Activation Cube

Belafon's page

Goblin Squad Member. ****** Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth 3,172 posts (3,217 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 24 Organized Play characters. 6 aliases.


1 to 50 of 811 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

If I am perfectly honest, I would not mind dropping the rarity system for nonmagical weapons and armor, unlike the system Kevin suggests, you are already trained in all of those weapons you just can't buy them.

I am having a bit of a tough time with the concept that something is not available for purchase in arguably the largest marketplace in the world, where the Society has its headquarter. Chances are high that someone can either get it for you or craft it.

I'm not suggesting a new system, that's actually the way it works right now. I'm just saying that I don't see it as "cheesy" to move somewhere specifically to learn how to access an item or archetype.

Having said that, I agree with you, Sebastian. It's silly that I can't walk up to a dwarven blacksmith in Absalom and say "I would like to pay you for a dwarven waraxe" unless I am a dwarf.

It would make a lot more sense from an immersion perspective if the mechanics were based around proficiency, rather than access. So anyone could buy a dwarven waraxe, but you couldn't get to trained or better proficiency level without meeting the prerequisites. You would have to find someone willing to teach you the subtle techniques peculiar to the dwarven waraxe or it's just a heavy stick in your hands.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ok. So when you say “ignore the anathema” you mean “deliberately break the anathema and suffer the consequences.”

Yeah, you would keep Heavy Armor proficiency. Not really in the spirit of taking the dedication, but it works.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That boon has the “limited-use” tag, which in this case means you can only use it once.

Compare it to the next boon on the chronicle which does not have the limited-use tag and says

Spoiler:
All of your characters can learn the Morlamaw language

Also, please use spoiler tags when referring to things that happen in a scenario or rewards from a chronicle

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Belafon wrote:
But it's not "Paizo choosing arbitrary DCs." I'd chalk the problem checks up to the author not being fluent with the system yet.

Given Paizo outsources most adventures to freelancers (feel free to correct me on this, but I'm under the impression most AP adventures are written by freelancers), you could say "Paizo isn't doing anything." Except that's a silly position to take because Paizo puts their name on these adventures and sells them.

And you are correct, some of the DCs are well chosen. Others are not. But I'm more than happy to move the discussion away from that specific adventure and talk more about their adventure paths and Fall of Plaguestone.

I wasn't intending to imply "give Paizo a break, it's all the author's fault," though I can see how it could read that way. (Amusingly enough the author of this scenario - like all the material released on the same day as the new Core Rulebook - is an actual Paizo employee.)

I meant that the designers did not intend for all DCs to be level-based and this was an error; likely due to the newness of the ruleset. Once people play more and everyone gets more familiar with the rules, including writers and developers, you'll see less of this kind of thing.

tangent:
As a side note, here are the three groups in the chain when we're trying to figure out if something is an error.
1) Designers - The people who actually wrote the rules. (This gets confusing because in video game terms these people are usually known as developers or "devs." That's a different job in the RPG world, see #3. Mark Seifter is a Designer.)
2) Writers - Those who write the actual adventure.
3) Developers - Assign the adventures to writers (usually with a paragraph or so general idea of what the plot should look like). Work with the writer, taking one or more passes back and forth. Make sure the adventure is of appropriate challenge and length. Make sure the adventure is lore-appropriate. (The writer should only change the world when requested to do so.) Order appropriate maps and artwork to be included in the adventure. Check for inconsistencies and errors. Pass on to layout and publishing.

The Designers, the people who really, really know the rules, are rarely involved in the publication of an AP book, module, or PFS scenario unless they actually wrote it. The designers are usually busy working on the next hardcover. The Developers are Paizo employees who have a good grasp of the rules but not as complete as the Designers. Developers have a broader range of responsibilities and do a lot of what might be called "project management." Writers are usually freelancers (or Paizo employees picking up some extra money by writing freelance in their spare time). Writers have varying degrees of rules knowledge.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I went back and reread the scenario you cited in your first post, and I think you may have slightly overstated how big of a deal the scaled DC was. There are a LOT of skill checks in this scenario. Most of them are scaled properly (a Perception check to find something hidden by someone). Some are a fixed DC (there's a DC 12 Society check at both tiers to recognize national colors on the same page as the example you cited). There's some that could have used either simple or level-based DCs (a Medicine check on a corpse). And there's some that the author scaled that probably should have been fixed (your example, or a religion check to identify religious iconography).

But it's not "Paizo choosing arbitrary DCs." I'd chalk the problem checks up to the author not being fluent with the system yet.

There's going to be a learning curve for PFS authors. Not only for whether a check should be Simple or Level-Based, but when to use each type. Checks that advance the story should be Simple DCs so both tiers can succeed. On the other hand since you want both the high and low tier parties have an equal chance to get full rewards, authors are going to have to learn to avoid making rewards dependent on checks that should be a Simple DC. (Since high-tier parties would have a greater chance of success.)

5/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
pjrogers wrote:
Douglas Edwards wrote:
Theres really no polite way to say how I feel about goblins.
I used a thick black marker to totally cover over the goblin on the back of the 2e CRB.

I used a thick black marker to write in tengu stats in the 2E CRB. I can show you right here where it shows tengu in the Core Rulebook, in ink, so you can see I was right when I said it was a playable race.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Flagged for spoilers.

Please avoid tying scenario names/numbers to things that happen in that scenario without using a spoiler to hide it. (Especially in thread titles.)

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 4 people marked this as a favorite.

Question: I have hero point(s) left over at the end of an adventure. Can I use a hero point to reroll a check I make during downtime?

Answer: No. Hero Points are fortune effects, and Downtime Activities can't be modified by fortune effects.

Reference(s): Hero Points are fortune effects (CRB page 467). Downtime can't be modified by fortune or misfortune effects (CRB page 408).

Commentary: Downtime activities are abstracted as a single roll but represent sustained effort over long periods of time, usually multiple days. Fortune effects represent a sudden turn of good luck at a single point in time and therefore are not usable over the longer periods in which downtime activities occur.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sober Caydenite wrote:
Fortune effects (like Hero Points, per p. 467) can't modify downtime activities. Mentioned under Rituals on p. 408 of the Core Rulebook, Downtime (Checks) on p. 500,

Thanks for finding this!

I nominate this answer for inclusion in the PFS FAQ. There is a correct answer, but you have to cross-reference at least two sections. No special rule is required but it’s not obvious unless you know exactly what you are looking for.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The Player Basics has this to say about Access

Quote:
Access: Some uncommon options have an entry labeled “Access.” If you satisfy the access condition by being from the specified region, a member of a particular organization, or meeting some similar requirement, that option is common for you. All characters created for use in Pathfinder Society Organized Play are members of the Pathfinder Society organization in the world of Golarion, so they gain access to options that require membership in the Pathfinder Society.

This paragraph is where plain language runs up against game mechanics, and hits a brick wall when people decide to be overliteral. Prerequisites and Access are two different things, each of which may have multiple parts, all of which must be met to take an uncommon option. If, for example, there is an uncommon option with

Prerequisite: Membership in the Pathfinder Society Access: Master in heavy armor.
I could name multiple players who will argue that the line in the Guide says "I gain access to options that require Membership in the Pathfinder Society, so I gain access to this option regardless of my proficiency in heavy armor." Fortunately the fix is easy.
Quote:
Access: Some uncommon options have an entry labeled “Access.” If you satisfy the access condition by being from the specified region, a member of a particular organization, or meeting some similar requirement, that option is common for you. All characters created for use in Pathfinder Society Organized Play are members of the Pathfinder Society for purposes of meeting Prerequisites and Access conditions. organization in the world of Golarion, so they gain access to options that require membership in the Pathfinder Society.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Robert Hetherington wrote:
Considering some boons explicitly effect downtime, I don't see why the hireling wouldn't be around.

Those boons are (in theory) all supposed to have the “Downtime” trait (which hirelings do not).

You know, I’ve been so used to the Starfinder boon system that I completely missed the fact that you can slot multiple hirelings in PFS2. This actually makes me a lot less anxious about building a low-skill character.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It sounds like you just got some very bad luck with the ooze fight.

It's got a decent chance to crit, but not a likely chance as the AC of just about every PC is 22, requiring a roll of at least 14 on the die to crit on the first attack. Grab takes an action, as does constrict. The most likely turn for a black pudding is Attack, Grab, and Constrict for 3d8+14 bludgeoning plus 3d6 acid. If the PC doesn't escape it will most likely keep the Grab and Constrict the next round, costing it two actions for 1d8+7 bludgeoning plus 1d6 acid.

There's two ways to handle the split ability. One is to only use bludgeoning weapons and spells and the other is to deliberately split it as fast as possible and let Ezren and Fumbus deal with it (fireball and bombs). The second requires a lot more player coordination using delays and careful targeting to make sure you split it as far down as possible between its turn and Ezren/Fumbus. Unfortunately what often happens is that individual players pursue a mix of strategies and the end result is several barely damaged puddings.

It is a big problem that Amiri and Merisiel have no way to damage the black pudding by default.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
As has been stated upthread, the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign is one in which we hope that players are not reading ahead (either adventures or Chronicle sheets) in order to cherry-pick adventures based on a checklist of monsters they'd like to encounter or equipment they'd like to receive. As such, we consider discussion of such spoilers to be against the spirit of the game.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Disruptive is a function of the player, not the character.

A person who wants to play a disruptive character will choose the character options that best let them use the excuse of “it’s just my character.” In 2E that means goblins. In 1E, you could find plenty of complaints about the “only CN because I can’t play CE” rogues. Banning goblins would just mean those players find a different excuse.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
Then why have that minimum listed at all?

Because there is no minimum listed.

If I say “for every $30.00 I spend I can get 10 gallons of gas” does that mean I can only get gas by spending integer multiples of $30?

Everyone agrees it could be worded much better. And it will hopefully get changed quickly. But we’ve got multiple eyewitness testimonies that the Paizo/OPF leadership at GenCon said multiple times in multiple ways that the 8-day block was intended to be the standard unit for checks. (So you wouldn’t roll 8 checks for 8 days or one check for the whole 24 days after an AP module.) If you have a block that is less than 8 days, such as after a 2-day Quest, then use the length of that block.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here’s a real world example from my brother-in-law:

The brewery near his college was pretty big in the area but not a national market name. They had a lot of volume but not enough to fully automate the packaging process. They figured out it was cheaper to pay college students to pack bottles into 6-packs than hire full-time employees. You could basically show up any time you had a free couple of hours, pack bottles, and get paid based on the number of bottles you had done. If that was one day a week or three, the brewery didn’t care.

That’s essentially what earning income in PF2 is like. You show up when you have time. It doesn’t matter if you’ve only got a couple of days or come in eight days in a row. You get paid based on the work you do.

Spoiler:
Yes, since this was the real world there were a bunch of regulations they had to deal with. Everyone had to sign paperwork indicating they were independent contractors, there were maximum hours limitations, and the like.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was wrong about being done with the boons....

There are two Radiant Oath boons listed in the table (Aid the Fallen and Share the Burden) that do not have a description.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

4 people marked this as a favorite.
shalandar wrote:
Blake's Tiger wrote:
E.g. I haven't found a way to gain access to a katana.

I have found one sure way to access the katana, the Human 1st level feat: Unconventional Weaponry. The key part is: "or that is common in another culture" Obviously, katanas are common in Tian.

Someone also told me there is something in society play that says "if you are from a region, you gain access to uncommon weapons if they are common in that area" but I can't find that anywhere....

Be careful of the word ”obviously”. All of us may think that katanas are common in Tien, but until that information appears in a printed book, it’s just theoretical. You can’t take an option just because something is “obvious” because you may turn out to be wrong.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

2 people marked this as a favorite.
whew wrote:
Tim Schneider wrote:

32s for a crit? I think you've messed up your math. I only get 16s.

A crit on a level 0 task gives you level 1 task success earnings. So instead of 5c/day you get 2s/day. 8 days at 2s/day is 16s. How'd you get to 32? To get that you'd need to earn 4s per day.

Are you doubling for a crit? Cause the crit success doesn't say to do that. "Critical Success You do outstanding work. Gain the amount of
currency listed for the task level + 1 and your proficiency rank."

I read "task level + 1" as meaning use the level 1 income (2 SP) + 2 for rank would be 4 SP per day. However, (5+1+2=8) CP per day is also a reasonable interpretation of that text. Argh, now I'm not sure. I'm flagging it for FAQ.

I think you’re getting confused by the definition of Proficiency and the line on page 237 that says

Quote:
You gain an amount of income based on your result, the task’s level, and your proficiency rank (as listed on Table 4-2: Income Earned.

You use your Proficiency Rank to determine which column of the table to use, not as an additional amount of money added to the result. “Proficiency Rank” is not a number, it’s untrained, trained, expert, master or legendary. Having a rank of “trained” adds a +2 proficiency bonus to your skill check, but isn’t directly considered as “rank 2.”

Look at the “Harsk Makes Tea” example on the sidebar, which includes a situation where he crits the check.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

Bob Jonquet wrote:
It’s a philosophical argument that will never be “won” by one side or the other. IMO, you cannot divorce yourself from any part of a deity’s dogma so you cannot properly worship, say Asmodeus, and claim you stick to the lawful stuff and ignore the evil stuff.

I’ve always been of the opinion that based on their write-ups the worship of many of Golarion’s deities is far more nuanced than a simple “within one step of the deity’s alignment” can convey. How can you possibly worship Rovagug without being evil? Chaotic - even chaotic neutral - really doesn’t mesh with Pharasma. On the other hand Nethys doesn’t really care what you use magic for, as long as you are using magic.

I like how PF2 has narrowed it down to only certain alignments that are particularly suited for the deity.

Though like a lot of people I’m surprised at how narrow they made Asmodeus. I always viewed him as being more than willing to give power to anyone who would work to further Hell’s plots (wittingly or un-).

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pathfinder Training
If you assign two networking points to any one school, you get a bonus feat at 5th level. Do you have to meet the prerequisites for that feat?

To make the answer a bit more complex, it is possible (if unlikely) that someone from the Swords school might not be trained in any of their required skills. Change the end of the 2-point description to:

Quote:
At 5th level, you gain a bonus skill feat selected from the list below. You do not need to meet the prerequisites for this feat.

or

Quote:
At 5th level, you gain a bonus skill feat selected from the list below. You must meet the prerequisites for this feat. If you do not meet the prerequisites for any feats from your school when you reach 5th level, you do not gain this bonus feat until you meet a prerequisite.

If there’s one thing that years of PFS have taught me it is that any ambiguity will be found either a)accidentally or b)by someone trying to game the system.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Working my way through the boons now, here’s the first few questions/comments.

Grand Archive Champion, Improved: lists “Envoys’ Alliance Tier 2” as a prerequisite. Pretty sure it’s a copy/paste error.

Gameplay Objective Boons (Society Recruiter, Academic Conference, etc.) Several of these offer a reward for doing something that isn’t playing or GMing a PFS2 scenario (playing the ACG, helping at a con HQ, etc.). Standardize to one explanation of how you track this Fame/Rep gain. I personally like the Verdant wheel language “you earn 2 additional Fame and Reputation with the Verdant Wheel faction on the next scenario you play. (though I would change “play” to “play or GM.”)

Curse Breaker: is the intention to get the item for free after you erase the curse? I seriously doubt it but either way it should be a bit more explicit. Either specify that it is free or say “This uses the same rules as you would to Craft the item, including materials cost, with the following exceptions...”

Same as above for Naturalist.

Vault Delver capstone: this may just be me missing something but this doesn’t look like a capstone. Why would anyone spend 8 Fame to give another character access to an uncommon item when you can bequeath any uncommon option - including items - for 4 Fame (and at an earlier level, to boot) with the Bequeathal boon? Is this the right level/cost?

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey everybody, just a reminder from Tonya's first post:

Tonya Woldridge wrote:
To facilitate our use of this thread, do not use this thread for program implementation/campaign rules discussion. We will delete off topic posts.

Debating what is/is not correct (even if someone is clearly reading a basic rule wrong) isn't helpful to editing the Guide. Instead, make a single post expressing your opinion of what needs to be done with the Guide, such as:

Quote:
The Downtime rules aren't 100% clear. What happens if you have a block of time that doesn't exactly equal 8 days? (Such as a quest that grants 2 days or a field-commissioned agent that gets 12 days after a standard scenario?) Please include examples of PFS agents using their downtime in a variety of ways.

If someone is misunderstanding a rule, just send them a PM instead of cluttering up the thread.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here’s what I focused in on in the Guide:

Quote:
If you are using your Downtime for any other purposes, they must be completed first before you attempt your check to Earn Income.
Quote:
For each 8 day unit of Downtime you spend (including units where you complete multiple activities, such as spending 7 days retraining and then 1 day Earning Income), you attempt one check to Earn Income, using the result to calculate your total earnings for that block of Downtime.

It looks like the intention is

1. Do any downtime tasks other than earning income.
2. The remainder of your time is spent earning income in 8-day blocks. If you have “extra” days and can’t form an 8-day block, form the largest block possible.
2. For each 8-day block (or fraction thereof) make 1 check and multiply the money earned by the number of days in the block.

Step two is the part that might be confusing at first. It doesn’t explicitly say “you can’t split a block into 8 separate checks.” And it doesn’t say “If your downtime isn’t evenly divisible by 8, use the remainder as a unique block.” But after a few read-throughs I’m sure that’s correct.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, piecemeal armor is a potential alternate armor system to be used in a campaign instead of regular armor purchases. The various alternate systems may end up being a tiny bit better or a tiny bit worse than the “standard” but it doesn’t really matter as long as the whole campaign is using the alternate assumptions.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Young Squire Pettypants wrote:
Can Monitor Obedience or Fey Obedience be used in place of Deific Obedience for the Divine Paragon archetype?

Strictly as written, no. You get the Deific Obedience feat, and therefore would need to worship a deity that specifically grants a Deific Obedience boon.

As a GM I wouldn’t have any problem letting a player use Fey Obedience instead. The introduction to Fey Obedience in TFW:RotF specifically notes that you can use Fey Obedience to qualify for Exalted, Sentinel, and Evangelist prestige classes with no changes - normally character level 5 - so making a Divine Paragon cleric wouldn’t be out of scale.

BotD specifically states that Fiendish Obedience does NOT directly qualify for those classes (it suggests the PCs be two levels higher to enter the prestige class) so getting the boons at the Divine Paragon levels would be too early. Similarly, you have to be at least level 7 to become a mystery cultist (Celestial Obedience) or Proctor (Monitor Obedience) so I wouldn’t allow those for Divine Paragon either.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Archives of Nethys is your source for. . . well. . . everything. The Open Road glyph identifies PFS-legal material.

The Exchange

6 people marked this as a favorite.

If you really do want to “teach him a lesson.” Start at level 8...

Very first encounter: Doors slam closed and a long (but not particularly dangerous) fight takes place in an area saturated with medium radiation. While this player tries desperately to get through the sealed door, the other players button up their Item Level 7+ armors and say “what’s that guy’s problem?”

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If I'm reading between the lines correctly, you're starting your campaigns at pretty high levels. A complete speed suspension is a level 12 item. That's why this is showing up as an imbalance. If the campaign was starting at level 1, the items he could get would be far less useful.

In addition, this is really only an imbalance for a character level or two. Because of the way Starfinder prices and loot scales up rapidly, his "boost" won't last for long before those starting items get lost in the noise floor. The other players will likely have picked up items of equivalent item level within a couple of character levels.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BastionofthePants wrote:

So when a mounted rider acts, they are treated as a single creature, with a single set of actions (swift, move & standard) in total, right?

Therefore, when that mounted rider chargers, only a single attack is allowed. Usually the rider.

This is not correct. Both the rider and the mount get a full set of actions, though there are limits on what the rider can do based on how far the mount moves. If the mount charges, both creatures count as charging, and can each (normally) make a single attack at the end of the charge.

Quote:

BUT what if the mount has the Pounce ability?

Would that mount, who is allowed to take a full attack action as part of a charge, be allowed to attack in addition to the rider? The mount IS performing a charge, after all, and the usual rules about "only one attack per charge" wouldn't apply to the mount.

The mount gets its full attacks and the rider gets a single attack.

Mounted combat is ugly and tricky. Be sure to read the full entries for the Handle Animal skill and Ride skill in addition to the mounted combat rules. Once you declare what you are doing but before the actions happen you may have to make a whole series of checks to determine a)How many of the rider’s actions are available, b)How many hands the rider has to use controlling the mount, and c)If the animal performs the actions at all.

flagged for movement to the rules forum

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Yakaboski wrote:
Kevin Willis wrote:
So you are requesting that the Organized Play Foundation or Paizo take on legal responsibility/accountability for disputed incidents of harassment that happen at a local comic book store?
No. I'm asking that they take harassment claims against their volunteers seriously.

And do what?

This is why people are confused by your posts. What does “take harassment claims seriously” mean? What do you want the Organized Play Foundation to do? Ban harassers from participating in OPF games worldwide? Publish a “known harassers” list? Provide counseling?

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I made some suggestions in the other thread, but just to recap I think some of the flourishes are just way too good, especially as a single-level dip. At a minimum I would:

1. Make Jinin’s Exodus an enhancement bonus.
2. Put a minimum level requirement on Wrath of the Heavens (probably 9th).
3. Ban or drastically alter Kitsune’s Mystique. One benefit or the other, not both. A 3rd level snakebite striker brawler can feint while moving, but only if she already has Improved Feint. A sage counselor monk gets Improved Feint for free, but it takes his second level feat and he can’t do it while moving. Pick one, and put a minimum of 3rd level to choose the flourish.

Some people also have problems with the amount of AC a Warrior Poet can get up to. But the Warrior Poet is quite MAD (multiple attribute dependent) so it’s not terrible if you use a reasonable point-buy when building characters.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I almost never play female characters these days, as opposed to my early teens when it was about a 50/50 split. If I really examine why this is so, it’s probably because since then I’ve seen so many men playing offensively stereotyped (or just poorly stereotyped) female characters and have decided that the easiest way to avoid falling into that trap is to avoid playing female characters.

Earlier posters are right; it’s often the desire to create a memorable character that leads to the stereotypes. So we try to create characters with a funny personality quirk. While a man playing a male character might decide to play up a collection of buttons, overwhelming ego, fondness for marching songs, or love of cabbage, the same player might look at his female character and decide to play up “is woman.” So we get ditzes (complete with valley girl accents), man-hating feminists (“see, I’m making fun of myself!” [no you’re not]), and ladies who obsessively clean everything and complain about dirty adventurers.

And then there are what I refer to as the “wish-fulfillment” characters. Female PCs who act in ways their male players wish women would act around/towards them. It can occasionally be darkly amusing to see someone unconsciously acting out their desires but far more often (and far too often) it’s just plain disgusting watching a man put his female character in pornographic situations and insist he’s “just doing it to be funny.”

You can play cross-gendered characters. But it requires a degree of awareness that is depressingly uncommon.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
CigarPete wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Davor Firetusk wrote:
Yes though it is a strong trade-off to do all those feats by then. You can go very Nova, but will very quickly run out of bombs.
Something i don't see alchemists doing nearly enough is since you have point blank precise rapid shot anyway is doing archery on the mooks to save bombs for novaing the wizard.
Alchemists only get prof with simple weapons, so would either need to invest a feat or take the Grenadier archetype to give proficiency with Long bow.
The downside to the grenadier archetype being...

Those pitiful grenadiers can’t take the mindchemist archetype. They are stuck as relative morons.

Seriously: grenadier is a fun archetype and certainly a powerful one to play. The main downsides are that it blocks off a fair number of other archetypes and that you get less bombs (with the PFS rule of extra bombs replacing brew potion). Nobody’s going to complain about a player with a grenadier, but it isn’t a “must take” archetype.

Edit: Curse your ninja skills, Auke. We seriously both went for the same example?

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would need to dig into the Community Use Policy (and applicable law) to be sure, but I think enterprising players could build their own electronic boon tracker.

Presuming the “HeroLab Code” box is going to contain a unique identifier for each scenario to make the boons appear for that character, there’s no technical reason a free tracker couldn’t reference the same codes.

Personally I’ll probably stay analog, but a fair amount of people would probably like a digital tracker/slotter.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

With the understanding that Starfinder is not Pathfinder...

If you hunt around on the boards you can find advice from actual Paizo designers on what usually makes a good rules mechanic. Most of it is in the form of "Don't do this!" I think Sean K. Reynolds was probably the most prolific poster among the designers.

One of the many no-nos is "No item or feat should duplicate a class feature."

There are examples of Paizo breaking this rule in their own published material, of course. But the general idea is that class features are what makes classes unique. If you add a Remote Hack feat, why not a Trick Attack feat? Or a feat that gives anyone a single Envoy Improvisation.

That's not to say you can't do this in your game. If it is necessary in your game, absolutely do it. If it's not necessary but is desired, you can still add it but you probably want to make it more expensive. I'd probably do something like this

Remote Interface wrote:

Prerequisites: Computers 5 ranks, Amplified Glitch

Benefit: Once per day, you may attempt to hack into a computer wirelessly from a distance of up to 20 feet. You must use a computer with a Range I (or higher) upgrade module to attempt the hack. Interface protocols vary from device to device, so the time required to perform this hack is doubled. If the hack attempt is interrupted, it still counts as your use of this ability for the day. The hack attempt otherwise functions as a regular attempt.

Improved Remote Interface wrote:

Prerequisites: Computers 7 ranks, Amplified Glitch, Remote Interface

Benefit: You may use the Remote Interface feat up to three times per day and your range improves to 30 feet.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I think orders is really only useful on the pilot isn't it?

Completely situational.

Greatly depends on the size of your crew. The smaller the crew, the more likely you are to give orders to someone other than the pilot.

If you're taking a lot of damage you may want to have the engineer divert and patch in the same round. You may want the science officer to rebalance shields and lock on to the biggest target. If you don't have many gunners, you may want to have the same gunner shoot an aft weapon at the ship tailing you while broadsiding the big target in front. Or just shoot twice so she isn't taking the Fire at Will penalties. Having the pilot able to stunt and Maneuver or Full Power in the same round is often useful.

Starship combat can break down into a solitaire game quite easily if one player continually comes up with a grand plan and tells everyone else what to do each round. Can be fun, especially if it's a group of friends and the captain has the plan. It can also be quite annoying when that one guy keeps trying to "play your character."

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Whether you are a fan or not, the paradigms inherent in the design of the item rules and wealth of Starfinder are “buy new; don’t upgrade” and “you can’t afford new weapons and armor every level.”

Power armor upgrading is a decent compromise to let you keep using an armor with a unique ability a little bit longer than you normally would before replacing. It isn’t a good deal financially. If it was a good deal (or just a break-even deal) it would have shifted the whole monetary assumption of the game.

I’m personally not a fan.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Paizo has explained that the old process of giving gift certificates created accounting problems which are at least in part a legal issue.

The way my accountant brother-in-law explained it to me:

Businesses that sell gift cards can book the revenue from the sale immediately, however they have to track the total outstanding gift card amount as an expected future cost. He used some accounting terms and reasoning at this point and my eyes glazed over, but if I understood correctly the takeaway was that they have to carry a certain amount of reserves fenced off for covering the redemption of those gift cards. If the cards get lost or simply don’t get redeemed they still have to keep carrying that reserve.

The particular problems with the gift certificates as convention prize support are: 1. With randomized distribution a decent percentage of them are going to people who are trying the game out and will never visit Paizo.com, much less buy something, and 2. Not all organizers were diligent about returning gift certificates that were not given out.

Coupons - which the newer vouchers act as - aren’t subject to the same requirement.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Puts on “reads too much” hat.
Puts on “tread carefully” shoes.
Shouts that he’s not belittling anyone.

Before going down the trigger tag path I would encourage the responsible parties at Paizo to pursue the available academic research on the subject. Unfortunately there is very little published so far, but some data suggests that trigger warnings may be counterproductive. Other research says they can be helpful to people with severe post-traumatic stress. I’m not bashing trigger warnings, but I’m not praising them either. I just want to make sure the end result is more positive than negative.

1 to 50 of 811 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>