I got an email yesterday saying that replacements for items from an order that I had reported as missing (#24324703) have been added to my next subscription.
The original items eventually turned up, so no need to include the replacements. Posting in the CS forum due to it being reasonably urgent.
As written, the Immortal Ichor has blindsense 60ft. This means it has a 50% miss chance on all attacks, and cannot cast targeted spells at range. Surely this should be blindsight, as normal for oozes?
Is the scale on the map correct? The description of area C1 says the starting platform is 30x30, but the 5-foot scale of the map indicates that it's 15x15. Should (some of) the map be at 10-foot scale?
Looks like there's an issue with my subscription. No confirmation email, and my items are in the wrong section on the subscriptions page. See here: https://i.imgur.com/QE5m257.png
I changed my subscription delivery option to Gen Con pick-up, but the list of books that were previously displayed as being shipped normally now don't appear at all. The Gen Con pick-up section is empty. Is this OK, or does something need to be corrected?
I'm flying into Gen Con from Ireland, and I'd like to pick up my subscriptions when I'm there. Can you please tell me the estimated weight of the following books, so I'll know how much weight I'll need in my luggage?
Pathfinder Core Rulebook
Pathfinder Bestiary
Pathfinder Adventure Path #144: Midwives to Death (Tyrant's Grasp 6 of 6)
Pathfinder Adventure Path #145: Hellknight Hill (Age of Ashes 1 of 6)
Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Druma, Profit and Prophecy
Pathfinder Adventure: The Fall of Plaguestone
A couple of years ago, I couldn't get Paizo.com to accept my Irish Visa card, and the issue was the strict address checking that Paizo's payment provider does. As far as I know, that's a mostly US-centric thing, and our addresses aren't in the same format as US addresses (no state/province for one).
I created a Revolut account so that I could enter my address in the exact format as the Paizo form, and this allowed me to purchase and start paying for subscriptions.
Now that card has expired, so I set up the new Revolut card with the same address, and it's failing to validate. I assume that the address validation only applies to the first purchase, and some time between setting up the original Revolut card and this new one, the address match broke. I've tried several variations, without success.
My card expired, so I tried to use a new card, but so far both have been declined, despite working perfectly well on other sites. Can you let me know what the decline message is? I've had issues before with Paizo's overly strict address matching (I'm in Ireland), but the address hasn't changed.
If I can't get the new card working, I won't be able to continue my subscriptions.
I see that a few people from Paizo will be travelling to UK Games Expo at the end of the month. There's no mention I can find of any seminars. Last year the Paizo seminars, about the playtest and other topics, were really good, and I'd like to attend any that are on this year.
Would like to know if we'll be able to add the limited editions as part of the subscription as still get the PDF, in the same way that we could for the reprint of Curse of the Crimson Throne.
For replays, options 2 and 3 are non-starters, because they run out eventually. Only option 1 will actually allow people to continue to play PFS 1e.
Honestly, the opinion of no replays, or severely limited replays (what we have now) baffles me. If a group wants to munchkin their way through the same "valuable" scenarios and crowd out new players, that is a social problem, not a game rules problem.
I have now officially given up on Paizos Pathfinder map folios and won't buy another one until they actually make them again like the Shattered Star one.
Agreed. The art for the County of Meratt in particular is beautiful, but as a game aid, this product is truly dreadful. It boggles my mind that Paizo could approve the release of not one, but two totally unlabelled maps in this folio.
I'll be pausing my Campaign Setting subscription for the next poster map folio at least.
Posted this on the subreddit and it was well received, so reposting here for increased visibility.
Yesterday's 1.1 update to the Playtest rules has some welcome changes, and some changes that take some time to understand. This is thanks to the errata format of "replace the would 'should' with 'may' on line 25". This is meaningless without going to the page in question, doing the mental substitution, and figuring out the change in meaning.
The errata and update documents should be much clearer in outlining the intent of the changes being made. As it stands, they're opaque as to what the changes are intended to actually do. Sure you tell me what sentence to change, but I've no idea why until I do it, and if I get the wrong idea from my substitution, the meaning is lost in translation.
I propose the following format for important errata: wrote:
Errata Title
Location of text
Text describing the intent behind the change
Original Text: ...
Updated Text: ...
For example: wrote:
Using Quick Alchemy to Craft Uncommon Items
Page 46
The Alchemist should be able to use Quick Alchemy to craft any item in their formula book, not just common alchemical items.
Original Text: You create a single common alchemical item that is of your level or lower without having to spend the normal monetary cost in alchemical reagents or needing to attempt a Crafting check.
Updated Text: You create a single alchemical item in your formula book that is of your level or lower without having to spend the normal monetary cost in alchemical reagents or needing to attempt a Crafting check.
This way the change is immediately apparent and the reason for the change is clear. It would make readying the update document a lot more pleasant. As it's a PDF, pagecount isn't an issue, though I understand there's additional layout required.
Another request I saw was for timestamps for each erratum, so we can see what is a new change and what isn't.
I've noticed that if a named monster has a stat block, in often can be difficult to know what type of monster it is just be going from the tags.
An example from Doomsday Dawn, part 1:
Drakkus the Taker is a Faceless Stalker. But his tags are
Aberration
Chaotic
Evil
Medium
There's no mention of Faceless Stalker anywhere in the stat block. You need to read the module text to understand what he is.
There's a similar issue with the second Pathfinder Society Playtest scenario, Raiders of Shrieking Peak. There's a named harpy, and the stat block in no way mentions that it is a harpy.
It should probably have the "harpy" tag, in the same way that goblins have the "goblin" tag.
4) It makes every spell with a save more complicated. While the new 4 degrees of success enables the designer more knobs to fine tune spells, it does mean spells are not easy to remember and will have to be looked up all the time. Fireball, reflex save or half damage. Now it 4 possibilities and these won't all me simple damage modifiers. Some spells place...
From the one session we played, the four degrees of success instead of two did slow us down. It remains to be seen how much that will improve over time.
So far, all of the blog posts have to a greater or lesser extent been written as marketing pieces designed to build hype and preview content. That's fine before the release of the rules, but now that they're out, what we really need is open and honest communication from the designers.
I would start by going back and reading those initial blogs with fresh eyes. Between the blogs and various interviews done by members of the design team since January (I've done half a dozen), I think we have been very open and honest about the design intent of the Playtest's design. The pieces are there and in abundance.
Hi Stephen, thanks for replying so quickly! Thinking about your suggestion, going back and re-reading and listening to the prerelease info now that I've read and played the game is something I should do.
In relation to a few of the hot-button issues that have arisen, such as the Ranger's strange seeming lack of synergy to give one example: do you think posts talking about how those element are intended to fit into a party and the game system would be helpful? Not so much fire fighting, but addressing the big topics that have only come up post release.
There's been a lot of discussion within the community about every element of the playtest rules, and there are a few issues that keep being mentioned. Examples are the Alchemist in general, the Rangers lack of synergy in its class features, and the Paladin's glut of reactions. Others include the micromanagement of actions in combat with things like removing and replacing your hand on your weapon.
One thing I'm hoping we see that could help with a lot of the confusion is if the playtest designers published blogs that discussed the design intent of the different elements of the playtest rules.
To use the alchemist as an example, since it's the only class I've played, it would be really good to know why they chose to tie the alchemist into resonance the way they have, and if they have a different view of the alchemical items, which seem to be basically always worse than spells. Perhaps the alchemist is intended to be a melee or ranged class that compliments its attacks with alchemical items, rather than relying on them, and that's been lost in translation.
That's just one example, but there are many topics of discussion where the playtest community lacks the context to evaluate seemingly confusing design choices.
So far, all of the blog posts have to a greater or lesser extent been written as marketing pieces designed to build hype and preview content. That's fine before the release of the rules, but now that they're out, what we really need is open and honest communication from the designers.
Was Amazon in charge of general distribution to game stores too? Reportedly, playtest copies haven't arrived in the UK yet, only arriving at the European distributor, Asmodee, on Wednesday. Doomsday Dawn and the flip mats are supposedly still sitting on pallets in New York as well.
So how is the obvious, gargantuan snake supposed to play in with the manifestation? PCs will clock the snake from 50+ ft. away, and murderize it from range. This means it likely won't combo with the manifestation, which will happen afterwards.
Are they supposed to see the snake from a distance to allow it to get out of squeezing? If that's the case, why is the 4-player adjustment for the snake to come out during the damage round of the manifestation? The snake will be in combat long before then, at full strength.
I feel like, if you have to re-use the same map from the previous scenario, you should make your encounters actually work with the map.
For example, if a medium character is riding a large mount, do they occupy one square of the mounts space, or are they considered to always be occupying the same squares the mount does?
If an area-of-effect attack would hit the front two squares of a large mount, can the rider choose to occupy one of the rear squares, thus avoiding the attack?
Asking in relation to a mounted character who has been played at my Pathfinder Society tables.
I'm trying to schedule our local PFS events for the next few months, and I'm wondering what the release schedule is for season 10 after Gen Con. Will scenarios #10-4 and #10-5 release at the end of August, or the end of September?
Order 5057674 was initially authorised on my card, but I asked Sam to switch the order to use my store credit, which he did. Everything looked good on the day.
However, looking at my card transaction history, it looks like the full amount was confirmed on my card by Paizo, and I still have my full balance of store credit on Paizo.com.
Could this please be fixed, so the charge on my card is reverted, and my store credit is used instead?
I noticed that my card was just authorised for the order, but I have enough credit on my Paizo account to cover the cost of the order. Can you change the order to use my credit, please?
Sorry if I wasn't clear earlier. The AddressPal address is in the US, and then An Post handle delivery to Ireland. The address is actually in New Jersey. I've added it to the addresses in my Paizo account.
The books need to be in a single package, and need to have an invoice attached to the outside, as it would for a shipment to Ireland.
I saw that my May and June subscriptions were rolled into one order. The shipping to Ireland is $60.
Would it be possible to change the shipping address to use my AddressPal (https://addresspal.anpost.ie/) address? This is the US delivery service of An Post, the Irish postal service. The books would need to be shipped in a single package, but this would save me $35–40 on shipping.
If this is possible, I can send the new shipping address in an email.
I think the article on Falcon's Hollow from Towns of the Inner Sea has updated stat blocks for the main NPCs. As I recall, they're all quite a bit higher level than in the 3.5 Darkmoon Vale modules, but perhaps you could use them as inspiration, and delevel them to suit your group?
I'm running The Ruby Phoenix Tournament for a group of four players, and after running the first day of the tournament, I'm fairly certain it's going to be a cakewalk for them. I'd like tips on how to make it more challenging.
The party consists of four, 15-point-buy characters of 11th level.
Arcane Bloodrager – obscene to-hit and damage, haste and blur when raging
Halfling Ninja – greater invisibility, flurry of stars with 6d6 sneak on each shuriken
Silksworn Occultist – arcane support
They wiped the floor with the four monks in round one. Honestly, I think the bloodrager could have solo'd them. We're using The Elephant in the Room feat tax house rules, so the monks had +14 to +16 to disarm, trip, etc. They managed to get one disarm and one attack off between them before all being permanently killed. The bloodrager hit one from 71 hp to around -40 hp in one full attack.
All three strikers are rolling 30+ on most hits, can fly, can haste themselves, and are magic item'd out the wazoo, so darkness, fog, terrain, etc, won't affect them.
They got trounced by the Shenzuzhou in the exhibition match, but that monster is crazy powerful, and worse than any of the tournament fights, as far as I can see. Even then, that only happened because all but one of them failed their save againt the Fear aura. I'm pretty sure they would have killed it in the first round, if they'd saved. The bard almost solo'd it, getting it down to 20 hp in two rounds.
What can I do to make the fights more challenging? I don't think they're going to enjoy wiping every fight in 1–2 rounds, taking almost no damage.
