Attempting to make a purchase today (I have made many over the years), I encountered a technical problem.
On page two, payment, I have everything all set and it looks good:
But when I get to page 3, it has "forgotten" the information from page 2!
This happens with three separate browsers, and with two separate credit cards (and yes, I have checked, my primary CC is working fine and has no holds on it or anything).
Many thanks, Scott
Player's I've run seem to enjoy it. Including:"Married to Skagra the shewish goblin in a shotgun (well, firework) ceremony"
"Owes a favor to a devil"
"Lost left pinky toe to a dimensional mishap"
"Will never be able to get another job in Magnimar as long as s/he lives"
The only player who was upset (and I can understand why) was:
Two of my favorites:
I am excited by the idea of the Spring-Attack Lunge build suggested by Mercurial.
Well, Jeepers. I guess that I will have to start writing all of my public postings about private games in strange convoluted ways. To wit: "Hi all, If you are interested in applying to play in our special top secret group that may or may not run a troupe game in which certain PFS classes or character types are not allowed, please write privately to me with your qualifications and I may or may not send you the ultra-secret invitation."
Or I could just give up on jumping this sort of ridiculous hoop, and stop expecting to run normal games through PFS.
All of this because some yahoo can't stand the idea of a GM having a table at which he doesn't want a 300 hit points Synthesist stealing the spotlight from other players.
Is PFS really this broken?
Really, it's pretty stupid to treat a statement on an only semi-public mailing list that "hey, I'm running this -- who is interested?" as a public invitation to a public game. It's like seeing someone write on a mailing list, to someone else, that "we should get together for tea some time" and responding them to make tea for you if you suddenly show up on the doorstep.
If the first rule about private games is that we're not supposed to talk about private games, then how the Hell do we recruit? Dumb, dumb, dumb.
I see a change in the description from
"Will be available for purchase Wed, Feb 2, 2011."
"Will be available for purchase approximately Wed, Feb 2, 2011."
This worries me, as I have promised a group (six players plus one waiting-list) that I would run the adventure on Saturday.
I don't know if this mixed group will be able to find something else that none of us have played. Hopefully the quest for perfection will not keep Paizo from putting the scenario up on Wednesday, given that they could update the PDF after thorough proofing later . . . (Though as a publisher/editor myself, I wholly sympathize with the problem.)
I like your suggestions, mostly because I am fond of special attacks and grappling.
It might be simpler to allow characters -- without pulling out combat maneuverer rules -- to move in to share a square with an enemy, causing both of them to be subject to the "squeezing" rules.
Then one could have a feat that allows a character to share a square, and not suffer the penalty for squeezing. That would allow the person to freely attack at full advantage while disadvantaging her/his adversary to the tune of -4.
A follow-up feat might be to allow the person to take an AoO on a character that does a five-foot-step out of the squeeze.
Perhaps if someone had both the close-fighting feat and improved grapple, they could be eligible for a feat that lets them ignore the -4 penalty for grappling without both hands free, and which doubles the damage that they can do with a light or off-hand weapon during a grapple.