Probably.
Search Posts
Just want to note that I got my PDFs, thank you CS team for sorting that out for me. I won't pretend I'm not disappointed at having waited so long, it's been a struggle for the last 6 days not to let my frustration get the better of me, but I have always had faith that Paizo's CS team are trying to satisfy their customers. Working in customer service myself, I know how difficult it can be when circumstances create difficulties that you just have to cope with, and the response has been good. Selfishly I did want more frequent updates, knowing full-well that it's unrealistic to ask for. Anyway, thanks again, and I hope that everyone eventually gets matters resolved satisfactorily.
Fourteen. Crossing everything.
Wowzers. I was expecting a Kingmaker CRPG kingdom sheet. This is quite obviously more in depth and not so. I'd like to thank you in advance for when I do get into table top =) You are most welcome. I will note that this sheet is specific to the PF1 version of the rules, so if you're looking for something that works for PF2, I haven't done that.
A long time ago, you said that a Ultimate Kingdoms version would be avalaible. Any chance of that happening, Thank you Ooh, sorry, thought I'd replied to this ages ago. Yes is still the answer to that.
Is anyone else still waiting for their shipping or should I be worried now we are 2 business days beyond the estimate? You are not alone. I’ll be emailing a bit later today.
Ask, and ye shall receive.
You're not wrong. In fact, you did a review of it in 2011. This version is longer and has more items, so there's obviously a bit more to it than just conversion of the original.
Pending order notification. My watch begins.
8.5 year necro is impressive.
Definitely a typo. It's a +1 striking, major staff of fire.
Heh, yeah, can't expect anything to happen in the tabletop gaming sphere around Europe during Essen - because the thing that's happening is Essen.
I think "Paizo community" is a perfect description. Still working on the sheets to make sure I know exactly how they tick (and I'm still in the process of wrapping my head around the 2E kingdom rules, anyway), but I have some ideas already.
Firstly, wow, these are looking amazing! Frankly I might even just save myself the worry and not do an updated version myself, because these are just awesome. Secondly, and this is by no means a criticism AT ALL, but tomeric, could you please remove my name from your references to the Ultimate Campaign Kingdom Tracking Spreadsheet, as I cannot in good conscience claim any form of ownership for a project that has been the work of several primary authors as well as countless users who have found bugs and suggested revisions. I am immensely proud to be the current caretaker of that sheet, but I absolutely refuse to claim it's "mine". But going back to the real topic, I am blown away by these. I'm going to spend a few days having a play around with them, and if you'd like I can share my thoughts?
A pleasure. Oh, and in case anyone's wondering (thanks for the prompt, RD), yes, I absolutely intend to create a PF2 version of the sheet for the upcoming Kingmaker AP products, I just have to fit it in.
Good question. Checking it and some of the encounters that include that trait, it's probably an earlier name for the Secret trait that got changed in development and not all the instances got caught. It is possible that it's a new encounter trait that doesn't otherwise get referenced, which is far less likely, but given that the encounters that include the trait seem to give details on how it can be "unhidden", the specifics of the trait probably don't matter too much.
Thanks for the update, sucks a bit that my physical products will take longer to get here, but this is good information with detail, so I'm not in the slightest bit concerned.
Bugfix done to correct the issue, thanks for the help, it was easy to find with the sheet you shared. Still working on finding the time to add the updated stuff, but it will be happening.
Well, that "few days" took a lot longer than expected. However, here goes: I am unable to replicate the issue with forts and watchtowers, I've tried every combination I can think of for those terrain improvements and all of them are correctly reporting both Stability and Defense to the Overall worksheet, on both my test copy and the copy you linked above - please link me to a copy of the workbook that is showing this problem. Thank you for the work on the build cost chart, that's hugely appreciated, and I will be grabbing those and the new edict charts that you put in, as well (those are SOOOOO awesome, thank you!). Expect a new version of the spreadsheet soon™.
My watch has ended!
And so my watch begins.
My watch continues on.
I assume you're using the sheet I host? If that's the case, have you actually exceeded 25 cities? The first 6 city sheets are shown by default, but there are a total of 25 built into the workbook. If you're using Excel, go to Format > Hide & Unhide > Unhide sheet... The popup window will show you all of the hidden worksheets, including city sheets 7 through 25, army sheets 2 to 9, and a few others, though I would strongly recommend not changing anything in the sheet called Dropdown unless you know exactly what it will do. If that doesn't solve the problem for you because you have exceeded 25 cities, I'm sorry to say that I can't really help too much. It's not an impossible task to add more City sheets, just time-consuming because the data get referenced in so many places that adding +'City 26!XY69' or whatever everywhere it needs to go would be a bit of a pain. Though if you are interested, most things get collated in the "City Overview" sheet, so you could probably add the relevant lines there, increment the city number where appropriate, and that would make it work in most circumstances.
Yep, same here, my watch continues.
Will be there for a couple of days this year - looking forward to seeing anyone else who's able to make it.
Thank you! I'll have a proper look at this in a few days and your link.
Dex score is given as 26, so... +11/6/1, +8 Dex, +1 WF is +20/15/10. Weapon training and +2 weapon puts it up to +23/18/13. TWF with a light weapon (+2 dagger in off-hand) is -2/-2, so with the three attacks GTWF allows, the full attack combo seems to be: +21/16/11 rapier and +20/15/10 dagger. Unless someone points out a place I'm wrong, of course.
Because they scale, Cantrips are the baseline spells that magus use to spellstrike. Other spells (if they're suitable to spellstrike with) should really only be used for emergencies.
Obviously not an official answer, but... As I understand it, Open Content is fair game to use in your Pathfinder Infinite products, in much the same way it is for any Third-Party Publisher to use Open Content. Your only obligation is to include the appropriate Section 15 entry in your OGL. Common courtesy suggests that it would be polite to ask permission if you're planning to reprint (even if you're doing a rules system update), but this is not obligatory, though it may be noted by the publisher in question and might be questioned by customers, and could damage your reputation. Having said all that, the OGL is a license and is a legal document. If you are unsure of the appropriate use of it or any portion of it for products you are publishing or planning to publish, it is in your interest to engage a lawyer.
Yep, same here, file size is tiny, pdf's don't open. Hope this gets fixed soon.
Yep, same problem here, Fighter and Wizard tried so far, tiny zip file and PDF (less than 1Kb in size) won't open. Please fix ASAP.
Well, I must say that I'm very sorry to see you leaving Paizo, Mark (I saw the news pretty much straight away, but I've only just hopped here to comment). On the other hand, RfC is a brilliant move for you, and I am really looking forward to seeing more of the work you do there. I will, of course, never forget the first time you and I seriously interacted on... that question... about size and damage... that was soooooo complex. But an awesome experience nonetheless. Can't wait to see what you do next, and hope I can manage to squeeze more time on live Arcane Mark streams (despite my wife's objections).
To try and help out the CS team: after you've left it personalizing for 60 seconds and you click on the link again, what happens? The download process is a bit odd, and doesn't work the way you might think: you have to click the product link 3 times during the process: once to personalise, once to prepare the download, and once to actually download it.
That's a pretty fair point, given how tightly this product ties into Ultimate Relationships and is almost required to make URel work, plus with this being a plug-in for existing AP characters, it might not fall foul of the cultural sensitivity issues that made LG pull the Far East line (a decision I wholeheartedly support, btw). The most significant problem is that it's probably not a huge seller, so the cost of a cultural sensitivity review might be beyond the value this product has to LG. Given how much I love this product and the value it adds to URel, I will see if I can have words with the relevant parties and come to some sort of conclusion.
Hope so! I'm pretty pleased with how it worked out. I would have loved to do something akin to a public playtest of the rules too, but that's not something Paizo has ever had the bandwidth to take on, alas, with actual class playtests taking a higher priority. Internal reviews, solo playtesting (done by me), and feedback from the design team should be enough though, I'm hoping! It's pretty self-contained after all, and doesn't have the wider-reaching concerns, I guess, that a brand new class that could potentially be in ANY game, would have.In 2nd edition, your kingdom uses the character building rules. If you know how to build a character, you know how to build a kingdom already. Instead of an ancestry, a kingdom has a charter. Instead of a background, it has a type of government. And it has only one class: Kingdom. Beyond that it gets skills and feats and levels up with its own XP... As a very outspoken fan of the 1E Kingdom rules, I would have loved to be able to playtest the 2E rules. I guess I’ll just have to wait until the book comes out. Fortunately I can continue to be patient.
Close - cis- is a Latin prefix, as is trans-, and that’s where chemistry got them from. The Romans, for instance, divided Gaul into “Cisalpine” (on their side of the Alps) and “Transalpine” (on the other side of the Alps), which is the fun history example I prefer to reach for.Because I believed it to stand for something? Christ, why are you actively looking for something to be offended by?…why are you writing cis in all caps? Thank you for the update and correction, it’s much appreciated.
Because I believed it to stand for something? Christ, why are you actively looking for something to be offended by?…why are you writing cis in all caps? In that case time for a small element of education. The term "cis" is actually a chemistry term meaning "on the same side", in contrast to the term "trans" meaning "on the other side". Since the term transgender is used to reference someone who has "changed sides" (ie transitioned from their assigned-at-birth gender), by common usage someone who is cisgender retains their assigned-at-birth gender. In cases where it's clear that gender is being discussed, it is reasonable to shorten both terms to the prefix only. Therefore the term cis is not an acronym or initialism, but a complete term in its own right and does not require capitalisation. This educational moment brought to you by someone who was once offended by the term cis who then got educated and is now a strong advocate for it.
Got email about poster map being added - it only seems to have been added to the File per Chapter download (or at least, I've re-downloaded the single file version 4 times and I don't get the 8-panel map in the zip file or the pdf). I would also ask someone to check the resolution of the map download, which looks amazing zoomed out or at 100% zoom, but that's probably the best resolution to view it at, which makes it less useful for looking at small areas (such as individual districts, let alone individual blocks).
I appreciate what has been said, and it shows an awareness that I think many people have feared didn't exist. I am also encouraged by the employee engagement survey and reaching out to a law firm for an external investigation. These are positive steps. The apologies for poor behaviour and corporate decisions are also welcome in my eyes. I am also aware that Paizo cannot discuss internal disciplinary or staffing matters. I would hope that, at least in regards to former employees, Paizo seriously consider making it clear that those ex-staff are able to publicly discuss their employment (and the end thereof) and experience of disciplinary proceedings. This is a start. I consider it a positive one. There is a lot more.
As for the multiple accounts thing, there are certainly reasons that Paizo allow multiple accounts for a single person (I know, I'm one of them), but it is definitely the exception. I asked for specific permission (and gave my reasons) before creating my other account.
As with my call to Paizo to recognise the union, I have sent a brief email directly to Erik, Lisa, and Jeff, to express my thanks and admiration for this step.
I have emailed Jeff, Erik and Lisa, and expressed my feelings as respectfully and honestly as I could, and called upon them to voluntarily recognise UPW. I've seen some antagonism and comments that make it clear that some people perceive Management and the Union to be in opposition to one another, and while I am aware that it is possible for that to happen over some issues, the overall impact that a good union and an honest company management can achieve is exceptionally advantageous to everyone involved. That is the position UPW are looking to get to - working with the Execs to make Paizo stronger and better. I cannot applaud the decision to create UPW enough, and I have high hopes for the future.
There is almost certainly a hard limit to the number of aliases a single account can have, but it's probably buried somewhere really deep in the forum code, and it could be a really big number. While I'm not a programmer, one thing I have come across time and again over the years is a limit of 2^n or 2^n-1 on things, where n is an almost arbitrary integer some coder put in once-upon-a-time because "nobody's ever going to need that many". So the milestone alias numbers are quite likely to be 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, etc, where if you create alias number 129, you know that you will be able to get up to at least a total of 255.
Seems like a reasonable complaint. Flagging to get moved to Paizo General Discussion or Website Feedback, since those are more appropriate than the 2E forum.
Freddy is basically correct. Even with the expanded rules in Ultimate Kingdoms from Legendary Games, nothing dictates the precise scale of any structures that make up a Building. Given that a single lot is 750x750 feet, a single building can be pretty darn big.
I think you're on the right track, RD. Basically, the FAQ text doesn't let you use your normal 10th level spell slot for any spell you could cast without expending a spell slot, and you can't use your normal 10th level spell slot for abilities that give you more spell slots, but the Divine Font ability is outside that - you don't use the normal 10th level spell slot for Divine Font, it has its own spell slots. So if an ability creates spell slots "at your highest spell level" and you can cast 10th level spells, that's fine, they work as expected and create 10th level spell slots. Similarly, 10th level cantrips are fine - you're not using the 10th level spell slot to cast cantrips without expending spell slots, you're using your cantrips for it.
*F5* *check email* *F5* *check email* can'twaitcan'twait *F5* *check email* /repeat
Not entirely clear, but I'd say that you roll for each type.
Please do share, either email me, PM me, or drop a link here, I'm MORE than happy to use things other people have produced!
Heya! I need to do a lot of work to get things updated so that the full UKing rules are implemented in the sheet. And there's a chance I broke something the last time I was fiddling with Armies anyway. I'm trying to figure out when I can schedule some time to actually get some of the outstanding work done (the last year or so has been... difficult and not conducive to doing things on the sheet). I'm very hesitant to commit to anything on it right now, if I'm honest, but I'm still as dedicated to getting it done as I ever have been (I remind myself at least once a week that it needs to happen). Saying that, though, actual bugs/errors and helping people with what the heck the sheet's doing are things I'm always happy to sort out.
|