Wayfinder of the Planes

Daneel's page

FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Venture-Agent, Rhode Island 61 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 22 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

This post references page numbers from version B; I ran vB as overseer GM at my local store and Iammars was one of my table GMs. We had a mild disagreement about counting successes.

In the "Chaos at the Museum" successes section [p9], special success (Failing Wards) doesn't appear to add to the successes necessary for determining which condition is in effect when area "C" opens; but Andrew Hoskins corrected that up-thread (special successes do apply). In "Winter Solstice" [p21], although diplomatic successes do affect base successes, special successes (Portal Closed) again do not appear to. In "Ivvora's Fate", [p32] base successes (Scattered Kobolds) very specifically doesn't include special or fey successes, and Surprised Dragons appears not to as well.

But Iammars pointed out that with most encounters in "Ivvora's Fate" taking an average of a half-hour to complete, if Fey Successes don't apply towards getting Surprised Dragons, we'd never get the 2.5 encounters-per-table needed to trigger Surprised Dragons within the 60-minute limit.

Obviously, in "Ivvora's Fate" and "Blighted Battleground" (version C), special successes can't add to base successes, since those areas don't open up until enough normal successes are accrued. But am I reading it right? (Since "Chaos at the Museum" is gone), barring diplomatic successes in "Winter Solstice" do special/fey successes never apply to base successes? And the same appears to go for not adding spirit successes to base successes in "Blighted Battleground". Were all the tables at my store just slowpokes? Or should I be adding all these successes to the base successes except where specifically barred from doing so?

-Daneel

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

The skills chapter regularly mentions taking 20 on skill checks if the character has access to an infosphere or a "downloaded dataset".

Page 430 notes starships can download an encyclopedia-like dataset that can be used in place of network-aided research. Page 215 of the computers chapter lists "secure data modules" that can allow a character with access to take-20 on some skill checks. Page 215 also suggests a price cap of 1000 credits.

So how many credits for that deluxe encyclopedia-like dataset; 1000cr? Or is it 1000cr per skill?

Can any tier 1 computer hold the dataset or is there a suggested minimum size? How about a mechanic's custom rig - or their drone or exocortex; could they download such a dataset?

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

1 person marked this as a favorite.

5-stars for me!

Wow, 600 hours... there's a joke in there about having no life...

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

Is anyone getting player session search to work?

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

Anyone else discover how to make this work?

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

Same here. The player search says I've never played Confirmation. Or any game with the letter "a" in it.

Grand Lodge

Just for fun,

So you call a group of wolves a pack, and a group of crows a murder...

What would you call a group of air elementals? A dervish? A group of shadows? Other fantasy monster groups?

(Reference)

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Map C: Ustalav [p17-19]
-----

outside- Corpse (Diplomacy, Intimidate, Survival 20/25; Heal 15/20)
c2- Holy Symbol (Appraise 15/20)
c2- Holy Burst (K.engineering, Survival 15/20)
c8- Vellum (Perception 15/20, in a box; hazard)
{gust of wind can destroy the vellum when the box is opened}
c1- Prayer Scroll (Perception 15/20; hazard & dweomersink)
{the prayer scroll is in the SE top corner}

Primary- 2/6 Skill checks (ritual happened)
Secondary- 4/6 Skill checks (reproduce ritual)

c4- Crusader’s Blade (Perception 15/20)
c5- Restorative Cache
c11- Magical Reserve (Perception 20/25) (hazard)

Tier 3-4:
--------

c13- Skeshnil [p49], dark slayer [p46]
(remove dark slayer)
{the high ceiling gives Skeshnil room to fly. Put the dark slayer in the north kitchens where it can come out stealthed and sneak attack.
If talking w/ PCs have Skeshnil drop a normal stone in bowl of mold after Bluff/Sleight of Hand to trick PCs into thinking it's a gem.}

c14- 3 shadow drakes [p49]
(remove 1 drake)
{the linked threats make perception checks to notice the fight in c13 and show 4 rounds later.}
c10- Army Ant Swarm [p63]
(degenerate: -2 all)
c1- Dweomersink [p73] (hazard)
{covers doorways: out, c2 & c8. Designed to strip buffs cast outside the dungeon. Since the PCs must enter c2 to get both success conditions, it might strip buffs repeatedly.}
c6- Bad Air [p72]
{put candles/incense in shrines to temp players to light them}

Tier 6-7:
--------

c13- Skeshnil [p50], 2 dark callers [p44]
(remove dark callers)
{the high ceiling gives Skeshnil room to fly. Put the dark callers in the north kitchens where they can come out stealthed and sneak attack.}
If talking w/ PCs have Skeshnil drop a normal stone in bowl of mold after Bluff/Sleight of Hand to trick PCs into thinking it's a gem.}

c14- Weakened denizen of Leng [p46] and 2 dark slayers [p46]
(weaken denizen* and remove 1 slayer)
*Remove the Denizen of Leng’s dexterity drain and planar fast healing abilities.
{the linked threats make perception checks to notice the fight in c13 and show 4 rounds later.}
c10- Rot Grub Swarm [p70] & 2 Giant Grubs [p71]
(remove giant grubs)
c10- Rot Grubs [p73]
{separate the hazard, the swarm & the giant grubs in the three rooms}
c1- Dweomersink (CR 9) [p73] (hazard)
{covers doorways: out, c2 & c8. Designed to strip buffs cast outside the dungeon. Since the PCs must enter c2 to get both success conditions, it might strip buffs repeatedly.}
c6 - Bad Air [p72] (candles/incense in shrines)
{put candles/incense in shrines to temp players to light them}

===

<GM Notes: Ran low-tier last night. As noted up-thread, the army ant swarm killed two PCs (including my wife's monk); the 3d6 one round after they fall unconscious is a killer. However, it was their total lack of tactics that killed them, not the monster. I picked the Bad Air and the Dweomersink to be weaponized vs swarms.>

Grand Lodge

Daneel wrote:

Necro apologies;

Any word on what the GM-star or con-only requirements are for #7-98 Serpents' Ire and #7-90 Through Maelstrom Rift?

I know it must be posted somewhere in the blog or something, but my google-fu is failing me...

http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5lj43?OPC-Log-20-Rova-4716

Grand Lodge

Daneel wrote:

Necro apologies;

Any word on what the GM-star or con-only requirements are for #7-98 Serpents' Ire and #7-90 Through Maelstrom Rift?

I know it must be posted somewhere in the blog or something, but my google-fu is failing me...

http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5lj43?OPC-Log-20-Rova-4716

Grand Lodge

Necro apologies;

Any word on what the GM-star or con-only requirements are for #7-98 Serpents' Ire and #7-90 Through Maelstrom Rift?

I know it must be posted somewhere in the blog or something, but my google-fu is failing me...

Grand Lodge

Necro apologies;

Any word on what the GM-star or con-only requirements are for #7-98 Serpents' Ire and #7-90 Through Maelstrom Rift?

I know it must be posted somewhere in the blog or something, but my google-fu is failing me...

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

Necro apologies;

Any word on what the GM-star or con-only requirements are for #7-98 Serpents' Ire and #7-90 Through Maelstrom Rift?

I know it must be posted somewhere in the blog or something, but my google-fu is failing me...

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

Necro again.

Anyone know the minimum GM-stars and minimum tables needed to run the specials and exclusives? As far as I know, Bonekeep 1 and Serpent's Rise are the only 1-table scenarios a non-5-star GM can run that qualify toward their 5th star. And I think Year of the Shadow Lodge has the next-lowest table minimum with 3. Does everything else require 4+ tables or 5-stars?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
galahad2112 wrote:

Wow, this is still a thing. Crazy, huh?

So just out of curiosity (read: masochism), other than
1) acting in the surprise round
2) the staggered condition, and
3) the nauseated condition

what else falls under the "Restricted Activity" guidelines? I can't think of any situations other than those three, but it is COMPLETELY plausible that I'm wrong (It's happened once or twice before...)

PRD Glossary wrote:
Disabled: A character with 0 hit points, or one who has negative hit points but has become stable and conscious, is disabled. A disabled character may take a single move action or standard action each round (but not both, nor can he take full-round actions, but he can still take swift, immediate, and free actions). He moves at half speed. Taking move actions doesn't risk further injury, but performing any standard action (or any other action the GM deems strenuous, including some free actions such as casting a quickened spell) deals 1 point of damage after the completion of the act. Unless the action increased the disabled character's hit points, he is now in negative hit points and dying.

Grand Lodge

Shar Tahl wrote:
People are reading way too much into things. There is such a clear wording. You can only do a move action. full stop. It is a powerful condition. No ambiguity, no grey area.

_

If there is no ambiguity, please explain why (if Nauseated prevents Free Actions but not Move Actions) we can:
  • Mount/dismount a steed, Move ~20', climb a rope, swim, jump a gap, and stand up from prone . . . but not fall down?
  • Draw/sheathe a sword, load a (small) crossbow, move a heavy object, pick up a sword, ready/drop a shield . . . but not drop a sword?

    Please clarify why when we add in class features, feats, items (like the spring loaded wrist sheath or the quickdraw shield) the list of paradoxes continues to grow?

  • Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Game Master wrote:

    The "restricted activity" find clinched this issue. Now the only thing left is a shouting match and a "quote the same thing 2,000 times and bold my favorite part" fight.

    Stop it, guys. You're not discussing rules, you're saying "LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" on the forums.

    You're right. It's just like watching a car wreck. I know I should stop replying - I'm just repeating myself. Saying the same thing over and over. Maybe I should just rename my avatar Mojo Jojo.

    Grand Lodge

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    Restricted activity tells you what to do in a situation where you have one of your two main actions taken away, making it clear that your free and swift actions are not taken away.

    I agree with this statement 100%. Unfortunately, the meaning I got out of it is the opposite of what you meant to say: Restricted Activity tells you that even when your Standard Action is taken away you may still take free/swift actions.

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    It does not apply to situations where your free and swift actions are taken away, such as when the only action you can take is a single move action

    Except you can take a free action as part of a move action.

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    The solution is to get Paizo to restore the original wording.

    This doesn't help PFS now. The only common sense option is to take the logical reading.

    Grand Lodge

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    Cheers! : )

    or "2. no more than; merely; just" means: "The only action such a character can take is a single move actions per turn." & "In such cases, you are restricted to taking only a single standard action or a single move action (plus free and swift actions as normal)" & "You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally".

    I'm still not trying to change your mind, and I'm still looking for constructive recommendations for resolving the paradoxes created by your interpretation in PFS...

    Grand Lodge

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    Read what you wrote again. Nauseated restricts you to only a move action. Therefore, it already means you can't take any action that is not a move action.

    _

    only
    [ohn-lee]

    adverb
    1. without others or anything further; alone; solely; exclusively:
    "This information is for your eyes only."
    2. no more than; merely; just:
    "If it were only true! I cook only on weekends."
    3. as recently as:
    "I read that article only yesterday."
    4. in the final outcome or decision:
    "You will only regret your harsh words to me."

    adjective
    5. being the single one or the relatively few of the kind:
    "This is the only pencil I can find."
    6. having no sibling or no sibling of the same sex:
    "an only child; an only son."
    7. single in superiority or distinction; unique; the best:
    "the one and only Muhammad Ali."

    conjunction
    8. but (introducing a single restriction, restraining circumstance, or the like):
    "I would have gone, only you objected."
    9. Older Use. except; but:
    "Only for him you would not be here."

    Idioms
    10. only too,
    a. as a matter of fact; extremely:
    "I am only too glad to go."
    b. unfortunately; very:
    "It is only too likely to happen."

    Grand Lodge

    Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

    So let's review the basic Free Actions, shall we?


    If we got any other Free, Swift, or Immediate Actions to list that cause unusual situations, then go ahead.

    The Combat chapter in the CRB lists the following as Free Actions & Move Actions (AoO data removed).

    Table: Actions in Combat
    Spoiler:
      Free Action
    • Cease concentration on a spell
    • Drop an item
    • Drop to the floor
    • Prepare spell components to cast a spell
    • Speak
      Move Action
    • Move
    • Control a frightened mount
    • Direct or redirect an active spell
    • Draw a weapon
    • Load a hand crossbow or light crossbow
    • Open or close a door
    • Mount/dismount a steed
    • Move a heavy object
    • Pick up an item
    • Sheathe a weapon
    • Stand up from prone
    • Ready or drop a shield
    • Retrieve a stored item
      So, if Nauseated prevents Free Actions, but not Move Actions, we can (ignoring possible Feats/Class/Race bonuses):
    • Mount/dismount a steed, Move ~20', climb a rope, swim, jump a gap, and stand up from prone . . . but not fall down?
    • Draw/sheathe a sword, load a (small) crossbow, move a heavy object, pick up a sword, ready/drop a shield . . . but not drop a sword?

      If you start adding in class features, feats, items (like the spring loaded wrist sheath mentioned above) the list of paradoxes just continues to grow.

    Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play wrote wrote:
    The leadership of this organized play community assumes that you will use common sense in your interpretation of the rules.

    _

    Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
    -Speak: BLAAAARRGHGHHH!!!......That is all.
    Assumes facts not in evidence.
    PRD wrote:
    Nauseated: Creatures with the nauseated condition experience stomach distress.

    Grand Lodge

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    No valid reading of the PF version of Nauseated allows you to take free actions.

    Except the one provided by an alternate definition of "only" that makes moving while Nauseated a Restricted Activity. I realize you disagree, but I'm not trying to change your mind - I'm just looking for answers to the question of why Nauseated creates so many paradoxes. As compelling as your arguments are, they aren't answering my question.

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    If that bothers you, use the 3.5 version.

    As the OP states, this is a Pathfinder Society rules questions, not something that can be house-ruled for a home game.

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    The wrist sheath activation action is at fault. It should be a free action useable once per round, rather than a swift action.

    So Nauseated has only one interpretation - but we're just going to declare another rule faulty because Nauseated turns it into a paradox?

    _

    Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play wrote:
    The leadership of this organized play community assumes that you will use common sense in your interpretation of the rules.

    These forums provided a RAW reading for Nauseated that removes the breaches of common sense (i.e. paradoxes) which started this thread. I'm sorry to say it, but as compelling as your argument is, I'm constrained by the PFS requirement that GMs use common sense when interpreting the rules.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    The 3.5 PHB, in the yellow pages near the back, where all the conditions are defined.

    Thanks! Found it pg#310, right where you said it was.

    Grand Lodge

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

    Now, compare this:-

    3.5 Nauseated wrote:
    Experiencing stomach distress. Nauseated creatures are unable to attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells, or do anything else requiring attention. The only action such a character can take is a single move action per turn, plus free actions (except for casting quickened spells).

    Unrelated to this discussion, but out of curiosity, were did you find that v3.5 definition of Nauseated? Both d20SRD.org and DnDSRD.net are missing that line. I'm wondering why. Maybe theirs is an earlier/later version?

    _

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    As mentioned, restricted activity is not a condition, so it should not be expected that these situations define themselves in those terms. The only place restricted activity appears is at the end of the explanatiory notes of the Actions In Combat table. Believe it or not, this is to help us understand how to adjudicate those situations where a creature is limited to one action (move or standard; their choice) instead of the normal two actions (both standard and move). There is more to it, hence the explanatiory paragraph.

    Restricted Activity is not a condition, and is also not a explanatory note - it is a type of action. That's why it is listed in the Action Types list with all the other types of actions.

    _

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

    I agree that the word "only' could either be an exact amount (no more, no less than two cookies) or an upper limit (no more than two cookies, but you can have fewer than two, or you don't have to have any if you don't want to).

    However, applying that to Nauseated results in: you can only take a single move action, which either means:-

    • you must take a single move action, no more and no less

    OR

    • you can take a single move action, but you don't have to if you don't want to

    It cannot mean that you can take more actions than a single move action! That is not an acceptable reading of those words.

    Since (under normal conditions) you can take more than one Free Action while you are taking only one Move Action, Free Actions are less than a Move Action, not more. Thus, the interpretation of "only" as an upper limit can be interpreted to allow lesser actions - like free actions.

    _

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    Apart from the objection to swift actions mentioned above, good luck in finding one that doesn't require attention.

    Wrist Sheath, spring loaded

    This is one of those absurd paradoxes I keep talking about (and mentioned in the earliest posts). Nauseated lets me draw a weapon from a normal sheath, or a normal wrist sheath, or put it away in a sheath, but it won't let me draw from a spring-loaded wrist sheath - which is designed as an improvement over a wrist sheath?

    Grand Lodge

    I actually had something very like this happen to a Pendragon character of mine.

    Our (very wealthy) host invited all the local nobles - Cymric & Saxon both - to a week-long feast at his hall. My character had survived an earlier poisoning at a friendly hall entirely by accident, and was a very devout Christian knight, so he forgoes the wine/mead.

    On the last night the host broke his Hospitality oath and poisoned the entire feast with a paralytic (that left everyone awake and able to feel pain) so that he could personally kill the Saxon kings at the feast. Of course, his (unlimited number of) guards aren't paralyzed (although there were only a half-dozen in the room with us). And he's already promised that he isn't going to kill any Cymrics.

    All my character has to do is not protect his mortal enemies and he'll live. It's also a breach of Hospitality to let the host kill them, and un-chivalric to let an oathbreaker like the host escape. He can even pretend to be paralyzed and no-one (on Earth) would ever know.

    What followed was an epic battle of speeches, and a hilariously outnumbered unarmored knight making a valiant last stand - to defend people who'd gladly rape & pillage the PCs own manor - because it was the right thing to do. There was a tin turkey platter used as a make-shift shield, dueling with a serving fork vs. a spear, beer thrown to blind, tables & chairs used as high ground and terrain impediments to make them come one-at-a-time.

    I had been sure I was dead as soon as combat started; Pendragon armor is much more protective rules-wise than Pathfinder armor. I figured it was a great way to go out. I mean, how often do we get to die for ideals in a RPG? I was amazed when I actually made it to the third round before one of the guards skewered me.

    Then our host kept his word, executed the paralyzed Saxons, and abandoned his manor (he had a lot more) without harming any other Cymrics. But on his way out the host left my PCs unconscious body with some nuns, and their Churgery skill was good enough to save his life.

    Or maybe God approved.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

    Nauseated creatures cannot take free actions, by the definition of the condition.

    Choosing to interpret several conditions as examples of Restricted Activity does not allow you to change the game effects of those conditions to more closely match the description of Restricted Activity.

    Choosing to interpret Nauseated as a subset of Restricted Activity does not allow you to take swift or free actions while Nauseated just because Restricted Activity doesn't prevent them; Nauseated does prevent them.

    Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

    Highlighting the Bolded parts, Restricted Activity specifies that you can take only 1 standard or 1 move action (as well as any Swift/Immediate and Free Actions as normal). Nauseated specifies that a Nauseated character can only take a single move action per turn. That means no Standard Action, no Swift Action, no Immediate Action, no Free Action, no Full-Round (or attempts to complete one), none of whatever else is listed in the former section. That's 4 (and a half) different action types that the former allows me to complete that the latter doesn't. That's a fairly substantial difference.

    And you're going to say they're the same exact things that fall under the same exact paradigms? Sure! While we're at it, let's call Magic Missile and Fireball the same spell, because they're both from the Evocation school, right?

    Everyone who keeps repeating this argument is 100% correct. That is a perfectly grammatically correct way to read those two sections you quoted. I'm not entirely sure why people keep repeating it ad nauseam. We really do understand your point.

    But English isn't the type of language where words and sentences have just one correct interpretation. Since subway rat was the one who reminded me of that fact about a hundred posts earlier in this thread, I'll let him repeat it here:

    subway rat wrote:

    You can absolutely take free and swift actions when nauseated!

    It's right here in the core rule book.

    Page 182 CRB wrote:
    Restricted Activity: In some situations, you may be unable to take a full round's worth of actions. In such cases, you are restricted to taking only a single standard action or a single move action (plus free and swift actions as normal). You can't take a full-round action (though you can start or complete a full-round action by using a standard action; see below).

    People keep getting bogged down on the word "only". They interpret the word to mean "to the exclusion of all else". But really, the word can designate an upper limit. For example, when your mom said you could only have two cookies, she didn't mean you were disallowed from eating a single cookie, or half a cookie. The word was used as an upper limit. The same is true for this case. You are restricted to not taking more than a single move action (plus free and swift actions as normal).

    Of course the nature of free actions taken is still under GM discretion. So, offering to sell a potion to another player while nauseated may be more talking than the GM is willing to allow.

    Still not convinced? Look at the text for free actions:

    CRB wrote:
    Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM.

    Free actions may be done as part of a move action.

    The real issue here is whether the action requires attention, and that is purely a GM decision. But as a rule, being nauseated should not prohibit swift or free actions.

    So now we have two equally valid, grammatically correct readings of the rules.

    _

    And going back to the very first post of this thread, I once also thought that, by RAW (which is the only type of rules at the PFS table) the "only" in Nauseated meant no free/swift, but upon further research, was confused by the hidden paradoxes this created. The first post was asking for help clarifying why the paradoxes were being created by that rules interpretation; subway rat has provided a RAW-valid alternative that resolves the problems created by my initial understanding of the rules.

    Despite subway rat's point being grammatically correct, it doesn't invalidate the other reading. I'm still waiting on Paizo to come down with an official ruling - here in the thread, in the FAQ, in an Errata, etc. When they do make a ruling, as a PFS GM, I'm more than happy to abide by what they say, even if it reintroduces the crazy paradoxes.

    In the meantime, my local PFS groups have decided the RAW interpretation that created no crazy paradoxes is the one we'll use. You're free to use your interpretation at your table. I'm sure my PFS group will eventually run across a GM who feels the way you do, and we'll use your interpretation when they're sitting behind the screen.

    Then, after the scenario's over and we all have our scenario sheets, we'll take the GM out behind the role-playing store, Nauseate them (probably with corny jokes, but we may have to whip out the 4chan - some of them have good Fort saves), and go through their pockets looking for loose grammar.

    Grand Lodge

    Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
    I mean, if Nauseated and Staggered were to function as ultimately the same thing,

    They are not the same. Staggered allows Standard Actions, Nauseated does not. Staggered allows spellcasting and concentration, Nauseated does not.

    And some argue that Staggered allows you to fall down, while Nauseated does not.

    However, both allow you to stand up.

    Grand Lodge

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    Restricted Activity isn't just a meaningless phrase which triggers game modifiers; those game modifiers are intended to represent in the game the effect of not being able to do all the stuff you can usually do in a round, either because the round is too short or that you are moving too slowly to do the same amount of stuff in a round that you could if you weren't slowed or on zero HP.

    Correct: Restricted Activity is a specific type of action listed in the Action Types section of the Combat chapter. However, it does not specify what does and does not cause an activity to become restricted.

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    Nauseated is intended to model in game mechanics the effects of an overwhelming feeling of nausea.

    Nauseated states "stomach distress". It does not specify overwhelming, vomit, diarrhea, cramps, etc.

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    there is no game mechanic that suggests that Nausea is a sub-set of Restricted Activity, just because both conditions affect the actions you can take.

    That logic is circular: there is also no game mechanic to suggest Nauseated is NOT a restricted activity. And Nauseated and Restricted Activity use identical wording (bolded above).

    _

    Again, both interpretations are valid. The logic and reasoning are identical. One creates paradoxes, the other does not.

    Grand Lodge

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

    Restricted Activity is all about not having enough time to get all your actions in. Usually, a rounds worth of actions is either standard + move, move + move, or full-round. But swift/free actions don't impact that in any way.

    Restricted Activity is caused by the surprise round (because you don't have a whole round to do your stuff), being under the influence of a slow spell (you have enough time but you're moving slowly so can't get as much done), and the like.

    Restricted Activity doesn't impact the kinds of things you are able to do, outside the time it takes to do them.

    While a reasonable interpretation, Restricted Activity doesn't actually say that an activity becomes restricted solely because of time constraints: "In some situations, you may be unable to take a full round's worth of actions." What's causing the restriction isn't specified. For example, you actions could be restricted because you're at exactly zero hit points (staggered). And - separate from weather you agree that the RAW Nauseated Condition falls under the RAW Restricted Activity - IRL, "experiencing stomach distress" does restrict your activities.

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
    Nauseated is a different kettle of rotten fish. The things you can do are not limited because of lack of time, but by your inability to take any action that requires you to do anything requiring attention, because all your attention is occupied by the overwhelming feeling of nausea. Like the condition says, 'the only action such a character can take is a single move actions per turn'.

    As stated, a perfectly grammatically correct reading of the sentence. As stated, my initial understanding of that sentence. As stated, not the only correct reading: it is also perfectly grammatically correct to deduce that the Nauseated Condition is a Restricted Activity.

    Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

    Free and Swift actions are not prevented by Restricted Activity because these actions don't take any appreciable time, and the lack of time is what is restricting your activities. But free and swift actions are prevented by Nauseated because of your inability to do anything requiring attention, except for a single move action.

    Swift actions take less time than move actions, but are more complex; that's why you can't trade in your move action for another swift. Swift actions are usually spells or SLAs, and the kind of attention needed to use them is prevented by the Nauseated condition.

    Logic based on three assumptions: (1) Restricted Activities are time limited, (2) Free Actions require more attention than Move Actions & (3) Swift Actions - other than those specifically prevented by the Nauseated condition [i]"unable to attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells…" - require more attention than Move Actions.

    As stated, (1) assumes facts not in evidence. As stated, assuming (2&3) are true create several paradoxes and contradictions that assuming they are false does not. PFS GMs are supposed to use common sense; it says that dropping a sword does NOT take more concentration than picking up a sword or sheathing a sword. Falling over does NOT take more concentration than standing up or moving 30' or or climbing 10' on a rope or jumping over a 10' chasm or swimming 10'. Etc, etc, etc. Dead horse.
    _

    Again, it's not a matter of right vs. wrong. Both readings are correct. My PFS group has simply decided that barring clarification from Paizo, disallowing free/swift while nauseated creates more problems than assuming the reverse.

    Grand Lodge

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
    Matthew Downie wrote:
    They're not different things. Nauseated is a type of Restricted Activity. (Probably.)

    And when that type of Restricted Activity adds clauses that are different from the otherwise stated subject matter, it becomes its own specific level of restriction, and then, as I stated previously, supersedes the language present in the Restricted Activity paragraph.

    After all, if Restricted Activity is the general term, and Nauseated is a specific condition that would fall under the general term, the wording of the specific condition trumps the general term. Or to further simplify the rule: Specific Trumps General.

    I would like to point out that The Staggered condition has the same repercussions as the Restricted Activity entry, and also falls under the general term.

    PRD:
    Glossary wrote:
    Nauseated: Creatures with the nauseated condition experience stomach distress. Nauseated creatures are unable to attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells, or do anything else requiring attention. The only action such a character can take is a single move actions per turn.
    Glossary wrote:
    Staggered: A staggered creature may take a single move action or standard action each round (but not both, nor can he take full-round actions). A staggered creature can still take free, swift and immediate actions. A creature with nonlethal damage exactly equal to its current hit points gains the staggered condition.
    Combat wrote:
    Restricted Activity: In some situations, you may be unable to take a full round's worth of actions. In such cases, you are restricted to taking only a single standard action or a single move action (plus free and swift actions as normal). You can't take a full-round action (though you can start or complete a full-round action by using a standard action; see below).

    The question comes down to why the Staggered condition contains the line "A staggered creature can still take free, swift and immediate actions" but the Nauseated condition does not (or a similar line specifically preventing free/swift/immediate actions). Were they intentionally writing the Nauseated condition to be a more restrictive version of a Restricted Activity and prevent free/swift actions? Or is it just an editing oversight, and the "single move actions" part of Nauseated is pointing back to the (unparenthesized) part of Restricted Activities? Without further clarification from Paizo staff, BOTH interpretations are EQUALLY valid.

    I've already posted above why a condition that allows move actions but prevents free actions is self-contradictory. I've noted above the paradox of personal-only swift actions specifically designed to remove a condition that prevents taking swift actions. I've commented above that it's impossible to cease concentrating on a spell if free actions are disallowed. I really don't need to go over all that again.

    But I thought that this Combat page and this Conditions page from a v3.5 d20 SRD website was interesting background material. The combat actions section and the Nauseated entry are nearly identical to the PRD, but you can see places where they were slightly edited (adding swift actions to Restricted Activities, etc.). But the Staggered condition has the line in question added between the SRD & the PRD. Obviously, someone had this same argument about the Staggered condition in v3.5 (i.e. can a Paladin Lay-on-Hands himself when Staggered? Can a Barbarian Rage while Staggered?). And when Paizo published Pathfinder, they clarified Staggered.
    _

    It doesn't really resolve the disagreement. The v3.5 SRD could be interpreted as proof that Nauseated is intended to prevent free/swift actions (since Staggered was modified and Nauseated wasn't) or it could be interpreted as proof that the editors forgot to update Nauseated (since Staggered was modified and Nauseated wasn't). Catch-22.

    As I said, my group has discussed this ad nauseam, and we decided that while both interpretations are valid until Paizo chooses to make a ruling one way or the other, the interpretation that Nauseated allows free/swift actions is unburdened by the crazy contradictions and paradoxes that the other interpretation creates.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Glossary wrote:
    Nauseated: Creatures with the nauseated condition experience stomach distress. Nauseated creatures are unable to attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells, or do anything else requiring attention. The only action such a character can take is a single move actions per turn.
    Combat wrote:
    Restricted Activity: In some situations, you may be unable to take a full round's worth of actions. In such cases, you are restricted to taking only a single standard action or a single move action (plus free and swift actions as normal). You can't take a full-round action (though you can start or complete a full-round action by using a standard action; see below).

    As per the posts above, for the last few months my local PFS tables have been interpreting Nauseated as being a type of Restricted Action because the wording of the bold highlighted parts match so well. Thus, as per the italicized part, we've been allowing free & swift actions with move actions when Nauseated. We haven't run into any unexpected issues.

    Grand Lodge

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    hjgz89 wrote:
    In that situation I think the Shelynite would call him The Brother of Our Beloved Lady. True, and not something the Kuthite can take offense to.

    Probably off-topic, but if the Shelynite insults the Kuthite with a cutting remark, would that count as worship of Zon-Kuthon? And if it does, would the Kuthite still consider it an insult? And if the Kuthite enjoys the fact that the insult was worship of Zon-Kuthon, does it still count? And if …

    … oh no, I've gone cross-eyed …

    Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

    Also, remember that three of the replayables are FREE downloads:

    First Steps—Part I: In Service to Lore (1xp & 2pa; level 1 only)
    Master of the Fallen Fortress (1xp & 1pa)
    We Be Goblins! (1xp & 1pa)

    So if you're just starting PFS they're an excellent investment.

    Additionally, while they are NOT replayable, you can GM/play the following FREE downloads once each for PFS credit:

    Dawn of the Scarlet Sun (1xp & 1pa)
    We Be Goblins Too! (1xp & 1pa)
    Risen from the Sands (1xp & 2pa)

    Also worth every penny.

    Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

    #6–10: The Wounded Wisp is the new Season 6 replayable.

    Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Rhode Island aka Daneel

    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    Although Pathfinder is at booth C101, PAX hasn't labeled anything. I rolled poorly on my Survival check to avoid getting lost, I was Fatigued by the time I found them.

    Pathfinder is in the main Expo hall: the giant room in the middle of the building with the 20-foot-high Halo screens in it. Not one of the smaller meeting rooms scattered around the perimeter of the Expo hall (for example: there's a meeting room 101, not in there).

    On the con map Pathfinder is in the orange "Tabletop" section of the Expo hall. You can download the PAX Mobile App by scanning the barcode on your con pass or visiting the App Store; there's a copy of the map in that App.

    IRL Pathfinder is in the green "C" section of the Expo hall - the Southeast corner of the Expo hall. The tables are right next to the wall, just under the giant green male bathroom sign. It's the end of the Expo hall opposite all the giant video game booths.

    Grand Lodge

    Some quotes from the other Test of the Starstone thread...

    Daneel wrote:
    See Dungeon magazine's "The 30 Greatest D&D Adventures of All Time" (purchase here). Personally, I like threatening my players with Tomb of Horrors whenever they start waxing poetic about the Starstone Cathedral.
    Senko wrote:

    I rather like imagining it as similar to the maze in the death stalker novels or the pattern in the novels of amber. Not massive battles against evil monsters or dastardly traps to kill the unwary. Instead it forces the person to confront who and what they are, all their strengths and weaknesses with any illusions stripped from them. Beating the test of the starstone means knowing yourself as you truly are.

    Those who fail are those who can't handle this knowledge. It's one of those things that are a pain to run though. Still I'd have it as something themed around 4 parts.

    1) Knowledge of yourself: The person must confront the choices they made in their life. What do you regret, what are you proud of, why did you really make that choice and review them stripped of any self delusion. Did you give the beggar money because you wanted to help them or just because it was expected. Designed to force them to confront just who and what they really are.

    2) Knowledge of others: A continuation of part one but now your experiencing those decisions from the perspective of the others involved. Your good natured joking with someone is seen from their view as constant abuse that hurts them, your heroic deeds to impress a girl as seen from her view as idiotic actions that guys do, a casual work said to a passing stranger is seen from their view as a major defining moment in the darkest time of their life as something that gives them strength to go on even though to you it meant nothing and you don't even remember their name. Designed to show them how their view of the world can be very different to others and how even minor actions can cause ripples.

    3) Knowledge of the world: A review of events throughout history designed to show the connections and how rarely an event truly is all or nothing good vs evil. They see the rise and fall of empires how things that spanned the world can fall and be forgotten and how the actions of one person can turn the tide of history only for them to be vilified and destroyed because...

    Atavar wrote:

    I recently ended a five-year campaign that took my players' characters from 1st to 20th level. From level 17 on they played through a mega adventure I wrote.

    The final chapter of that adventure was the Test of the Starstone. They didn't take it to become gods, though; they took it because they had discovered that something was wrong with the Starstone itself, something that was tearing reality apart, and they needed to get to the Starstone in order to save/fix both it and all of Golarion.

    I don't plan to go into a lot of details of what happened during the Test. Needless to say, they had many harrowing encounters (literally--one encounter was with a Harrowed Deck of Many Things) on their way to the heart of Starstone Cathedral.

    Once they made it there, they learned the answers to many mysteries--why Aroden died, why the Worldwound opened, why the Eye of Abendego exists, why prophecy has no meaning, and some others.

    They also discovered that in order to save/fix the Starstone, one of them needed to become a god and then voluntarily die at the hands of the Unmaking ability of a Time Flayer (Tome of Horrors Complete, p. 603); this would erase that character from reality, all memory of their existence forgotten by everyone.

    The catch, though, was this--only one of them would be granted godhood, and they all had to agree willingly and unanimously as to which one of them it would be. Five out of seven characters volunteered, and they agreed to draw straws to determine who it would be. The arcane trickster of the group, named Lel, used slight of hand to cheat (getting a result well north of 50), and ended up tricking the rest of the parting into choosing him.

    So, Lel became a god for a few moments, long enough to save/fix the Starstone, shrink the Worldwound by a few miles, close the Eye of Abendego, return prophecy to the world, and save all of reality from unraveling.

    Of course, Lel was forgotten. The rest of the party emerged into a changed world. Their efforts triggered the return of...

    Grand Lodge

    I imagine it would be very similar to when the "followers" of two powerful human leaders meet IRL. When a Brittish cop visits China, does he refer to the Premier as "Li?" I guess it depends on if the bobby wants to piss off his hosts.

    Grand Lodge

    Daneel wrote:

    But what types of food could we reasonably expect to find in what parts of Golarion? Smell is a powerful memory key, and describing the unique smells PCs detect (other than manure) when traveling the planes can help set the mood.

    Some likely probabilities to get us started:
    Most of the Crown of the World probably serves burnt meat on a skewer.
    Sushi's probably popular in Tian-Xia.
    Hummus in Casmaron.
    Lembas bread in Kyonin.
    Tea and crumpets in Taldor.
    Snails in Galt.
    BBQ in Bloodcove.
    Ortolan bunting in Cheliax.

    Thanks for the info on the cheeseburgers.

    But what I was really looking for was examples of culturally-recognizable foods. For example, IRL if a Japanese person finds a store selling cheeseburgers in Japan, they think: "This is American food."

    In Golarion, if your character found a food vendor serving sushi off a cart in the streets of Absalom, they'd think "This food's from Tian-Xia." Anything else? The next time I'm GMing a session in Numeria, what foods should the PCs smell when they walk into an inn? Foods that aren't just typical dietary staples found all over the continent, but cuisine that's specific to the region you're visiting.

    (Way to derail my own thread...)

    Grand Lodge

    Sissyl wrote:
    ONE three-hour movie?

    Touché.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    WombattheDaniel wrote:
    Holy Hera. How do you keep it interesting? What are they possibly facing at that level that's still a challenge?

    It can be a challenge.

    But even dozens of the gods of Golarion had to band together to defeat Rovagug. Specifically, the NG Sarenrae had to offer an alliance to the LE Asmodeus, who had treacherously killed her mentor Ihys in front of her! Then Asmodeus had to put the prison together while the other gods fought to keep the Rough Beast from munching on pieces of reality.

    Tell me there isn't a story worth telling hiding in that paragraph. Peter Jackson could probably turn it into a three-hour movie...

    Grand Lodge

    BlackOuroboros wrote:
    Ok, I'm going to have to remember that when my PCs dine with a decadent villain.

    Nearly every episode of Hannibal has the titular villain prepare something delicious - of course with "long pig" as an ingredient about half the time. There are long discussions of some of the rarer (non-human) ingredients and preparation methods: a scene like the Ortolan bunting clip is typical to every episode.

    In other words, if you want food for your decadent villain to serve/eat, try watching a few episodes.

    Pro Tip: each episode has a type of food for the title, generally what's prepared/eaten in that episode.

    Grand Lodge

    revaar wrote:
    Something else to consider: How has magic effected the development of cuisine? Even a 0-level cantrip can flavor foods and drinks. Are spices as important in places where magic is more common? How does access to magical fire and cold effect cooking? Does meat taste better cooked over a magically influenced fire? Is refrigeration and transport of food an issue with access to ray of frost?

    Does that mean Alkenstarian food is more, or less tastier, than your typical Golarion fare?

    Grand Lodge

    Orfamay Quest wrote:
    My apologies. But it's hard to judge the gender of a large snow leopard, and, more to the point, "the OP" isn't you, but Daneel, who does seem to be wearing a male avatar.

    Funny story: despite the fact that I am male and also assumed my avatar looks male, I ran The Wounded Wisp yesterday using RPTools MapTool and used this avatar picture for the female Cleric of Pharasma's Token. I justified it as saying the avatar simply appears more masculine - it doesn't actually have any "male-only" features, like facial hair.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    If you're interested in some of the fluf surrounding the Starstone Cathedral, you might enjoy The Wounded Wisp, the newest replayable PFS Scenario. I played it a week ago and then ran it yesterday. Climax takes place during an aspirant's attempt to take the Test of the Starstone.

    Grand Lodge

    Orfamay Quest wrote:

    .So for all three, the answer is "the America analogue -- Andoran."

    More generally, you'd be looking for a fairly cosmopolitan and multicultural culture with a fair amount of openness to "foreign" influences (to be willing to...

    Hmm... sounds about right.

    Andoran is a culturally more like colonial-USA; the food excesses are more post-WW2-USA. The working class wields more power/money, but is still racist.

    I hate to say it, but that sounds more like Cheliax or Varasia than Andoran.

    Grand Lodge

    HappyDaze wrote:
    You make an assumption that Asmodeus would be opposed to loosing Rovagug. The whole thing was just his manipulation of the other gods to get them to provide him with a superweapon. The fools actually fell for it and think Asmodeus is doing them a favor. If it suits his needs and fits into a loophole in his agreement, he might be all for letting the Beast romp a bit, especially if he gains more from it than he loses.

    PathfinderWiki: Asmodeus. Keeping in mind that only Asmodeus remains of the two that were . . . and is an Unreliable Narrator . . .

    He was apparently one of the First two beings in existence. I read somewhere his war with Ihys weakened him to less power than most gods, relegating him to being (impersonating?) an Archdevil. Part of his writing/holding the Contract of Creation included language that returned him from being "just" an Archdevil to being a true deity. Asmodeus' mortal followers certainly hold it as dogma that the Contract of Creation will one day mean his ascendance to supremacy over the other gods. The Contract of Creation may also be part of Rovagug's prison, perhaps even the fabled key to it.

    (So well off into supposition here) but if Asmodeus solo used to be more powerful than Rovagug (unlikely), and if the Contract of Creation equals the Key to the Dead Vault (highly unlikely) and if it contains within it the means for Asmodeus' ascension (possible); then yes, Asmodeus could intend to eventually use Rovagug as part of a plot to increase his own power.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Dress the Iconics — Enora on fashion goblin.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    CrinosG wrote:
    Honestly, were it me. I would just take some infamous Megadungeon (Such as Rappan Athuk or the like) and use that as the test of the Starstone.

    See Dungeon magazine's "The 30 Greatest D&D Adventures of All Time" (purchase here). Personally, I like threatening my players with Tomb of Horrors whenever they start waxing poetic about the Starstone Cathedral.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    So obviously, depending on your group's personal preferences, your Golarion has everything from the typical ren-faire turkey legs and mead to Coca-Cola and Twinkies.

    But what types of food could we reasonably expect to find in what parts of Golarion? Smell is a powerful memory key, and describing the unique smells PCs detect (other than manure) when traveling the planes can help set the mood.

    Some likely probabilities to get us started:
    Most of the Crown of the World probably serves burnt meat on a skewer.
    Sushi's probably popular in Tian-Xia.
    Hummus in Casmaron.
    Lembas bread in Kyonin.
    Tea and crumpets in Taldor.
    Snails in Galt.
    BBQ in Bloodcove.
    Ortolan bunting in Cheliax (hopefully, none of your players actually have these memories).

    But where would I get tacos, pizza and the eponymous cheeseburger? I mean, if they're offered anywhere on Golarion I can probably also get them in Absalom (and other major cities, but as a Pathfinder Agent, I'm biased). But what cultures would spawn them? The 4th Earl of Sandwich wasn't even born until 1718 A.D.; are we even allowed to say "the greatest thing since sliced bread" yet? Earth mythology credits his gambling habit as the impetus behind it; what country is infamous for their gambling? Maize is sorta required for Mesoamerican cuisine; anywhere on Golarion famous for growing it? Can you even have pizza without deep-dish Chicago-style vs. New York-style thin-crust (Magnimar & Korvosa)?

    (Probably) unrelated to Pathfinder Foods. And the Internet claims those ren-faire "turkey" legs are really emu.

    Grand Lodge

    Page 182 CRB wrote:
    Restricted Activity: In some situations, you may be unable to take a full round's worth of actions. In such cases, you are restricted to taking only a single standard action or a single move action (plus free and swift actions as normal). You can't take a full-round action (though you can start or complete a full-round action by using a standard action; see below).

    Makes sense to me, but unfortunately it fails Specific overrules General.

    In light of the logic I've posted above, I don't think the sentence structure of RAW Nauseated was ever "intended" to prevent Free/Swift actions - just prevent Standard/Full (leaving "only" Move) actions. It's just the way it's written it certainly reads like Free/Swift are not allowed.

    In the interest of clearing up the ambiguity, here's hoping Paizo responds...

    1 to 50 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>