boon? GMs don't get special boons. Until this latest update, we got fewer boons than players.

The race boons come from attending conventions, and anyone who did so had the chance of obtaining one. This made conventions cool, but while I am glad they are opening up new races, I wish they chose the eastern ones instead of Aasimar and Tiefling; I feel that the Planetouched should remain special.

Actually, you got a dhampir or tiefling race boon if you were a GM for beginner's box. And I've received at least one other special race boon that was just for GMs at a convention, as well.

Really? Huh. Okay then.


Kerney wrote:


I wish half orcs and elves were seen as 'special snowflakes by more people, but they're not.

Half-elves may have been special in earlier editions. However, in Pathfinder we get: Calistrian Prostitute (Calistria) (Elf Religious Trait) You worked in one of Calistria’s temples as a sacred prostitute, and you know how to flatter, please, and (most of all) listen.

Something tells me that half-elves aren't all that uncommon anymore.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Mike I have a question about Pg 32 Second full Paragraph second sentence.

PFS Guide Pg 32 wrote:
While we certainly encourage you to allow fun, engaging roleplaying to take place, if your players are still playing darts at the tavern an hour after the game started, you should prod them into action.

My question is, when are you going to start selling "Official" PFS GM Prods? ;)

Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West aka JohnF

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragnmoon wrote:
My question is, when are you going to start selling "Official" PFS GM Prods? ;)

I initially misread that as "Official PMS GF Prods" - not quite the same!

5/5 5/55/55/5

Dragnmoon wrote:

Mike I have a question about Pg 32 Second full Paragraph second sentence.

PFS Guide Pg 32 wrote:
While we certainly encourage you to allow fun, engaging roleplaying to take place, if your players are still playing darts at the tavern an hour after the game started, you should prod them into action.
My question is, when are you going to start selling "Official" PFS GM Prods? ;)

.... is that a prod FOR dm's or a prod you use ON DM's?

Dark Archive 3/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:


.... is that a prod FOR dm's or a prod you use ON DM's?

More importantly, does having one get you a free reroll?

Dark Archive 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Plains

Deadrender wrote:

I really don't understand why anyone is against the inclusion of additional races. How is more variety a bad thing?

I get that some GMs might get a little upset about having their specialness taken away when races previously only available as GM boons are added for everybody. I get that completely. I still want them to add more. GMs with race boons need to simply take solace in the fact that they had access before anyone else. If that's not good enough, I guess I don't know what else to say.

I eventually want to see even more races added to the list of universally available for play. I will never understand how anyone can think that more options is somehow detrimental to the game.

Just my opinion of course. Feel free to disagree.

Have a nice day.

There are two main arguments:

1. Race boons are a huge support to local conventions that draw players in. No other boon has been a draw like that and its cheap for paizo to support. The aasimar boon was auctioned off for charity at my convention for $100.
2. Players don't want to feel like they are at a 'zoo' when they sit down at a table.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Todd Morgan wrote:


2. Players don't want to feel like they are at a 'zoo' when they sit down at a table.

With halflings, gnomes, elves, half-orcs, animal companions, familiars and eidolons its a bit late to worry about that...

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

Deadrender wrote:

I really don't understand why anyone is against the inclusion of additional races. How is more variety a bad thing?

I get that some GMs might get a little upset about having their specialness taken away when races previously only available as GM boons are added for everybody. I get that completely. I still want them to add more. GMs with race boons need to simply take solace in the fact that they had access before anyone else. If that's not good enough, I guess I don't know what else to say.

I eventually want to see even more races added to the list of universally available for play. I will never understand how anyone can think that more options is somehow detrimental to the game.

Just my opinion of course. Feel free to disagree.

Have a nice day.

Opening up too many races at once, as was said, denies Paizo an easy source of boons. (Con Swag).

I am satisfied at the opening of the three races. Some concepts I had (Tiyet) would have been hard to play in PFS w/o those races, others it saves me a choice* (Do I want a Tiefling Magus or a Tiefling Inquisitor, I only have one boo- oh wait, never mind). ALso it shows that Pathfinder does evolve and grow. I'm thinking we'll still see plenty of humans/elves/gnomes at the table. Most people are attached to their first character. I'm seriously looking at a gnome cavalier for example.

*

Spoiler:
Some of my concepts rely on a race to pull it off. Others rely on a specific attribute (When I build an underdark scout type, it's going to have darkvision and the enhanced darkvision trait. Now I have 4 options (dwarf, half-orc, tiefling, aasimar) instead of two. On the other end of the spectrum, despite Oni-spawn (+2 str, +2 Wis -2 Cha) or Asuraspawn (+2dex, +2 Wis -2 int) being better for an inquisitor skirmisher, I don't like their appearance/default personality for the character, so I went with devil-spawn. Now synergy/non-synergy would be if I made Helena for PFS, she'd be Pit-spawn. Which would be synergy if she was an abyssal bloodline sorcerer, or a hinderence if she was a witch. (Both fit given who I model her after)

Silver Crusade

Stormfriend wrote:
Todd Morgan wrote:


2. Players don't want to feel like they are at a 'zoo' when they sit down at a table.
With halflings, gnomes, elves, half-orcs, animal companions, familiars and eidolons its a bit late to worry about that...

I disagree.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Maryland— Baltimore aka Qstor

Andrew Christian wrote:
It's all tongue in cheek Papa, they aren't really bragging about killing characters.

What I guess you don't know Kyle :p

Mike

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Maryland— Baltimore aka Qstor

Dragnmoon wrote:
My question is, when are you going to start selling "Official" PFS GM Prods? ;)

Yeah like a belt of Kyle so we can notch off our kills :D

Mike

Lantern Lodge

So RAW for the Gravewalker Witch, Undead Lord Cleric ,and Vivisectionist Alchemist there is no reason to ban them.


hyachi Ishirou wrote:
So RAW for the Gravewalker Witch, Undead Lord Cleric ,and Vivisectionist Alchemist there is no reason to ban them.

Depends on what you mean by RAW. From what I understand its the flavor of the classes thats the issue not anything in their particualar rules. (other than teh undeadlord some issues were raised about the possible time it takes to stat new corpse companions you were ready for.)

501 to 550 of 737 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Paizo Blog: Guide 4.2 and Changes to Pathfinder Society Organized Play All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.