Athelis's page

There are quite a few in my area that I play with that have 12th level, though almost none of them post on these boards. That being said, I currently have two 12th level characters.

Alynasis - 12 level human Osirion monk (Osirion Faction)
Aesa, Daughter of Aerenndis - 12 level Ulfen fighter (archer)/(Taldor Faction)

I also have 3 other characters from levels 2-8.

-Toni

I was thinking about this - and honestly, I think the real problem is there isn't a middle ground with most of the modules, imo. This has been a problem since day 1. They are either over the top difficult or a cake walk (generally, there are obviously acceptations).

In a lot of ways, I think that pathfinder still has a lot of growing up to do and module difficulty(and originality) are areas that it struggles with. I think it comes down to a number of things - the restrictions placed on authors and what is expected out of a module, inexperience of some writers and judges, what people conceptually think of as difficult (more fights does not necessarily = a harder mod. It just makes it a longer mod.)

As a player, I LIKE to be challenged and I have no qualms whatsoever if my character dies. The best times are when you are fighting for your life and nail biting, while keeping in character. There should be a penalty for failure and you should feel there is a good (and fair) chance of it. When a module is a cake walk or it makes up things to screw the player just because, that kills a lot of the fun for most people, myself included.

I certainly hope that this is something that improves with pathfinder - but I think it needs to happen sooner rather then later. The campaign isn't really new anymore. I've seen some mild efforts towards it but not enough. Mods also have to have more interesting role-playing opportunities - places for character development. Those moments that define a character, where you sit at the table and gasp or think, 'Now what?'

On a separate note, good role-playing doesn't exclude being effective. It drives me batty when people fall into this trap. ;)

-Toni

Honestly, I don't see any issue whatsoever with 're-skinning' myself, and while I have never done it, I think it could be lots of fun for various reasons. Role-playing shouldn't be punished and instead encouraged. There are always going to be people who try to cheat or abuse the system. Why punish those who don't for the few that will?

If I had to vote, I'd say that allow the GM to decide on if the animal is allowed - players that choose this route will just have to understand that there is always the chance that their choice will be disallowed, even if it is only at the DM's whim. If it isn't allowed, the player should have a 'back-up' or 'normal' animal to use.

Another suggestion is, if people want a more 'unique' animal, maybe that is something that could start appearing on the adventure records as rewards? Personally, I find only find items to be really boring and this is one way to allow a little bit of variety.

-Toni

Personally, I think that going straight fighter and not taking the archtype 'archer' is much better.

I just retired a 12th level archer at Gen Con and trust me, there are ways to make them deal copious amounts of damage. I felt bad a couple of times, the way GMs boggled at me.

-Toni

I've played many, many times in long car/van rides, usually to things like Gen Con. You might loose dice in the far reaches of the car seats, but it works pretty well. ;) We just 'winged' it without any sort of mat or grid - everyone just has to be reasonable!

FrozenTundra wrote:

But I think you're just trying to stir the pot more, cblome59, which I have no interest in subjecting this list to. If you want to keep talking we can do so in private, my email address is frzntundra4 @ yahoo.com

I'm just trying to get my point across, like you. Speaking with you, at times, has been about as effective as banging my head against a brick wall. I know I'm not the only one who feels that way.

Like you, I will continue to defend the game as I see fit, regardless how you might feel about my opinions. As will most everyone on these boards.

No point in taking this private as I can talk to empty air as effectively right here in my office.

You complain that FrozenTundra is as effective as talking to a brick wall, but your tone is super confrontational and dismissive and also very off-putting. Let's all put this sniping aside, take it down a notch, and try to have a constructive discussion, alright?

I thought I’d finally speak up a little here. :-)

I shall state right out, that I would love to play high level. Personally, I think that both low level play and high level play have their merits, for different reasons. As has been pointed out, things change drastically when certain things (spells, abilities, etc.) get introduced to the game but this doesn’t mean they aren’t worth exploring. There are all sorts of ways that these can be dealt with from limiting/changing or not allowing the potential ability and more.

For some people, higher level play isn’t their cup of tea. And that’s great! Some people really enjoy higher level play and that’s also great. Those that don’t enjoy higher level play don’t need to play/judge it if they don’t like it, no one will hold it against them. But it would be nice that for those that do, the option existed for them to continue to play those society characters they’ve come to enjoy. I already have two 12th level characters, a 5th, and a 1st and there are tons of modules that are out that we haven’t played. I also don’t enjoy having to constantly make new characters – I’d rather nurture the ones I have and make a new character when a cool idea strikes me, not because I have to.

Unfortunately, organized play is a different beast than home play. It has to be - you have to be more specific on what is allowed and what isn’t, in order to have consistency and fairness. Organized play is a growing organism and as such, there has to be room for change.

And in regards to this, I just have to say, I’m very happy with some of the changes that you guys are working on implementing into society play. I think the slower progression track is a great compromise (though I worry it might cause unforeseen headaches down the road). I’ve felt this whole time that 3 per level was just way too quick, as just when I’m starting to get a feel for a character, they level again. The 3 per level also didn’t let me work out some of the fun rp quirks and personality before suddenly I’m done. Modules should help develop and expound upon character personality and that’s hard when you level so quickly, imo. I have a friend who refers to PSS as the ‘souless campaign’ because of this difficulty.

The module quality is also slowly improving (with some shining examples) so that’s great that it is moving in the right direction, and one of the big things that has kept me interested in pathfinder society when I get frustrated. Having mods that aren’t just treasure hunts, overarching plot arcs, and relaxing the submission process and module word count are things I hope to continue to see in the future. I have high hopes the modules will continue to improve.

I’m also going to apologize right now. I hope this post is coherent. I went to a con this past weekend and the lack of sleep and the extra fun has turned my brain to mush. Gah! ;)

-Toni

Hey, I was looking at the Meteor Hammer and was trying to determine if and how it works/does not work with the drag CMB. The weapon came out before APG, in 3.5.

I'll post from the OGL here, since I don't have my book with me. :)

Meteor Hammer -

This weapon is one or two spherical weights attached by a 10-foot chain. You whirl the weights and wrap them around an opponent’s body.

Benefit: If you succeed at a trip attempt with a meteor hammer, you can drag your opponent 5 feet closer rather than knocking her prone.

You may use this weapon in two different ways:

* in meteor mode you use it as a double weapon
* in fortress mode you cannot use it as a double weapon but gain a +1 shield bonus to AC

Action: Switching between these two modes is a free action decided at the start of your turn.

Weapon Feature(s): reach, trip

Is there official errata that I'm not seeing? Or am I crazy in thinking that this would work with drag?

Thanks,
Toni

Yep, an update is very much in the works. Given the extreme workload we're all under, Hyrum and I have hired someone to assist us with this on a freelance basis. We met with the capable individual a few weeks ago and went over the new format we want, changes to rules that have appeared on the boards, changes to the rules that have not yet been revealed, as well as some other super-secret stuff. We're giving our secret weapon time to write it all up, organize it, and pare the extra complication from the existing document before turning it in for a full development pass. We expect to have a version to venture-captains for review in the next few months and will have the full series of documents out sometime between PaizoCon and GenCon, when the seasons change.

Until then, we appreciate everyone's patience and understanding. The wheels are turning, there's just only so far we're willing to pull back the curtain on how things work behind the scenes.

That is awesome and really the type of answer I was looking for. I just wanted a vague idea of when it might be changed/updated. I couldn't find anything on the boards. :) Thanks!

As to some of the rather snipping replies I received, I wasn't looking to kick a hornet's nest, I wasn't whining, and I wasn't intentionally asking a question that (apparently) has been asked a million times before in an effort to 'badger' those in charge. For homegame-type sessions, sifting through the boards really isn't that big of an issue other than the time it consumes. However, being at a convention is another matter. There isn't always internet access, and while we've done it, printing out all the pages to the sticky is an ugly mess, hard to read, and a pain. Additionally, there are going to be people (which I experienced a few weekends ago at DCV) who will refuse to honor the posts on the board because they aren't 'official' regardless of who the poster is. Their argument is because it isn't in the official rules document, it doesn't count.

I completely understand that this is a hefty undertaking especially if there are going to be more rule changes included besides the bits that are currently on the boards. And, I really appreciate the hard work and time that is going into it. It needed a lot of love and attention, imo.

Anyway, thanks again for taking the time to answer my question! I appreciate it. :)

-Toni

Hi!

Maybe I'm missing it (I've tried sifting through the numerous messages), but I was wondering if there was a date for when the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play is going to be updated and re-released. I know that various important rulings have been changed since the last iteration and that these corrections currently float out on the boards.

Unfortunately, this method has caused quite a bit of confusion and uncertainty, even from those players who regularly read the message boards. I know that it isn't an easy task, but it is something I feel is important to have up-to-date.

Anyway, if someone knows of a general date, it would be super helpful.

Thanks!

I've posted in the past about some of the issues involved with the current leveling system, as well as the level cap. I'll try to dig it out shortly and repost. :)

That being said, I'm not sure that the database is going to exactly accurately reflect everything that is going on with PCs or with players. Just in looking at my own stuff, there are a TON of scenarios that I've played that aren't showing up and, up until a few moments ago, I'd forgotten to level my characters in the database from when they went from 7 to 12 and 2 to 7. And we don't even play that often. Unfortunately, I can't really think of a more reliable way of tracking or keeping it updated, unless you maybe allow players to report modules that they've played but don't seem to have been reported.

I'll admit, we haven't played the high level modules yet because we were trying to pin down a good judge as well as arrange to have a few friends who live far away play with us as well. That being said, we might try to play them at DCV on Oct. 22-24.

-Athelis

I’ve had a bunch of different posts all floating around my brain now for over a week and I haven’t had the time to write them out. Honestly, the majority of them involve this topic. So, I’m going to likely combine them into a longer post and put them here. I know that some people have comments similar to what I’m saying but I still feel like I need to put my own thoughts on it. I’m really sorry if this is too long!

I am glad to see that those in charge of Pathfinder Society are looking at taking suggestions on how they can see the campaign grow, and how to make it a stronger, more viable campaign.

One of the largest and most important things that I think would help the campaign is story. I believe this is HUGE and will pull people to your campaign in droves. One of the largest compliments and draws of Paizo’s work is their ability to create a well-written story. I get the impression that a lot of folks expected this to carry over into the Pathfinder Society and I think that your average gamer craves plot devices in a module.

As things stand right now, Pfs is nothing more than a large string of combats with a tiny, tiny bit of story to tie them together. They are all stand alone, one shot modules where the goal is really nothing more than to get loot. This is fine and dandy for a while, but it quickly gets old – I know that I am already bored with pathfinder. Sadly, I know a large group of players that have been holding out hope for season 1 to be different and involve a more of a story than season 0, but after playing at Gen Con they are loosing this hope. The majority of them have been involved with other living campaigns in various management positions and are so disillusioned that we have talked about playing a large ‘home-game’ with the 20-30 people who’d be interested, instead of pathfinder.

Now, I am not saying that every module has to be involved in some overarching plot – far from it. But, I would suggest having SOME plot so that the players can really get a feeling of being involved and important. After all, they are the heroes (or anti-heroes!). If you are worried that not everyone would enjoy playing something other than a 1-shot, I would suggest labeling the adventures into types much like Living Arcanis did. If the mod was plot/RP heavy with no combat, it was listed as a ‘story’ module. If it was nothing more than combat, it was listed as a ‘crawl.’ If it was a one-shot module or involved a story that didn’t really have much to do with the main plot, it was called a ‘soft-point’ and anything that had to do with the main plot was labeled as a ‘hard-point.’ Now, I’m not suggesting you go with these exact labels but having these on the modules help quite a bit to let people know what they were getting into before they sat down. Perhaps some variation would work for Pathfinder.

Something that also might help with the story issue is to loosen up the restrictions on modules and submissions. As things stand right now, with the very small page limit it is difficult to get a lot of background/story information into them. In theory, it is a great page and time saver to expect the DM to be able to go with a little information and flesh it out. However, in my experience, this doesn’t really work in a living setting very well because of a number of reasons. The DM could be new, could be intimidated by the players, the DM might not be quick thinking on their feet, might not have had time to really study the module, the DM might be unfamiliar with the ongoing story and so not feel comfortable adding bits in, etc. It is quite possible to have a heavy page count module fit into a 3 or 4 hour time slot.

I also believe that allowing people to submit any ideas for a module they have will allow you to garner better and more creative modules and will draw those authors who love to write but don’t want to be told what EXACTLY to write about out. (Everyone has to expect some editing but if it is your idea in the first place, I think that people won’t mind as much.)

Another way to help players feel involved is to have their actions actually count or impact the story either through a special event interactive, or a summary that can be turned into the author so that they can see what the majority of players did in the module. I know that when I’ve written modules, I would love to see the interesting and creative things that players did and I was often surprised when the majority of people didn’t do what I thought they would do. I had to rethink more than 1 module because the bad guy I was expecting to perish survived in the majority tables etc. Maybe he shows up at a later date, or maybe he turns other NPCs against the players, etc. There are many options! I also love shades of grey. ;)

I might also get some help for you in running the campaign. Right now, things are smaller and more manageable but as time goes on and (hopefully) the campaign grows, the overall management of the campaign is going to get more difficult for 1 person to deal with. I would suggest getting someone to assist you with say, plot related things, another to edit, etc. This will help from one person getting overwhelmed and allow for more complicated aspects of the campaign to be realized. Having those in charge get burnt out is not good and burn out can happen relatively quickly.

I think that the quick level advancement is fine so long as Pathfinder stays a 1-shot type, beer and pretzel game. But, if you are going to add in more story elements, I would suggest slowing the advancement down because part of the fun of gaming (imo) is not only to test out builds but to test out character concepts – to allow a character to develop and change as you play them and grant them their own special personalities and quirks. My favorite characters are the ones that are not just stats on a piece of paper, but have had various experiences in their adventuring career that I can role-play out. I already have a 10th level character and I’m just now starting to get a really good feel for her personality. (Please note that I do like the 1xp a module thing. I just think that perhaps leveling should scale as you advance. Maybe it takes 4xp to get to level 4, and 5 xp to get to level 5, etc.)

When new players sit down at a table, they are often just making a character on the spot or taking one of the iconics in order to get a feel for the game. In these types of sessions, a player might not make a character that they actually like or one that fits how they’d like it to into the world of Golarion. I would suggest allowing people to rebuild their 1st and 2nd level characters while they learn the rules, familiarize themselves with the world, and pathfinder society in general. I would have these characters freeze when they hit level 3. (Or you could do the same and only allow them to rebuild a 1st level character and have the characters freeze at level 2.)

I think for now, I’ll stop here. These are the largest suggestions that I can see right now. :-)

Thanks,

-Toni

Just a quick question - There are a lot of good questions being asked in the FAQ section. Are the more important answers going to be incorporated into the Society Guide at some point?

The FAQ is quickly getting long and difficult to sift through. :)

Thanks!

I suppose I can see how someone could take what I’m saying as confusing OOC and IC. Honestly, it is a little bit of both. I think that the actions IC should affect more of the OOC in terms of which group has the greater influence in the world. (Which, I guess is sorta OOC and IC!) I think that it shouldn’t necessarily be how many people play this particular faction, but if they were successful, how they were successful, and WHICH of the missions were successful. Right now, it doesn’t matter if I stick a note proclaiming the evils of slavery, or I rob a tomb - the outcome is the same. Unfortunately, I’m not really sure how to dictate this any better. Perhaps have premiers have a greater impact? Or make the missions more difficult? (I know that people say failing can happen but in my experience, it has been very rare.)

While the groups with the most players will have a greater pool of points, I think the world itself should also affect who is going to rise. I mean, say you have this tiny country but 75% of the players are have that as their faction and a massive country has only 5% - shouldn’t the size or even current power of the country have SOME affect on it? Maybe I just want too much realism in my gaming. :D

This should absolutely be about fun, cleverness, and struggle. There should be missions that make you or the others at your table go ‘OH!’ or missions that make the character that is doing it think twice. As well as missions that a character may outright refuse – to which there should also be consequences.

Maybe I’m also saying that right now they seem too simple and too straightforward? I agree with Doug that to me, it just seems that everyone is happy-lovey, everyone did a good job type feeling. Which is fine sometimes but I wonder if it should be the norm.

I will say that I love the little story points and details that are written into the missions. Currently, they are written in such a way as to give a good feel of the faction that they are representing. Awesomeness in a can!

-Toni

Hi!

First of all, I am going to apologize. I think my previous email came across a little grumpier then I intended. :)

I actually don’t have any issue with the amount of gold that is being given out at this point. I have always been a BIG fan of having to EARN what you get and not have everything fall into place perfectly for you. Yeah, raise dead is spendy but it SHOULD be. [Here soul, go back in this body! *Shove*]

And I do appreciate you telling me that your leveling is based off of the new prestige award system you will be unveiling and that a new system won’t work well with something new. However, there is the option of saying that not only do you have to have so many faction points to receive such-and-such a reward but stipulate that you also have to be a certain level.

And I do admit, I’m a little unclear on the ‘choosing’ to level slower, so maybe that’s where some difficulty is for me. Are you saying there is going to be an option for people to just to choose to not to level? Or, is this in reference to people who won’t be able to play as much?

-Toni

After having just run an all weekend long block of the pathfinder modules, I’d like to give a few suggestions on the faction missions. :-)

I have always loved the idea of faction missions and I have seen them pulled off poorly in some organized campaigns and very well done in others (Living Arcanis). I might suggest that you not have a mission for every faction in every single mod. As it stands right now, everyone knows that everyone else has some secret agenda that they have to accomplish and it seems to take away a little of the mystery surrounding them as well as their importance. “Oh yeah, what do you have to do this time Joe? Ah. No biggie, I’ll give you a hand if you want.” Additionally, with every faction having a mission, the faction that is going to have the largest impact on the campaign is just going to be the faction with the most players. Was this intentional or a side-effect?

While I know that some people really dislike character conflict in any form, I would also suggest that occasionally the faction missions should conflict with one another. Maybe one group wants to destroy something that is important to another group, or they both want the same thing, etc. This is especially true of factions like Cheliax. I mean really. They worship Asmodus. They are not going to play nice very often.

What do other people think? Do they like the faction missions as they stand right now? I'm curious.

-Toni

I had a rather large post all ready to go before I decided to just break it out into a few different posts.

First and foremost, was my concern on leveling. While the 1xp thing makes it far easier to keep track of, having a character level every 3 modules makes characters level extraordinarily quickly. While I don’t think this is too much of an issue at lower levels, when you reach the mid to high level range it is far too often. If leveling is increased then a character generally will not have enough wealth to survive at their level, and unfortunately 3.5 has a heavy emphasis on gear. Without a little bit of that money, such scenarios would be deadly. Add in that many players need a little bit of time to adjust to playing a character at a certain level, I think that character death will be high at the higher levels. You just can’t expect someone who’s never played a rogue before to be used to playing a 10th level rogue (or whatever) so quickly. Leveling shouldn’t be a given. If you want to keep the 1xp ratio to keep bookkeeping simple, perhaps change it to a sliding scale. Say it takes 3 adventures to get to levels 2-3, then 4 adventures to get to 4, 5 to get to 5th and so on. Even this maybe much too quickly – I have to sit and think about it further. And as I now have finished reading this thread, I see that someone else suggested the same thing. :)

I also see that some people on this topic are asking about character death. Death is a part of the game and to remove any danger of it (as some people have suggested) takes away a lot of the interesting challenges of the game. It makes things less heroic and less memorable for example, if you see that troll in front of you rip your friend’s arm off and you throw yourself in front of it so that everyone can flee. Whoopie. I died. Where was my save point again? Bleh. Death should absolutely have some hefty consequences to it. I’m not sure that just the gp cost is enough. I think that the level/con loss should remain.

I’ve played a lot of games in my life, and have a good amount of years and experience playing in both high level games and the living/organized play setting. I have to say I avoided any of the campaigns that had level bumps or automatic leveling like the plague as do most of the group that I play with. I honestly think that if you had such a function, it would drive players away in droves – WotC learned this with their campaigns that had such policies.
It really saddens me to see comments that the leveling system is set in stone for the next two years. The point of season 0 was to give suggestions, and Joshua’s comments about the system make it seem like that isn’t the case. While going to a more traditional xp system might be a little more difficult, utilizing some variations on the 1xp system shouldn’t be too hard.

Regardless, I want to say that I really appreciate all the work that is going into all of this. Thanks!

-Toni

*Lifts up head for very first post*

Honestly, I would bring back the save or die spells. I have played numerous characters (including fighter-types and wizardly-types)starting from 1st level and playing them through 20th level. In my experience (with some very tough DMs and adventures)at a certain point High Level play becomes much less dangerous. I don't like to cake-walk through things and I think that having the chance that someone could die at any moment keeps part of that challenge. Having that 'on-the-edge-of-your seat' type of feeling adds a lot to combats, imo.

I really dislike the straight damage from ALL spells as it makes them less unique and interesting - downright boring. It also doesn't really lessen the chance of character death except for those characters that have tons of hit points. In many ways, removing save or dies also lessens spell utility.

I have never understood people's hatred of failing a saving throw - even one that will kill you. Death is and always has been a part of the game and if you lessen the likelihood of death, I think it takes away from the game.

Thanks!

-Toni