Is there still no update on this? Are we still going to let players all start flying?
Most scenarios are bad for large land mounts let alone large flying mounts. Let me see you bring that inside and squeeze into the 20x20 room with four bad guys and your other five party members. or better yet the 5 foot hallway that almost all maps have. It's not that big of an issue.
the Haunted Jester wrote:
Isn't there a bus stop right in front of Arsenal Game Room? If so, I believe Bus 14 will help take you to most of the hotels in downtown Indianapolis...if I am right.
I am running Dawn of the Scarlet Sun at Arsenal from 6-10pm. If anyone needs a ride, I will be leaving the JW Marriott probably about 5:20 and coming back after my event. I have room for 2 or maybe 3 if you squish in the back with the toddler seat.
Kyle Baird wrote:
As this is the first event I know of where someone can play a level 13,14,15,16, or even 17. "They" means whoever breaks down the 12+ into tiers.
Andrew Christian wrote:
Based on what you told me this is legal as long as they give it back, right?
Andrew Christian wrote:
I guess that's the part that confused me. I was thinking that using a wand, scroll, or potion on someone that same as giving them the gold?
Thank you for the correction.
Andrew Christian wrote:
Why? Lets say I have a CLW potion that you need. I offer to loan it to you until we get back to Absalom. You use it in whatever town we went to. You then buy one sometime while we are traveling back to Absalom and give it to me. I now have not used a CLW potion so my Chronicle says nothing. During this scenario, you have used one and bought one, so they both get noted on your chronicle.
Why doesn't that work? It seems to me this could cut back on a little bit of create accounting (cheating).
So to go along with this, I could create a character who his whole function is to get to a certain level and never spend money but stockpile it for potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario and then just let the character die off and start again?
Not sure I like it, but that seems to be what you are telling me.
Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?
If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.
I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?
As Diego said, you have three choices at the end of the scenario.
1) Saving Throws
The first you do yourself with help (items or spells to increase save). The last two you can either pay for an NPC or have someone in the party cast the spell. The prices in GP or Prestige points are in the Society manual.
Many times at the end of a scenario, we have had to spend a night so the cleric could get the right spell for the next day. Be it remove disease, lesser restoration, restoration, and others.
The easy way to deal with this is to let the players who want a solid object have a nearly opaque "suite" that looks like whatever they want.
After all, nearly opaque is the same as partially translucent. Like partly cloudy is the same as mostly sunny.
But also include that observers will always know that it is really a summoner inside their "suite", because it just looks unreal.
Just me 2 cents.
Just wanted to add my 8 characters between 2nd and 12th level. All have CLW wands and all purchased with PP within their first couple of mods. That includes a healy cleric and a druid.
At almost every table I have been at almost everyone has a CLW wand. Spells and channels are used in combat and wands are almost always used out of combat.
Yes, the happy stick "costs" more than a renewable cure spell, but wouldn't you rather I have a spell slot to use in the next encounter instead of firing my crossbow.
The way I see it is:-Cure Spells cause damage
-LoH causes damage
-Inflict spells heal
-Channel positive to Heal has no effect - like it would in a battle against undead
-Channel positive to Harm undead damages - because the Dhampir acts as undead to positive energy
-Channel negative to Heal undead would heal - this is like an inflict spell
-Channel negative to harm living - should have no effect as the Dhampir acts like undead to negative energy
Just how I see it.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
If a cleric has to choose when they channel to heal the living or hurt undead, shouldn't the Paladin have to choose the same way. So if he chooses to heal the living it should have no effect on the undead (dhampir). Its only if they channel to harm undead that it matters. Right?
I ran 6 tables at a con this weekend and I would say that about half the fights would have been over in one round if I followed this rule for NPCs.
James Jacobs wrote:
Not to hijack a thread but as long as you want clarification about pronunciation, how do you pronounce Paizo? I have heard everyone from players and GMS to Store owners and distributors say it different.
I think the Core book says that all creatures of the "animal" type are legal for wild shape. And seeing how there is no mention of that part of the core rules not being allowed in the "Additional Resources", I would guess then that any creature of the "animal" type would be legal as long as it is not explicitly listed as not legal for a given product.
They have left lists like this open ended in the past to include future products without needing to add new stuff. I don't see any reason not to think this is what they are doing.
Joseph Caubo wrote:
Actually after the level 12 arc, you can still play the 13th and 14th level sanctioned modules with your character.
Atrius (3/4 through Eyes of the Ten)
Kalus - level 11 (should be 12 this month)
The problem with most of the ideas concerning a "Living" campaign is that it introduces a time element that the current game can not support. If your success or failure mattered to future scenarios, what would happen if I didn't play that scenario until after the scenario is effected? You would need to limit the time a scenario could be played and then not allow anyone to play old scenarios.
If you want that type of continuity, play in a home game. Pathfinder Society is just fine as a way for you to play the same character at gamedays and conventions around the country. It is a great counter to the one shot games that are usually at conventions where you play a character for 4 hours and then never touch it again.
Chris Mortika wrote:
Here is the Warhorn site with the schedule. I think on their games page they link you to it.Warhorn
james maissen wrote:
I think everyone will agree with your point. But why give the player who you know is going to take a long time controlling his one character in combat the ability to slow down combat more by having multiple things to control?
You can't have the rule say: you can have multiple combat pets as long as you know what you are doing and take less than 15 seconds to do your actions per figure on the table.
The rule must use the lowest common denominator.
This whole issue is kinda common sense. I mean the rules don't explicitly state that my character ate lunch today, but he must have.
If I have a cure moderate potion and you are down, I am going to pull my potion and not yours. Then when combat is done and you are up, you hand me the one you have. At the end of the scenario, you mark it used on your sheet.
In the same situation but if you don't have one. You buy one at the end of the mod and put it on your sheet. You hand it to me before we part ways and then mark it used on your sheet.
In both of these situations, it must be the same potion/scroll/sword/arrow/whatever.
That is how I have GM'd it for years and how I will continue to GM it. If there isn't a place to purchase the potion, RP the end of the scenario a little and don't just read the conclusion when the combat is completed.
Really...People need this crap spelled out?
I think the biggest reason people optimize their combat stats and skills so much is because they feel they don't need to optimize their social stats and skills.
A lot of players feel they can just have witty dialogue to overcome their low social skills in game. Some GMs even give roll-playing bonuses for good role-playing.
That just makes the problem worse because then there is no incentive for the player to make a well rounded character.
If you have a player who can properly demonstrate good technique with a sword, do you give him a bonus on his roll to hit next round?
Should be the same way with your social stuff. If you have a Charisma of 8, I don't care how you phrase the dialogue, you will not get a bonus to bluff your way into town. Especially if the only reason your charisma is that low is because you had to sacrifice something to get to 20 strength.
Hey guys, just to let you know an update to my earlier posts. I have been running a game here in the Milwaukee area on and off for awhile.
There is a good group of players here but they all seem to play in home games or at the three or four local conventions. A lot of the old LG and current LFR players are also playing Pathfinder. The Milwaukee meetup hasn't played any Society scenarios that I am aware of except the Master of the Fallen Fortress. And I think the Cav Games thing fell apart when they went out of business.
Let me know if you guys ever want to get together for some scenarios. I am also in Tosa (near 118th and North). I only have a few players, so we are always looking for more.
I'm curious where this comes from? I haven't read any of the other topics about this so I might just be ignorant but the feat description says nothing about this.
Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You can fight with a weapon wielded in each of your hands. You can make one extra attack each round with the secondary weapon.
Don't think of it like the two little traits you take when you make your character. It's actually a racial feature that is being replaced. This one actually replaces a bonus feat that half elves get - Skill Focus - at first level. So you are just replacing one feat with another.
I thought the idea that the characters were members of their home faction was actually a secret from all the other pathfinders. Kind of like secret societies within the semi-secret Pathfinder society.
As a matter of fact, I think it is actually a secret note that you get at the start of each mission. What is to stop you from saying to the other players around the table that you are Osirian, but actually be Andoran? As long as the GM knows the truth.
Holy forum-drama, Batman.
I don't understand the issue. The rule has been this way for a while. It has been brought back up every few weeks when a new GM posts asking what he gets.
If I GM a regular group who runs the same characters, I will have a character that has the same Chronicles they do when we go to a Con or someone else GMs. That is why you get a Chronicle for GMing it. Of course I can't play it now that I have read all the behind the scenes stuff.
If you are running several groups of people at different levels, have multiple characters getting the different Chronicles. There are 60 some scenarios now. Its not like it was when there was only a few.
Arnim Thayer wrote:
I am pretty sure you can only get player credit if you have not GM'd it. So to get the Chronicle for both, you must play it first and then GM it.
Are these listed in the PFS event finder? I check that regularly, and haven't seen this listed there. With more advanced notice, I probably could have attended, but at this point, probably can't.
I don't think so. That's why I wanted to let at least some people know. I doubt any of the people organizing it even come to these boards.