James Jacobs wrote:
I am curious what your take is on this issue now that Mythic Adventures (2013) and Mythic Origins (2013) have been released.
Last year at GenCon (2016), I spoke with John Compton specifically about expanding PFS to level 20 content, and he seemed very hesitant to go even that high. However, it does seem in light of new retirement arcs such as All for Immortality that the max level in PFS is indeed increasing, yet slowly.
Any new thoughts?
EDIT: I originally found this thread in a search for "Yog-Sothoth." I readily admit that I jumped immediately to PFS, which is informed by Pathfinder RPG. I suppose to make my question more Pathfinder general, I'll just ask: What do you see as far as deity-player interaction in Pathfinder canon now that Mythic books have been released?
I enjoyed reading your guide. I am looking to build an assassin, and with the recent release of Ultimate Intrigue, I am eyeing a vigilante very closely for a cha and/or int assassin very closely. Right now, I'm debating taking some levels in vigilante and some in alchemist. My race is drow, so I can pick up void bombs which are just sick if your target is trying to flee (make the reflex save and still only have movement speeds--including flying, etc--reduced to 5 feet for a single round. Throw-in throat jab from vigilante where the target can't speak and figure out how to make the area difficult terrain, and the target can't move for an entire round--pretty nasty.
Anyway, thoughts on the vigilante (stalker) class?
So here's the deal: everything you've mentioned in the trade (boon, store credit, scenario) are all Paizo's intellectual property. We are not empowered to dictate what people do with respect to trading Paizo product for product. Now, selling boons for non-Paizo product is a different story altogether. That's not only frowned upon, it's been explicitly stated that the practice of selling boons for $$ is not permissible.
I disagree with the consensus here. Read the healing bomb description again, first sentence:
Benefit: When the alchemist creates a bomb, he can choose to have it heal damage instead of dealing it. Creating a healing bomb requires the alchemist to expend an infused extract or potion containing a cure spell. A creature that takes a direct hit from a healing bomb is healed as if she had imbibed the infusion or potion used to create the bomb. Creatures in the splash radius are healed for the minimum amount of damage the cure spell is capable of healing. A healing bomb damages undead instead of healing them (bold mine).
With the healing bomb you are in effect dealing healing/positive energy damage which heals living and damages undead. It makes no sense to say one of them adds your int modifier and the other doesn't.
Another suggestion is to start a conversation with a nearby VO. Regional coordinators aren't sovereigns in that we don't have to ask permission before entering another VO's region. We regularly play in each other's games and are even asked to help expand PFS in another's jurisdiction from time to time. We frequently converse--especially at conventions. That being said, if something like this is going on, go lookup a VO in a nearby area and start a conversation with him/her. In most cases, there will be several VOs within a 20/30/50 mile radius. The next time the two VOs meet, they'll talk it out. A lot of this stuff is about education and not malice (though it could be as Andy pointed out). And please don't take this as free reign to play both ends against the middle. I'm restricting my advice here for when one VO is doing something that is clearly not ok.
Talisman of Essence Conversion
I will be forthright in stating up-front that I did not read the entire Ultimate Intrigue document. I read the intro, the avenger and the stalker specializations. My wife read the entire thing, however, and I did play with other players who chose each specialization over the past weekend.
That being said, there are three main takeaways from my playtest experience:
1) As far as PFS goes (and that is the only style of Pathfinder I play--I know this is true of a lot of PFS players as well), I honestly couldn't care less about the dual identity feature/shtick. Most PFS scenarios, and the GMs that run them, focus almost exclusively on combat and a lot less on role-playing. Throw-in the time blocks in which PFS games are run and you have even less time/care to deal with a bunch of heroes running into outhouses to change clothes and suit-up. It really feels more like a gimmick and less like an actual mechanic. I do think it would be great for a home-brew game that allowed for that type of atmosphere, but again since I pretty much only care about PFS, it's kind of a non-starter.
2) The way the rules are written with regards to wands and the Vigilante, you are going to have to FAQ and even do a bit of backsliding (potentially) to rule whether any vigilante can use any wand without a UMD check. The way I read the rules, RAW, is that if a spell is on the spell-list of a CLASS then you may use the wand without UMD. This came up during one of our games this weekend. I argued that my Stalker Vigilante could heal himself without using the UMD skill with an infernal healing wand because the Vigilante class has that spell on its spell-list. Others of course said it was on the warlock specialization's spell-list, and I pointed out that that wording is incongruous with the wand use rules (again RAW). So, unless you arbitrarily say that a specialization is a class or something similar, you are going to run into more inter-woven rules problems (for instance, redefining what a "class" is). For instance, if you are going to rule that each specialization counts as its own class, then I should technically be allowed to take levels in different Vigilante Classes whereby I could be an Avenger level 3/Stalker level 4/Warlock level 2, etc. Personally, I don't think a Vigilante would be too powerful if you accept my ruling which is consistent with the wand use rules, RAW.
3) As has been noted a few times already, the Vigilante class is not very powerful or even useful compared to other classes. Here's the basic issue: say I'm a Venture Captain or other influential figure in the game world, and I have this important Pathfinder mission that needs to be handled now. It is my job to assemble a team of adventurers I can trust whom I know will get the job done. Why would I pick a Vigilante? The Avenger is nowhere near as good as a Fighter or Barbarian or even Paladin imo. The Stalker pales in comparison to a Rogue (unchained or vanilla) or even a ninja. Warlocks, only being able to cast 4th level spells at level 11, will feel left-out when their counterpart Sorcerors and Wizards are casting level 5 and 6 spells, respectively. And Zealots are a far cry from your cleric or oracle. There is no specialization that performs the particular role better than the other respective classes. There needs to be something to set the Vigilante apart, even if it results in the Vigilante being out-classed on the power level front.
To remedy this issue, I propose that at the start of every adventure, the Vigilante may select his/her specialization. So, if the party needs a healer, the Vigilante can be a Zealot. If there is no tank, (s)he can be an Avenger. Need someone sneaky? The Vigilante will play the Stalker role. I think this versatility is exactly what the Vigilante needs to be attractive and competitive. Clearly, there will need to be some balance inserted as far as feats/skills/etc. You could even expand the number of "identities" the Vigilante adopts over the course of his/her Pathfinder career (perhaps 1 role at level 1, 2 at level 3, 3 at level 8 and 4 at level 11 or something like that). Doing so can completely rework the "dual identity" gimmick issue that I noted above while making the Vigilante a desirable adventuring companion. Otherwise, I foresee many a player withdrawing Warhorn sign-ups the moment they see a Vigilante on the roster.
Thanks all for the feedback--just wanted to make sure I wasn't doing something wrong.
Another question I'm not sure about: can my group play up-tier for more gold and stuff if they get bored to death with single dire rat or 2 x skeleton encounters? I have no doubt they could handle the T3-4 stuff, but I'm not sure what the protocol is.
Quick background: I currently have a level 6 alchemist of my own (I pretty much only play at conventions) as well as a level 2 dummy from GMing for a group of friends. This group has not really played together very much, but all of them are RPG veterans and have played multiple systems. I wouldn't say they are power gaming monkeys, but they do make effective characters. They are all new to Pathfinder though they have experience with D&D. I am running a CORE campaign, and this is a list of the sessions we have done so far:
1) Master of the Fallen Fortress
Keep in mind that there are only four PCs: a ranger; a rogue; a cleric and a wizard. They use solid tactics and built good, effective characters. That being said, they have utterly facerolled through every adventure. Only in 2-3 fights has one character fell unconscious, and I think one of those times two characters were down. I understand that the adventure content should not be altered at all, so I feel pretty powerless as far as posing a credible challenge to the group. I don't want every single encounter to be death-defying obviously, but I also don't think they should be ROFLstomping every one either.
Any suggestions? Is there anything I can actually do to increase the suspense or thrill of the game in terms of danger, or are all PFS scenarios this easy? Again, I've only really played 15 scenarios so far on my Alchemist, and the only difficult ones were when we played up a tier (save one--Silver Mount Collection but that was largely due to party dysfunction).
I'd appreciate any feedback.
Matrix Dragon wrote:
I'm not sure how you can say that in natural form Kitsune cannot speak or cast spells.
The Kitsune description says they are "fox folk" and while in native form they are an "anthropomorphic fox." Check out anthropomorphic animal spell. There it talks about being able to speak one language as well as being bipedal and having opposable digits in two limbs to manipulate fine objects.
If this isn't enough, think about any of the Ratfolk Magus characters running around (I've seen a few out here in SoCal). If Kitsune, who are fox folk, can't cast while in that form, then Ratfolk shouldn't be able to either by that logic.
I am making a CORE halfling fighter with a lance. I have planned feat/gold expenditure progression through level 11, and this is what I have so far:
Strength is 14 (+2 mod)
Assuming all of these work together (which I believe they do), how much damage does my character do on a mounted charge with the lance? I understand how doubled doubles and tripled doubles, etc work (you add instead of multiply)--I just don't know the order of applying the different layers of damage bonuses. I should also point out that in reading the CRB, none of these bonuses indicate a type (circumstance, trait, etc). They are all unidentified types of damage.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.