Bob miller-camp's page

Deckard Cain, but with a bit more crazy old man put in.

It is official. The ACG update on 7-22-15 adds the words "this is a mind-affecting effect." to the evil eye text.
First page of the errata under the changes to page 36 in the book.

Thanks for all you have done!

Forcing doubt to creep into ones mind sounds like mind-affecting to me.

There are still more to be edited though.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rfdp?Is-GenCon-Reporting-done

Also to note. the Brain Spiders are Neutral Evil this time, instead of simply neutral.

Whoops. Brain fry. SO more of the skills are off and confusing me than before.

5. It looks like they have a rank. UMD 4 =+2 racial,+1 int,1 rank. If that is the case they are still missing the +3 class bonus. unless I am simply missing something it looks like several of the skills of the zombie lords are off by 2 or 3.

IF YOU AREN'T GMing THIS DO NOT READ!
....
....
...
....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Questions.
1. Slime in room 7. Are we hitting all equipment (backpacks, clothing, holy symbols, spell pouches and ect.) with this or just armor when it gets put on the PCs?

2. room 8. what do we do mechanically to turn a critter into an undead thrall? I suppose the Big Bad uses his command word and lets the critters cook till they have no more levels, but what then?

3. Is it safe to assume that his command word to summon move a marked critter to the circle is a standard action?

4. Does an undead thrall still have to make the strength check to leave the circle?

OK, My brain was stuck going the wrong direction. Got it now. Thanks folks!

Got that far. I suppose I am looking for some ideas on descriptions to give players I GM for that ask those sorts of questions. Drawing a blank at the moment. Just looking for a few little details.

Ah, that makes a lot of sense. thanks John.

This may be an odd question to start this topic, but what makes the tomb in mission seven a "rare form of Osirion Burial"? What details make it different than other Osirion tombs aside from its location?

The second paragraph refers to the conclusion of the "expedition TO the sky citadel"(which began in #5-24) not the exploration of it, nor the return trip. Also 6-00 in the summary refers to the expedition into the citadel. That information together implies that #5-99 is happening as the Society is finishing the trek to the citadel or close to it, but not that the group has explored the place as far as I can tell. A quick timeline might make that more concrete for us though.

Didn't find this till just now, but for what its worth I already posted a basic file for the whole Paths we choose scenario. I'm sure somebody can make it cleaner, but there it is. (At the time of posting it ended up in the Paths We Choose season 6 sub-thread.)
http://pfsprep.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewforum.php?242

Ah. Thanks!

Would there happen to be an event code floating around yet for prepping chronicle sheets?

I'm thinking the aura alone will get the point across. That way she doesn't even have to flick them. Also it would feel more to the point that she is not interested in fighting at all. Its supposed to be a meeting of the minds.

If one has a party silly enough to attempt a fight with the Diamond Sage, the Bestiary 4 is not actually in the PRD as the scenario says it should be. I suppose I just use the pfsrd now?

Thursday, August 14
Slot 1 (0800-1300): OFF
Slot 2 (1300-1800): #5-12: Destiny of the Sands, Pt 1: A Bitter Bargain (1-5)
Slot 3 (1900-2400): Gen Con Season 6 Special: The Paths We Choose (3-7)

Friday, August 15
Slot 4 (0800-1300): OFF
Slot 5 (1300-1800): #5-12: Destiny of the Sands, Pt 1: A Bitter Bargain (1-5)
Slot 6 (1900-2400): Gen Con Season 5 End Special: Legacy of the Stonelords (1-4)

Saturday, August 16
Slot 7 (0800-1300): #5-12: Destiny of the Sands, Pt 1: A Bitter Bargain (1-5)
Slot 8 (1300-1800): #5-12: Destiny of the Sands, Pt 1: A Bitter Bargain (1-5)
Slot 9 (1900-2400): Bonekeep Level 3

Sunday, August 17
Slot 10 (0900-1400): #5-12: Destiny of the Sands, Pt 1: A Bitter Bargain (1-5)

I think I'll be running #5-12 from memory by sunday.

Mending is a wonderful thing for this scenario but can take that PC out for a while. With only 2 hours to snoop it can hurt to take a PC out of the searches for 10 minutes for every 1d4 repaired.

As a GM in PFS, which trumps which if there is a discrepancy? I ask because of the trick with the sorcerers robe, laughing touch and hideous laughter trick discussed in the "So I think "they" got me" thread. Chris kept things moving fine, but it got me to looking at the sources and I found that in the PRD hideous laughter has

"... The subject can take no actions while laughing... On the creature's next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. This is a full round action..."

the laughing bit from Laughing touch limits you to a move action for the save so you cant save then. but in the up to date PDF the full round action part is stated differently.

"On the creature’s next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw
to end the effect. If successful, the effect ends and the creature is
treated as if it spent a full-round action on its turn."

So no actual full round action is used. You just make a save and that's your turn. the laughing touch is useless at this point.

A long winded example I know, and I am not sure how common these discrepancies are. the question remains however. Is there an official trump, or is it just up to judgment? Also as a GM I can have both the PDF and the PRD at the table but the players are limited to books and memory. If what they have at the table conflicts with what I have at the table what is a good way to handle that if its called out.

Alrighty. Thanks folks!

it would seem like a breath weapon is more of an area of effect than a ranged weapon. regardless if I use my breath weapon from my mouth and can bite things 10 ft away it would make sense for me to be able to use that reach to breath a bit further, over things or perhaps even around corners.

I'm having trouble finding out if a dragon is able to use the reach it has available for its bite to use its breath weapon. It would make perfect sense if it could but then again rules don't always agree with me.

@Blake.
Sorry but the way you wrote that last bit confuses me for whatever reason.

DM BLAKE wrote
"No, you cannot use just one claw for a complete Bite/Claw/Claw full-attack, but you could use just one claw for a Bite/Claw full-attack."

it looks like your saying to use a claw for a bite attack, which for the proposes of a full attack with natural weapons you cant do.

did you by any chance mean...
As the grappled critter that has one bite and two claws one can for their full attack, use one bight and one claw?

IF YOU ARE GRAPPLED
"...Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that doesn't require two hands to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack or full attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach..."

So, for the full attack can i use multiple natural attacks or does "a light or one handed weapon..." mean a single weapon?

So...
Critter with a bite and two claws. You would assume since you cant do anything that requires two arms you couldn't use 2 claws. The question is could critter in question while grappled both bite and use one claw for its full attack?

I am speaking BAB below 6. Shot one and the rapid shot are intended to be main hand. Then we step in to smack somebody in the face with some sort of a light weapon as my offhand Doodad. So, we have a -4 to all three attacks. Certainly not a big penalty for the gun touch attacks. the off hand melee will be hindered a bit without weapon finesse though.

RAPID SHOT
"When making a full-attack action with a ranged weapon..."

Does this mean the whole full attack is made only with a single ranged weapon, multiple ranged weapons or can the full attack be mixed with melee?

For example, can a gunslinger with rapid shot and two weapon fighting do this?
enemy 10 ft away
GS: fire shot one
GS: fire shot two with rapid shot(using a multi barreled gun or quickdraw)
GS: 5 foot step in
GS: off hand attack with melee

this would likely only be a lower level stunt and might not really be all that effective but its a fun image.

I've run "We Be Goblins" twice now for two very different results.
The first party did excellent for having to fight the entire boat of enemies at once and even used the wasp trap against the doggies. They brought the heads of all their enemies back to use in an explosive fireworks show for much goblin drooling.
The second party didn't wake Vorka up. This was a good thing since they didn't work well together. After beating Cuddles up in the boat's kitchen Reta started eating meat from the room. She looks up and sees that it's goblin meat. Reta keeps eating anyways and gets the stink eye from the other goblins. Later, once the epic battle with Vorka and Lord Longtongue got taken to the upper deck, Vorka put all of the PCs in the negative. Well, all but Reta, who got the last laugh. Vorka tries to use her last effort at 0HP to take Reta with her but fails. Then falls from the top of the broken mast and dies. Reta's priorities at this point were not quite typical of the Licktoad tribe. Step one: eat Vorka. Ironic no? Step two: eat the other PCs. Yes, Reta also ate her downed party. Then she brought back the head of Vorka with the fireworks as the lone survivor and became the hero of the Licktoad tribe.
Vorka mark II.

The additional rules for "we be goblins" makes that a bit confusing. The additional rules on the we be goblins purchase page says that it supersedes the guide in instances that the two documents differ.

"As always, each player may receive credit for each module once as a player and once as a player in either order."

Is this outdated, bad wording or does it really supersede the guide like it states?