Since this is already a pretty bonkers concept, would you consider adopting the Automatic Bonus Progression variant? That would allow us players to not worry about the fundamental rune minigame and relieve some of the stress over who's spending how much of the money on what. Will we get an alert that we're fighting the Final Boss encounter? Sweep wipe with dramatic music, maybe? ;) Caine is a swashbuckler, Princess is a fire kineticist. My original idea for this was a rather self-sufficient monk.
I agree with the conclusion: this is for a willing ally to accept damage/negative effect and not a loophole to make beneficial effects better. I disagree with the assessment that use of the rule is up to the GM now that OP has stated PFS uses that rule, else a GM could arbitrarily decide to not use it in the context for which it was intended.
That’s funny, though not for you. The rationale is technically correct—digital randomization is not random—but one would need to be very adept at computer science to abuse that fact. More likely could be that a specific version of dice roller is suspected of being controlled so rather than playing whack-a-mole versus digital apps, they banned all dice rollers. Suggest they generate a list of allowed dice rollers. Pathbuilder should have a decent reputation.
Pirate Rob is correct: this is a discussion best held with your local organizer. You could also consider asking the father (or the VO) how you could adjust your GM techniques to help the son respond faster. I would also give up on any illusions that you can maintain a certain tone or gravitas in your games. Plenty of players find roleplay difficult, and plenty of adults throw out movie or TV quotes and references that deviate from the setting and/or tone of a given scenario.
You don't need to log into an account to fill out character information. Click the "Sign Up" button to sign up for the PFS session. You will then be shown a pop up that encourages you to create an account with three options: "I have an account," "Create Account," and "No Thanks." Choosing "No Thanks" takes you immediately to the character details entry form. To create Sign Up sheets, e.g., as the GM or event organizer, you need an account. Simply having an account requires no money. The paid version allows anonymous emailing of character sheets and a string to copy for rapid completion of reporting details.
I don't think you have a way to get to exactly where you want to be with any rebuild boon. Problem 1: you want to switch your arcane thesis, which is part of your wizard chassis, to the remaster version while keeping the pre-remaster spell schools/focus spell. No solution. Problem 2: The AcP rebuild boon doesn't force you to change anything specific, so you could use it to change your feats without forcing an entire rebuild: removing mauler and rearranging staff acrobat feats.
I now realize hybrid legacy-remaster oracle is a nightmare to understand. I don’t want to have to figure out these ambiguous rule interactions on the fly when GMing. As a GM, I would like a more standardized endpoint for oracles that removes the ambiguity of how a class works. That is a table argument waiting to happen.
Ravingdork wrote: Why on earth would Paizo allow free rebuilds for Player Core 1 characters, but not Player Core 2 characters? Absurd! So that the nuance isn't lost to others in the several posts of concern: Player Core 2 characters, including oracles, can be rebuilt for free x 1... if they had 1 XP on them before November 2023. There are two different concerns with the oracle conversion rules: 1) Newer players who may not even have been PFS players before the blog scrolled off the website's front page who created oracles after November 2023 must now pay AcP to rebuild if they want to not be an NPC acolyte class with penalties rather than rebuilding for free x 1. From my perspective, this is the bigger concern, as it disproportionately affects new players and those players may have accumulated more than 12 XP but not enough games for a rebuild boon. They can't play that character to earn AcP, or else they'll be stuck as a pre-Remaster oracle (see below). 2) Older characters who could rebuild but don't want to, however, the way the conversion rules are written, the Mystery must use the remaster version, which is where all the benefits for an oracle used to rest in the pre-remaster version. 3/day spontaneous divine casting, with no benefits from the Mystery, but a curse that now increases each time you cast a Focus spell, and can only decrease by 1 by refocusing, and has no upper limit--those Ancestor oracles are going to be irritated by their Clumsy 6 status--and any other pre-remaster feat or feature that interacted with the mystery benefits won't work, either. It's a legitimate concern.
JohannVonUlm wrote:
That the document is a draft is technically true, but I believe you will find the emotional component of the concern comes from the response received following the concern for oracles built after November 2023 being pointed out. Alex Speidel wrote:
That response does not sound very draft-ish.
Tridus wrote: And why do Oracle Mysteries/Curses get replaced by the new ones while other subclasses (like Bloodlines) don't. . . The problem stems from the PFS rule that features with the same name are treated as an errata by PFS, so PFS players must use the Remaster version. I don't have access to the Player Core 2, but if Angelic Bloodline is still called Angelic, those Angelic sorcerers will need to change to the Remaster version of their bloodline. The difference being that a pre-Remaster sorcerer using a Remaster bloodline still functions correctly. They just miss out on Blood Potency and any proficiency changes that I might not know about. However, a pre-Remaster oracle with a Remaster mystery 1) looses all benefits from their mystery, 2) can't generate the cursebound status because 3) they can't take the new feats. An example from Player Core 1: Druid Order Animal kept its name, so Druids must use the new version. Wild Order was changed to Untamed Order, so you have to keep Wild Order if you don't rebuild, which doesn't break anything. Tridus wrote: . . .we broke your whole character concept. . . We, as players, need to be clear on what the problem is, and it is not that concepts were broken, e.g., my flavorful ancestors oracle can't be a gish now, but rather that the pre-Remaster class does not function--the mechanics are broken--except as a very feature poor class. Furthermore, this makes pre-Remaster oracles so inferior as a class to be an active problem to tables and likely temptation for heated arguments (and bullying) among players once they find out someone brought their beloved pre-Remaster oracle to play (or just don't have enough AcP for a rebuild). Giving out a rebuild to oracles alleviates that potential harm and has only the downside of creating an expectation for free rebuilds when a class is remastered, though I think they should if the remastering process broke the class.
Madhippy3 wrote: You misunderstand me. They keep the Legacy, but they do not keep pre-erratas. For example the cantrips that all got errated in the remaster so they got a second damage dice and no spellcasting modifier for damage. Those spells don't exist anymore. Legacy Produce Flame is 2d4. Legacy Ray of Frost same thing. Its a small example but it goes to show if they do an errata the sites which show official rules won't save what is being overwritten. I think you've chosen an unlucky example. All from AoN: Legacy Crossbow Ace wrote: You have a deep understanding of the crossbow. When you're wielding a crossbow and use Hunt Prey or use Interact to reload your crossbow, you gain a +2 circumstance bonus to the damage roll on your next Strike with that crossbow. If the crossbow is a simple crossbow, also increase the damage die size for that attack by one step. You must make the attack before the end of your next turn or these benefits are lost. Remaster Crossbow Ace wrote: Your deep understanding of the crossbow allows you to reload efficiently while moving yourself out of the line of return fire. Either Create a Diversion or Take Cover, then Interact to reload. As normal, you must meet the requirements to Take Cover; you must be prone, benefiting from cover, or near a feature that allows you to Take Cover Legacy Ruffian wrote:
Remaster Ruffian wrote:
Madhippy3 wrote:
AoN, at least, keeps Legacy links to things. You can find it near the thing's title and can swap back and forth between Remaster/Legacy.
Given the extreme overhaul to Oracle, unseen back in November 2023, and that not rebuilding an Oracle results in a non-functioning pile of mechanics, would it be the worst thing in the world to take a moment to consider and confer within the OP team whether allowing all Oracles created before August 12 wouldn’t be a good thing?
Everyone above is correct, so just to say it another way: "All" still means "All" in that "All characters have [the potential to take] the uncommon options. . ." Fane's Fourberie is a Rogue and Swashbuckler class feat. The character must still follow the mechanical rules regarding class feats by being a Rogue or Swashbuckler or by taking the Rogue or Swashbuckler Dedication multiclass archetype feat and the Basic Trickery, Advanced Trickery, Basic Flair, or Advanced Flair feats. Being granted access no more overrules which classes can take a class feat than it overrules the level requirement of being at least level 2.
You retrain with Downtime, just like regular PF2. You get 8 days of Downtime after a Scenario (2 days for Quest/Bounty). It costs 7 days of Downtime to retrain a Feat. So after you complete a Scenario, instead of rolling Earn Income for 8 days, spend 7 days to retrain and 1 day to Earn Income (or craft or something else).
SoulBaker wrote:
First, there's no problem with the granted Reactions. The rules for Reactions explicitly state they happen immediately (and there's no text stating if they lack a trigger they occur during your turn like Free Actions have). What you're doing is reading the text in a way that supports how you (and I) believe the feature should work. What you're missing is that the text you quoted makes no mention of timing to override the rules text of Free Actions. "Enabling these allies to respond to your tactics in combat" does not grant "immediate" response or response "outside your turn." And I have experienced at least one GM who reads it such that the Free Actions must wait. Where there is one, there are more, and they are technically correct. So, again, why not throw a few extra words in there to remove ambiguity?
Shinigami02 wrote:
I assumed the Commander's action served as a trigger for the granted free actions until a GM during the playtest pointed out the rule on free actions. Player Core pg. 15 However, they're writing an entire book with the new class in it. We shouldn't have to rely on assumption and referring to pre-remaster class features that don't work well without ignoring a printed rule when they can just slip into the Tactics rules text a line to the effect of, "Free actions granted by a tactic can be used even when it's not your turn."
I didn't remember to get this into the survey, but hopefully other people mention it: free actions without triggers wait until the character's turn to activate under baseline rules; if the Commander granted free actions are meant to trigger on the Commander's action, then they need reference to the Commander's action being the trigger. And if not, that needs to be more clear in the class/feature description.
Also more explicitly stated in the Table Variation Appendix. Table Variation (bold emphasis mine) wrote: As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and responsibility to make whatever judgments, within the rules, that you feel are necessary at your table to ensure everyone has a fair and fun experience. This does not mean you can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in this document, a published Pathfinder source, errata document, or official FAQ on paizo.com. House ruling critical results--fail or success--beyond that described in the source text is a contradiction of the rule. Table Variation Appendix (bold emphasis mine) wrote: Whatever changes you make as GM must remain true to the fundamental mechanical structure and challenge of the encounter. Furthermore, Paizo has officially published critical hit and critical fumble decks, and neither of those is legal in PFS. If the official product version of what you propose is not legal, house ruling it wouldn't be either.
Auditory does not imply speech but can include speech ("can speak or otherwise produce the required sounds"). It includes whistling, snapping, playing a drum, anything that makes noise. The is the Linguistic trait requires language. I could have sworn the Command an Animal used to have the option for the visual trait as well. There isn't an official ruling. Having trained enough cats and dogs, I'd allow it. In a magical world, someone who can regularly change their shape and has a pet as smart as a companion can have worked out a system for that pet to follow their commands in all shapes, in my assessment.
I've seen old PFS1 scenarios locked behind two very difficult Perception checks.
Just to point out that it's not so clear cut/one rule fits all situations: Torag - anathema to show mercy to the enemies of your people
And you can have Champions (and Paladins) of any of those.
The Decemvirate is a single character, mysterious and untouchable. Each lodge has a Venture-Captain. The three Masters are teachers. Don't they serve under the Grand Lodge's Venture-Captain? The factions are factions and, in my opinion, are far too organized since PFS2 1-01. They should be more like common ideals or motivations causing like-minded Pathfinders to coalesce together from time to time. Some of them might have charismatic leaders or heads but with no organizational authority. But it is what it is, now.
Counter to that assertion: how did Magic Fang, which grants item bonuses work? Strict RAW, though, that is correct. My interpretation of RAI is that restriction applies to actual items granting item bonuses. E.g., to prevent placing handwraps of mighty blows on animal companions. Alternative RAI, which I don't ascribe to, is the extra dice applies because that's not a "bonus" but the +1 item bonus does not. However, you could use this interpretation to use handwraps on animal companions to stack dice.
There is a Campaign Clarification that limits Adopted Ancestry. Quote: The Adopted Ancestry feat (page 252) can only be used to select common ancestries or ancestries which all Pathfinder agents have access to (such as kobolds). The Organized Play team will look to create additional boons to allow characters to be adopted by additional ancestries. Book text wouldn't override a campaign clarification. The boon adds options to the campaign clarification.
If you want to play a rogue--and we want to play high--I'll play my cleric. I have a rogue (3rd) and cleric (4th) in that range. I probably have some blobs in range too. I've got lots of options for 1st-2nd, but I would expect the playtesters would want to play with as many feats and features as then can.
It would be more appropriate if you were going to do that to use 8 treasure bundles per scenario, which is what the organized play system has figure should be the average treasure bundles earned. At the very bottom of this page linked below is the official table you're looking for: Multiply the number in the 8 row by 3, and that's how much you have earned for that level.
With as much content that is sanctioned for Adventure Mode, and given that the credit is applied to a character not participating in the Adventure/AP, I'm not sure what the point of the policy is anymore. Most PFS scenarios don't have boons anymore, and they're more style than power now, so boon hunting isn't that same advantage as it was in PFS 1e, but if the OP kept the policy in regards to PFS scenarios, I could understand that. Adventure and AP boons, not so much.
I believe that I understand and fully support artists on the issue of corporations hiring actual artists to provide art for their products. However, as a private citizen who is looking for art to use in my personal hobby activities for which I make no money and, in fact have to shell out money in the case of GMing Organized Play, I don't believe that either artists or Paizo have any business judging me on my use of AI art for fun. The people playing and GMing in PFS are just private citizens, not employees, playing their hobby in a format open for anyone to join. And, to be clear, what I use is by no means prodigious: one of my own PCs here, an NPC there.
|