DrJill's page

As a player, I keep my power curve around the level of the others in the group.

I guess my main problem is I have people in my group who will always min max, meaning that if I want to make a non-optimal character for fun/roleplay reasons, then I'll probably have less fun because my character seems less heroic than others, and my DM has a hard time making encounters that are an appropriate challenge for everyone.

And I'm not even really making *weak* characters...just not minmaxed.

I'm seeing a lot of objections to the "bounded accuracy" of 5e. As I understand it, that was implemented to curb the powergaming/minmaxing that is common in Pathfinder. Do you guys not see the minmaxing as a problem, or is bounded accuracy just not your preferred way to fix it?

The primary reason why my group plays 5e instead of Pathfinder is that in 5e, it is more difficult to make a ridiculously overpowered character. My group tries to be roleplay first, and in Pathfinder, it is too tempting to over optimize. 5e's power curve seems more "flat", in that characters don't get as strong as they level, and there's generally no way to achieve ability scores over 20, skill modifiers that are super high, etc. I REALLY like this, as it means that there isn't as ton of a difference between a perfectly optimized character and a character that was made more with roleplaying in mind. I would love for a similar design philosophy to affect PF2e.

What I really MISS about PF, as a 5e player, is the character customization, and the crunchiness of the rules.

Is it even *possible* to have all the great rules complexity and options of pathfinder AND the avoidance of min max hell of 5e? I hope so, but I doubt it lol

My table has 5 people, and after failing several times, we ended up just splitting into groups of 2 (1 hasn't done it yet but will catch up). Was easy after splitting into 2, which kind of ruins the fun, but...oh well. Needed to finish the adventure somehow...

I see. Thanks, I should probably demo the game at gencon this year and see how it plays. Is it expensive?

If you want to buy all the base sets and adventure decks so you can play at home, yes. (Though I think it's money well spent!!)

If you want to play in Organized Play at a game store, no. All you need is a class deck, which retail for $20 (but you can often find them for cheaper).

So, any chance that 'soon' is near and we will get to know more about MM and the possible projects beyond? :)

(I hope it's Jade Regent - bring on all the Samurai and Ninja I can take!)

I hope it's Jade Regent too! My sister-in-law loves things with an Asian flair, so I think it'd be easier to get her to play a Jade Regent set.

This thread seems to agree with the idea that if you use X skill instead of Y, it is still a Y check

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tr1d?Rules-Question-about-Varril-from-the

I have been playing under the impression that if encounter a monster that lists combat, I don't use a weapon, and I use Varril's power, I am now making a noncombat divine check INSTEAD of a combat check (thus enabling blessing of Shelyn to add 2 dice). Am I incorrect here?

OMG HE'S SO CUUUUUUUUTE!!!! <3 <3 <3

And his second ability looks quite strong. I like the concept.

You're WAY closer

Hooray!

The people at my FLGS say "I-oh-MEE-dee" instead of "I-OH-meh-day" for Iomedae and it drives me nuts! Don't know who is right but I hope it's me!

Awesome, thank you!

Sorry if this has already been answered...didn't see anything in the FAQ.

Last night, a monster caused me to shuffle a random card from my hand into my location deck, and it just so happened to be Holy Radiance (a loot card). The loot card doesn't have a check to acquire on it. My brother was lucky enough to encounter it from the location deck the next turn...but there is no check to acquire it. We decided that he would just acquire it automatically.

Did we play that right?

Very happy that Varril can use the power for unarmed combat. Thanks!

Got a chance to play as Varril last night--really enjoy him! And now I have an opinion on whether I actually *want* his power to be able to be used on straight combat checks (without using weapon or spell).

The inquisitor deck doesn't have anything in terms of offensive combat spells, and Varril has two weapons in his deck (one more with a card feat). So he has a relatively low chance of having something in his hand that will let him roll something in combat besides just his strength (d6, skill feat only allows up to d6 +1). He doesn't have stellar evading options (caltrops only work for so long), and he doesn't have an abundance of armors (one slot to start, only one card feat upgrade). And with a starting hand size of 6, he's pretty squishy. There's also only one cure in the inquisitor deck, so you don't have the option of using a second cure to get the first cure off the bottom of your deck to be used again in a timely manner.

So basically, he's pretty easy to get killed. I think that either of the following would help:

1) making combat a skill, or

2) rewording his ability to specify that it applies to listed skills AND as your (non-skill) combat check

Thoughts? I don't personally think it would be overpowered, but I could be missing something. I don't want him overpowered, because that takes the fun out of it. But currently, he feels pretty vulnerable compared to many other characters.

No official clarification (it's presumably still under discussion over there and it's a tough problem to work out so it may take some time), however I would play it as the following (per my arguments in past posts in this thread):

A) Yes
B) No
Followup) Irrelevant since B is "No"

The above assumes that Combat is in fact not a skill (the rulebook is ambiguous on this as Vic has stated, however I argue that it lends more support to "not a skill" than it does to "is a skill"). If your table believes/plays that Combat is actually a skill, then both A and B are "Yes" and your followup is also "Yes, it's a noncombat check now"

Thanks for your reply...this makes sense to me, so I'll go with it on Saturday if we don't hear anything official before then. I know Vic floated the idea of combat being a skill, but I'm uncomfortable going with that until it's official, because I share your interpretation of the rulebook as it currently stands. (If they do make combat a skill, that's good news for Varril, though! )

Mine arrived today and I'm hoping to play Varril on Saturday. Did we ever get an official official ruling on his power?

Situation A: If a monster lists combat, can I play a weapon that lists strength or melee for the combat check and discard a card to use my divine skill in place of the strength or melee?

Situation B: If a monster lists combat, can I discard to use divine in place of combat? (Not using a weapon or spell here).

Followup question: Situation A clearly remains a combat check. But in Situation B, is this now a noncombat check? I ask for purposes of using blessing that add 2 dice to noncombat wisdom checks.

(edited for clarity and to add a question)

So, as a player of the RPG, I love and have attachment to the iconics. They travel through all the Paizo modules with us, and every book contains art of the iconics. When you play pregens in PFS organized play, the pregens are iconics. So people who have played a lot of PFS have stories of adventuring with Kyra or Crowe or Harsk.

People who only play the card game don't necessarily have the same attachment to the iconics.* All the characters are new to them, and they'd rather see a new cleric than a 4th iteration of Kyra, because they don't have a history of Kyra.

Also, investigator is my favorite class, and Quinn is one of my favorite iconics. It makes me very sad that we're not even going through all the iconics before we get to see him. I continue to hold out hope that he is one of the unrevealed characters from Mummy's Mask. He can disable magical traps! He'd be so helpful!

*Note: RPG players:Iconic lovers::ACG players:Iconic indifferent is not necessarily a 1:1 correlation, and I certainly don't speak for all players of either game.

Ah, that makes more sense. I never played as an iconic in the RPG because I preferred to make my own characters. But I can see getting attached...I'm a big Seelah fan even though I never played her in the RPG.

Why is this 'iconics vs noniconics' a big deal? I can't remotely understand why it matters in any way, shape, or form.

I was confused by this as well! What are we missing here?

(just as much as I hated when 'you' became 'everybody')

err...can someone link me the relevant rules/discussion on this? I think I've been playing it wrong.

Salim seems a tad underpowered to me.

I think the divine skill is just there so he doesn't have to banish divine spells, but so he has a difficult time recharging.

DrJill wrote:

Gotta love how the developer pops in to talk about language use but not the raging rules debate going on :D lol

When a rules question has already been well established, I cheerfully weigh in. I avoid any debate over new cards or potentially unclear language until Vic calls the shot. :)

Oh, I wasn't meaning to take a shot--just found it humorous. I know you guys probably have to talk about it before giving an "official response" :)

Gotta love how the developer pops in to talk about language use but not the raging rules debate going on :D lol

Whether or not you can use Varril's power for combat (I hope you can!), he looks super fun! This deck is a definite buy for me. Imrijka looks powerful (though I've never loved her big red hat) and I'm looking forward to seeing Salim's skills and powers.

whatever happened to the good ol' days when we would use "their" when referring to a random person? Varril says "random card from her discard pile". I know nobody wants to use "his" anymore, but what's wrong with "their"?

"Their" is grammatically incorrect when referring to an individual. It's only appropriate when referring to multiple people.

I think the pattern they're going with is that for a male character (e.g. Varril), they use "her" when referring to another character's discard pile, and for a female character (e.g. Seelah), they use "his".

Check out Seelah's first ability--it's very similar. http://static1.paizo.com/image/content/PathfinderACG/PZO6808-SeelahFront.jp g

What do you guys think about Paizo doing a series of high-quality statues of the iconic Pathfinder heroes? Something like the $100 range of 9-12" statues on Gentle Giant or similar site. I would totally pay $100 for a nice statue of Seelah!

Just want to make sure someone notices that it's guns, not hammers, on the front of the box next to the banner :)

My husband and I just got into this recently, but we love it! Two organized play sessions and once through the base 3 scenarios in Rise of the Runelords and we are HOOKED! Thanks so much for making this game. Got excited shuffling in the Adventure Deck 1 cards for more RotR this weekend :)

Table of 4 and we beat it on the very last blessing. Very fun.

DrJill wrote:

So I'm kinda new to all of this. How does one get the "Free RPG Day" stuff on June 18?

Free RPG day is a promotion that a lot of gaming companies and stores participate in. Each store receives a box of promotional items that they give out for free to people who come in the store that day (though the store gets to decide how to distribute it). So if you stop in your friendly local gaming store on the 18th of June (and they're participating), you should be able to get a Tup. There's also an RPG scenario---We B4 Goblins.

In the past, I believe the Free RPG promos (Ranzak & Ekkie) were also sent to ACG subscribers, but I don't know if that will happen this year since there aren't any ACG shipments.

Thanks!

So I'm kinda new to all of this. How does one get the "Free RPG Day" stuff on June 18?

I am preparing to GM my first game ever, a game which happens to be on roll20, and these maps are SOOOOOOO helpful!!! Thanks so very much to everyone who creates maps...you guys have no idea how much fun you are helping everyone to have!

Wow, what a great response! Thank you everyone--you've given me a lot of great ideas. I really appreciate the help, as I have trouble playing if my storyline doesn't "make sense" to me. I think the Mendev crusades into the Silver Crusade is probably where I will start...that sounds rich with opportunities for backstory.

Thanks so much :)

Hi all!

So I'm pretty new to Pathfinder and Pathfinder Society. In other RPGs I have played, I have always worked with my GM to develop a specific background and motivation for my character to explain why she is where she is at the beginning of the campaign, as well as a general idea of where she's head.

I am interested in playing a paladin (Iomedae) in PFS. I've been poking around the web and can think of how to roleplay a paladin that's already *in* PFS (working with the Silver Crusade to use PFS as a tool for good in the world), but I'm having trouble explaining to myself why she would join PFS in the first place. To me, it seems sort of illogical for a LG paladin to join this somewhat unorganized group of random adventurers with differing motivations. It's easier for me to see her starting a campaign being sent on a mission of some kind from a local temple cleric or something like that. But obviously, that's not really an option because she has to be a member of PFS! And I'm not complaining...I think Paizo sponsoring this kind of organized play is awesome!! I'm just struggling with it from a roleplaying perspective. Can anyone help me out with some ideas? I love the tactical combat of Pathfinder, but I do also want to do some serious roleplaying.

TL;DR: What are some roleplaying reasons that a Paladin of Iomedae would join the Pathfinder Society in the first place?