DeVega's page

Here is what I saw:

Mustering (better than ever): It seemed to work exceptionally well this year. Allowing groups that are able to find 6 in the hallway enter the ballroom a little early during the normal slots helped free up some walking room. Making sure there was a specific line for Generics during the specials was also a good call. There was really no point where I felt the mustering could've been done better.

Technical Setup (needs improvement): This is based almost entirely on the Fri. night special. I was WAY in the NW corner of the ballroom and I couldn't see or hear what was being said when someone spoke into the microphone. If the slideshow for the special was running as intended, it wouldn't have been such a big deal. The two combined made it difficult for me to know what was going on. I don't know if it's the convention center or paizo supplying the tech-setup, but either way, there needs to be more coordination and louder speakers if you continue to use the entire ballroom at future conventions.

Specials (good, but too many): Between Paizocon and Gencon, I was lucky enough to attend all 4 specials this year, but it did seem like the quality of the games suffered. The True Dragons was amazingly fun, but probably could've been running all weekend like any of the We Be Goblins adventures. The Friday special was plagued with issues for my group, from the above technical setup to a mostly unprepared GM. It was the worst game I had all weekend, and it was sadly the one I was trying to use to get a few of my friends into PFS by playing some level 1 pregens. They were not enthusiastic by the end, and saying that it was simply a 'momentary aberration' isn't a convincing argument when it's the season 7 opener at Gencon.

GMs (Mostly good): While I understand that you can only ask so much from volunteers, I had problems with a few of my GMs. Most seemed to stem from poor prep. I'd ask Paizo to stress to GM volunteers the benefits of reading the scenarios more than once, pre-drawing maps, and knowing hand signals for the specials. Most GMs were on point, but enough of them weren't that I feel it necessary to mention.

Other observations:
The Pregen packets were a nice touch, but I'd be worried as a GM if I had to pay for the entire packet when someone inevitably walks off with a sheet.
Stop changing the lighting - please. Find one setting and stick with it. It was super distracting.

I feel that the best solution here is to roll every creature's initiative, then delay all similar creatures To the lowest initiative. Doing so allows you to follow the rules and make the game go faster... Why is this even an argument?

I don't like seeing groups of monsters on the same initiative, and if a GM asks if I have a prefference, I will tell them so. I have seen situations where a GM rolls high initiative on a difficult encounter and PKs the table. Most often the GM will allow a redo in that situation which is fine and cordial, but I'd rather just follow the rules from the begining and not be in that situation in the first place.

I really like that, because most of the problems with eugenics come from the problems with putting it in the wrong hands. You put it in the right claws though... Its just so lawful that its incredibly creepy.

Aye. It is the slickest of slippery slopes. The idea that one group of people is fundamentaly better or more human than another is the reasoning used for many of humanities worst atrocities against itself in real life. I'm not saying the fantasy version has to follow the same path, but it is all too easy to see the inevitable fall here.

The target says a lot about why you're doing something.

I can agree with this. I think we just disagree on the cause and effect of the situation. I can imagine a chaotic evil character that frees slaves by killing slavers just as easily as a chaotic good character... He just focuses on the killing part more than the freeing. The target may speak as to why you're doing something, but in the end your own actions are still more important to alignment than who you force those actions upon.

I don't believe my own group ever played that way. Just one of those house rules you follow so long you think it's written. Well, you learn something new every day.

DeVega wrote:

Jeff Merola wrote:

DeVega wrote:

Alignment in Golarion: a world where a supposedly lawful good gold dragon can run a centuries long eugenics program on his james-bond-villain-esque island in peace.

The keyword there is "supposedly". We don't have actual confirmation of that dragon's alignment.

. Well, all gold dragons are supposedly lawful good,

No. Most gold dragons are LG but there are exceptions.

Oh yeah, I forgot that was one of the big changes from 3.5 to pathfinder proper. Anyway,

DeVega wrote:

Alignment in Golarion: a world where a supposedly lawful good gold dragon can run a centuries long eugenics program on his james-bond-villain-esque island in peace.

The keyword there is "supposedly". We don't have actual confirmation of that dragon's alignment.

. Well, all gold dragons are supposedly lawful good, all undead are supposedly evil (apparently in pathfinder world this is a fact, which is a shame). I always enjoy discussions about alignment in pathfinder because it is so subjective and uniquely colored by absolutes and grey areas depending on who you're talking to. I have some fairly hard opinions on the matter or morality myself, but I've only ever called for an alignment check three times in my home games because i understand that people have different opinions. One involved chopping off both of a drunk old man's hands because he was 'unruly'. One because the player clearly wanted an alignment shift for role playing purposes. The last because the players decided they needed a distraction, and the distraction they settled on was to set fire to an occupied building while the tennants were sleeping inside... Which I might've let slide except one charater actualy said "it's not a distraction unless someone is dying." with a smile.

Alignment in Golarion: a world where a supposedly lawful good gold dragon can run a centuries long eugenics program on his james-bond-villain-esque island in peace.

DeVega wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Pathfinders commit unlawful killings all the time. So do rebels, freedom fighters, insurrectionists, and half the country or Nirimathis

A group of rebels that kills all defeated opposition and never takes prisoners isn't likely to be good aligned, no matter who or what they oppose.

You are putting words in his mouth. He didn't say that.

I believe the argument was, and I'm paraphrasing here, that it matters who you're killing when deciding if said killing is considered a good or evil act. The groups listed are all associated with fighting evil or oppression in one form or another, and are generaly considered nuetral to good, thus why they were brought up as an example to counter the opinion that 'killing an evil person is still murder'. I personaly feel that a group of people who make it their mission to kill all evil-doers are also evil, though I understand why someone may disagree. I was simply trying to point out that the listed groups are defined by their actions just as much as an individual is, and that who they fight doesn't matter. I just did it lazily.

Pathfinders commit unlawful killings all the time. So do rebels, freedom fighters, insurrectionists, and half the country or Nirimathis

A group of rebels that kills all defeated opposition and never takes prisoners isn't likely to be good aligned, no matter who or what they oppose.

It's impossible to talk about an alignment system without either letting your own morals color your oppinion or referring to a book which has a list of all alignment infractions along with all edge cases of each infraction, the effects of uninformed decisions, and the exceptions that prove the rule... More often than not, the second option tends to lead directly to the first.

In any case, the ladder had been thrown down from a different tree than the one he needed to access. So reaching the ladder, moving the ladder, and then climbing up the ladder couldn't possibly have been done in two rounds.

Fair enough. It sounds like you have a genuine complaint, so let the appropriate people know. If you wish, let the forum-ites know how it goes down. It's sometimes useful for others when they run into similar problems, but continuing to discuss this here may not be helping your own case as much.

He's only 3rd level, so no reduction in armor penalties for him.

Chainmail has the biggest acp out of medium armor at -5 mw makes it -4. Heavy shield is -2 mw makes it -1. -5 total. No fighter specialness was included in these maths.

As for violating "don't be a jerk", we passed that point sometime around the time that the GM decided that heavily-encumbered fighters climb ladders at the speed of light.

I have no idea if you GM was cheating or not, but a fighter in medium armor with a shield is probably only taking a -5 from armor checks at higher levels (assuming masterwork gear). So they can choose the accelerated climb option (-5 on the check) and still take 10 to beat the dc0 check to climb a ladder 10ft per move action. This is assuming a str mod of 0 and no ranks in climb.

There is clearly more than one side to this story. No I wouldn't count the CDG as an evil act given the circumstances. It sounds like the OP is more upset that the GM 'took a side' on the party's decision. I don't know the gm's reasons so I would suggest simply having a conversation with each other to figure out why the decisions that were made.... were made.

Bard: 7
Ranger: 4

I only get to play at conventions, or if I'm lucky enough to find some event while out of town for work.

Only 60 hours left until my flight. Roughly 20 will be spent attempting to sleep, another 18 at work, a couple more here and there for food, showering, and driving. That only leaves about 18 hours for me to get everything else in line!

What is the hardest thing to get used to when playing in a PFS game?

Is knowing the exact rules of play more important?

. In a sense, yes. Since you will likely be playing with different people each game, it is important for consitency of play that the tables follow the rules as best as able. That being said, it's not as important for a player to know all of the rules. GMs should be carrying a lot of that responsibility.

The hardest thing for me about PFS is the lack of free-form roleplay. Sure, you still get some of it, but you have to complete a mission in a 5 hour time slot. You don't have as much time to 'craft a story' when compared to a home game.

As far as playing your first game at gencon... Go for it! I did two years ago. There will be enough knowlegable people around that can show you the PFS basics if you can't find a game before the con. Someone already mentioned the best starting points (Confirmation, Wounded Wisp), but don't be afraid to try anything that peaks your interest.

Similarly, no one is interested in Assault on the Wound.

I'm not packing along that map tube if I don't need it...

I'm still hoping there will be a Thursday game I can join. Saddly, Assault on the Wound is one of the few scenarios I've already played.

With the introduction of the Faction Journal Cards, fewer scenarios will have suggested factions. Hopefully this is going to give people more opportunities to contribute to their factions while making fewer scenarios feel like one has to play a character of that faction to get the full experience.

This is a long way of saying that none of the Gen Con scenarios have recommended factions. Bring your Faction Journal Card, and have fun!

Awesome! Best answer possible.

Seeing as how they are working to get 6 scenarios ready by Friday for PaizoCon, I doubt that will happen, as nice as it may be.

Aye. I didn't think it would hurt to ask though.

I see that 7-1, 7-2, and 7-3 are all going to be run at Gencon this year. Since the event signups start this weekend, I was wondering if Paizo had posted a list of which factions are encouraged to go on which mission. If the kind folks at Paizo haven't... could they?

Thanks

Well, I hope the PFS scenarios I want are open for 4 or 5 hours after events open. Tomorrow is a long work day.

Bump.

I've moved away from the region. If a mod can close this thread, that would be helpful.

I'm just moving into town, and I'm interested in finding some people to play with. I've played Pathfinder for about a year now and I know the basic rules pretty well. If anyone has room, please post here or msg me.

I recently looked into this for a game I was playing in. You've got most of it there, but you may want to add that any turn 45 degrees or les also requires that you spend an additional 5 ft of movement, it just doesn't require a flight check. This isn't on the chart, it's just lodged in the paragraphs of text under the fly skill.

Also, all of those movement taxes do not count towards moving at least half speed, so you only count actual 2 dimensional squares moved. If you turn too much (or do anything other than move in a straight line while ascending) you'll have to make a fly check based on moving less than half speed.

I believe ( but am not 100% positive) that movement only costs 1/2 while comming down as well, but I don't have my PG so can't say for sure.

I'm not seeing either of those scheduled for a weekend slot in GA at the moment, but most of us haven't yet posted our scheduling for Q4, so you may want to check later this month on the Georgia PFS forums and see if either of them are posted for later this year.

If I schedule either of them for the store that I'm the coordinator for I'll pop back in this thread and let you know.

-TimD

Thank you for taking a look. Mid-week games work for me too as long as I know a little bit in advance. My work schedule is very flexible when I'm not already on the road.

Most of my games happen when I'm on the road for work, or at large conventions. I'm trying to find a few specific games within "weekend" driving range. The range includes Florida north of Orlando, all of Alabama and Georgia, and possibly some close parts of SC, TN, MS, or LA.

If anyone knows of an open slot for
5-02 the Wardstone Patrol
Or 5-13 Weapon in the Rift

Please let me know.

Nothing special. I have a plan to use a +1 merciful staff, but non-lethal damage doesn't work on a lot of things out there. I was just looking for options. I think the answer to this is to carry around a simple club on my belt.

Quick question:

The Shillelagh spell says it must be cast on a non magical club or quarterstaff. Can it be cast on the non-magical end of a quarterstaff with only one end enchanted?

PFS doesn't wish to make robot checks more difficult - the designers did that when they made the rules.

Why can't non-druids learn Druidic? Because it's a secret. So is technology.

There is NO doubt as to the RAW, since it is in the technology guide and PRD.

I agree that RAW is crystal clear. The problem I have is that these rules are not part of the core assumption (like your Druidic example is). So you can't expect GMs to even know that these rules *exist*. This leads to wildly different table variations, which isn't good for anyone. You say it isn't broken so don't fix it, but I'm inclined to disagree.

I feel like the easiest solution to this would be to remove the Technologist feat from the additional resources document along with removing the rule stating you need said feat to make trained checks.

If PFS wishes to make 'robot checks' difficult, simply impose a -x penalty in the scenario writeups(this way the scenarios have the rules instead of requiring the DM to have the technology guide). As players explore technology laden areas, those chronicle sheets could have a boon that reduces that penalty.

To me, these suggestions seem thematic, have self contained rules, and they don't totally ruin a skill-monkey's day.

I recall a home game where my GM had decided to run us through the "dungeon of item attrition". Every single thing sundered, disolved, stole, broke, or rusted our gear... It was effectively the GMs way of saying he would like someone else to GM now. After that lesson, I use those abilities sparingly.

I'm currently nearing the end of the first book, and while I have a small party of 3-5 depending on the week, i've run much larger games. I will say that eve. With only 4 people the players are tripping over themselves to get into the fight.

You're going to have a few big challenges ahead of you, and most have already been covered by others.

Combat and time:
Combat tends to take the most time, and in this scenario there is more combat than usual. Combined with 8 players taking actions each round and the need to raise the CR of encounters this AP is going to take time. Let your players know this up front, discourage people from taking companions or familiars, and be fairly strict about making sure each player knows what they want to do by the time thier turn comes up. I tend to give each player 15 to 20 seconds to decide the PC's actions and then inform them that their PC is delaying if the player still hasn't decided.
When it comes to the encounters themselves, I think you'll be served best by only adding enough enemies to allow your melee players to engage. The rest of the CR should be from templates, advanced rules, or character classes. The fewer actions, stats, and hit point pools you have to worry about as the gm the better. Fewer monsters will also cause fewer bottlenecks in this already cramped dungeon crawl. Just don't add the feindish template to the centipede swarm. It's too mean.

The Dungeon:
This place is riddled with 10ft wide hallways, oddly angled rooms, and blind corners. You may want to play around with the map some in order to widen some hallways and doors. I would strongly suggest giving extra space in areas B15, B31, B43, C9, C10, D10, and D11.

Roleplaying: There are enough hooks that the people who want to roleplay can, and this module might as well be tailor made for anyone who just wants to kill things. Players who engage in RP will be rewarded, and everyone else will have several people willing to do the talking. I don't think you'll have too many problems here. Just be able to recognize a bored player and act on it. Speaking of... Normaly I ban extraneous internet searches in my games, but with large groups, as long as the active player isn't distracted, and everyone is able to keep up with events, I don't mind.