Search Posts
I don't want to talk financials publicly, but I emailed CS on 5 August and am awaiting a response to fix my subscriptions. Meanwhile, you have canceled 4 of my subs and are threatening to cancel a 5th because I haven't resolved the issue I emailed you about on 5 August. I do not regularly check the CS forum, but I do regularly check my email.
It seems weird to me that the mentality is that playing something that is neither written for nor intended to be an OP scenario entitles you to OP credit. Here's a less pessimistic lens that I prefer to look at it through. Thanks for buying and playing our product! We know how much you also enjoy OP, so here's a chronicle sheet giving you an entire level, fame, gold, and access to some items that have absolutely nothing to do with the OP campaign for your OP character. We appreciate your interest in our non-OP products and want to thank you by giving you this entirely unrelated reward as a way of saying thank you. Thank you, Paizo for giving us OP players/GMs an extra bonus to our OP characters for purchasing and playing your non-OP product. I appreciate it!
If you really can’t use these, offer them for sale. Someone will take them. I’m definitely going to be buying these, so let me know if you sell them. If you're serious about that comment, PM me. I really won't have time to start practicing on throw-away minis, much less be confident enough in my ability to make near-perfect assemblies until after Origins of 2021 at the very soonest and that doesn't help me with getting good minis on tables between now and then. I ordered the original $400 all-in and the additional blue dragon add-on.
Maybe you can sell them to someone to recoup some of the money you're out? At least you would have lost less in this deal, and you won't be stuck with un-assembled minis. If the Starfinder Battles start producing the same minis, I am 100% offloading this product that I cannot attempt to use until May of 2021 due to my schedule and may never have the time to learn a new type of professional quality craftsmanship for. I see no reason to produce garbage on my own time and money when my trash might be someone else’s treasure. I’d rather get nothing and suck up the loss than to have Archon try to help out by severely downgrading the product and handing it to me. It would be like handing a golfer a tee that is in two pieces and saying it’s better than nothing. No it’s not. It’s broken (down) and requires you to remove the pieces, clean the surfaces, assemble it with no evidence of assembly, then use it and expect it to be as sturdy as single piece construction. Seriously would have rather been peeved at ND than be peeved at ND and also have Archon else come in and offer something totally different and unusable (by me) and call it help. The gesture is nice. The execution is just another slap in the face after I had finally gotten over the whole thing.
Well I went from excited about this to just throwing it all on the shelf for a few years. I didn’t back an assembly required project. Unassembled minis do me no more good than nothing at all. I work full time, am in school full time, take my kids to piano lessons, gymnastics, cheer, Girl Scouts, and 4 different therapists. On top of this I GM 2x a week in stores, some a 1 hour drive away. I bought a product to help me save time, not require me to vet and pay someone to do it for me. My schedule already has me going to bed at 1am 7 days a week and getting up at 6am 6 days a week. I understand this is “free” and that others may like this, but I am being charged my valuable and very limited time without my consent. This is an incredibly frustrating, negative turn of events. I don’t even own the stuff to properly trim, clean and prepare the surfaces, nor do I have any experience doing these things on anything smaller than a 150' wingspan cargo plane with far less precision required to appear perfect upon close inspection. So now I am forced to go from polished, finished product to my amateur garbage? The only reason I am not throwing these up for sale immediately upon arrival is because maybe, after Spring of 2021, I *might* get some time to buy a bunch of other crap minis to screw up before finally being brave enough to try to get into crafting and start these minis. By then, I'll probably have all of the same minis preprainted out of the box, and well-worn from use, thanks to the Starfinder Battles boxes I will be buying, making these still basically worthless to me. It would have been less frustrating to hear that Archon was backing out then that they were going to make me put in hours of inexperienced work for a product that is probably on the verge of obsolescence anyway.
I just want to compliment the explicit callout of which flip-tiles were specifically used. THANK YOU! Also, the use of the flip tiles, as printed in the scenario instead of misaligned, overlapping pieces, as was often previously done with map packs, is a welcome improvement. This does create some "skinny" zones but those can be easily ignored and treated as not existing. A HUGE improvement on both parts! THANK YOU!
@AsmodeusUltima I am sorry this happened in the first place, but I am glad that your items are recovered and also that through your misfortune, you have had the experience of the amazing caliber of people in this community. Between the Paizo staff, Know Direction and everyone else who supported you through this, you seem to have been touched by a genuine community of people who love this game and care for the people who play it. I'm thrilled that Paizo was able to replace your (Paizo product) stuff and even more thrilled that you were able to recover all of your original stuff. Congratulations and good gaming. I envy your ability to be there.
The guide doesn't address other things that require the use of downtime, such as replacing a lost familiar or animal companion, which takes 7 days. It seems intuitive to me that if you are spending said time training up a new familiar/companion you can't perform other tasks for those 7 days. Upon completing an adventure that grants XP, you gain days of Downtime that can be spent in a variety of ways. (See Organized Play Basics, under Downtime, for how many days each type of adventure grants.) These include attempting checks to Earn Income and Craft items, as well as retraining. Certain other activities may be available depending on boons or other circumstances as described in the adventure. The circumstance of training replacement companions (so far) is not described in "the adventure". I am certain a devil's advocate will make an argument that because it isn't listed as allowed and the phrasing of the list of activities is inclusive rather than exclusive, it can't be done during downtime and therefore does not cost downtime in society. I would love sanity check from the masses to establish a consensus.
Page 214, first paragraph covers the limit for animal companions. I’m on my phone or I’d copy/paste for you. Page 217, second paragraph under the heading familiars covers the limit 1, for them. Summoned creatures are covered by action economy. All of the summon spells I see so far require all 3 actions to summon and then an additional action per turn to sustain it. Sustaining the spell then eats one of your three actions, preventing you from summoning a second companion. Page 304 outlines this. There’s a caveat. When you summon a creature, it immediately gets two actions. All sustained spells last until the end of your next turn. If you sustain one you can’t summon another because of action economy. If you summon on round 1, it gets two actions then your turn ends. If you summon instead of sustain on round two, you burn a second spell slot and have two summoned companions that each have two actions but as soon as your turn ends, the one summoned in the first round is then gone. You could technically chain cast all of your spell slots to keep getting companions, but given the level disadvantage of the summoned companions, I don’t suspect many if any people will think this a wise use of their spell slots per day. Even heightened. I hope this is helpful and if you see something I missed, please point me in the right direction so that we can both learn together.
Follow up question. So that I can properly plan, what decks do I need to buy as a balanced minimum out of my own pocket as a VL to be able to kick off PACS in my stores and provide our players who want to try society play before making a financial commitment? I need to have a conversation with my wife and start budgeting.
Thanks for the responses. We have one player at our store that is starting who owns anything at all. I didn’t want him to have to hand out his decks every week until we can convince people to buy their own or until I can recover from the cost of 2e launch plus a Starfinder hardcover to hand out sets to everyone else. At the same time this is our weekly organized play gathering and I’m trying to support organized play with PACS. I suppose there just isn’t a way to support PACS at this time and can hopefully convince the store to start stocking them.
So here comes the new guy questions. In PFS and SFS you can go into a store, grab a pregen and experience something fun and new, which could potentially result in sales for Paizo. Why is the PACS policy that the GM or another player has to buy things out of their pocket or else tell the curious walk-up player there is a minimum $20+ store purchase required to even see if they like it? It’s very off putting to force GMs to buy decks for walk-ups to use. It’s very off putting for a new player to be told to fess up $20 if they want a seat at the table. Is there a reason for banning the characters already built in the rulebook in the box? I have the core set and crimson throne, but have only played once so far. There is interest in my store but it’s not fair to keep asking one of my players to supply all their personal decks to random strangers every week and with my late July shipment already in excess of $450 between PF and SF, I can’t add catching up on class decks for public use to my budget anytime soon. Does OP have a process to bring in first time players? What does OP offer? There are restrictions to playing. Is there any added benefit beyond consistency if you play card game at conventions? Which btw, is also not really a thing as far as I can see. Were there class decks for walk-ups at Origins or was there no support for society? I honestly don’t know, even though I was there. How about GenCon? With PF/SF you can play a pregen core character and see if this is the thing for you within the society context. How does PACS support this aspect?
Just a quick update. A VC did reach out to me yesterday about sitting in with another VC to observe me due to their general inexperience with high level Starfinder. I did not see this message until recently, because I didn’t notice that I had a PM. While I still believe my concern has merit, this individual is willing to make an effort and I find that to be utterly fantastic! I truly hope we see VCs who will be present at events people are looking for evaluations at step up like this. Wether we agree or disagree with the program implementation, that is no longer our choice. Being a community that still works to support each other through the process and its revisions is exactly what we need. Thank you, kind VC for stepping up and helping others move forward in this process. Even if you don’t feel comfortable signing the evaluation without more SF experience, you can provide valuable feedback that players are often uncomfortable providing and that means something to me. Thank you.
I think you may be rather jumping to conclusions here, I'm not saying that you're wrong or that it doesn't mean it won't be difficult to get evaluations under the proposed system if your experience is borne out so please don't misunderstand me. But I do think that saying there is some massive, organised secret protest or boycott from VCs because no-one replied to one post you made is... stretching things. Please don’t mistake me for thinking our VCs are united in a coordinated effort to stop this. I don’t believe that at all. I believe that one of them is. And another one is. And another one is. It appears that it is more an aggregation of individual refusal to participate.
I’m not concerned at a lack of offers or agreement to help me, personally. I would LOVE to have other people who don’t know me give me the feedback to improve or the kudos to congratulate me. I always strive to be better than I am in everything I do. My concern is that I see a LOT of active VCs, many who have stated they will be at Origins. Not one has even said hey, let’s meet up and see if this is possible. That’s more than any have been willing to do so far. No one said you need to be a Starfinder expert to evaluate. In fact the criteria doesn’t require the evaluator to be one. Excessive reference, excessive delays, things like that aren’t Starfinder specific. Good GMing isn’t Starfinder specific. If they don’t know the system, they can be an asset in ways others can’t. They get to see how you are with players new(ish) to the system.
I should also add context to my previous post. I originally asked if someone would be willing to work with me on this a month ago under the understanding that this was coming and I would like to be proactive rather than procrastinate. Any attempt to open a dialogue with the VC core has been completely ignored. I don’t say that out of contempt or frustration, but as a point of fact. If requests for evaluations are to be met with silence by the VC core then then their inaction will halt all access for everyone who doesn’t have the geographical luxury that I have. Wether they like it or not, the evaluation has moved from question to statement. The question now is how many people they deny progression through intentional inaction and refusal to support an official part of the Organized Play program. Wether or not you agree, this is now set forth by Paizo as the official way ahead. It is not appropriate to refuse to even discuss the possibility of supporting the program at the expense of others because of your personal stance on what Paizo has officially set forth. The evaluations are already taking place and even conducted at PaizoCon. Why attempt to penalize everyone else over your disagreement? You can disagree out loud without holding everyone back. Evaluate under protest in an effort to not penalize everyone else. I’m sure that absolutely zero VCs will be willing to evaluate me at Origins anymore now than they were in the last 30 days, but again, I don’t need the VCs at large. I’m voicing my concern over the impact to everyone else who will have trouble finding a VC in the first place, much less three times, when requests are met with silence or completely ignored. Is it really too much to even discuss the possibility of scheduling an evaluation table at “the Starfinder con”? It’s not like we don’t have precedent of evaluations before the guide update, because that’s already happening and the criteria has already been published.
If I can’t get a single VC to be willing to even open a dialogue about it for Origins where I will be running 8 tables, I can’t help but have concern for the ability to do this at major cons. I may have misrepresented my concern. I have frequent and regular access to at least 3 VCs, so the new system doesn’t pose a problem for me, personally. My concern is what appears to be a boycott by VCs to even discuss the possibility of doing a Starfinder evaluation at Origins. Of all the places someone should be able to have that discussion, especially for those with limited VC access, Origins should be that place. I am currently at 7 specials, 42 unique scenarios and 96 tables. I will have all but the 150 table count by January with no trouble using my local VCs. If exactly zero VCs are even willing to open a dialogue at doing a Starfinder evaluation at Origins in some sort of act of protest, that’s a problem. That’s their right, but at what cost and to who? Refuse to entertain the idea to force change at the expense of your GM core? That seems to be a problem that needs to be addressed. “I don’t like it, so I will passively contribute to preventing anyone else from achieving this.” is a poor way to protest and isn’t victimless. That’s not the behavior that seems appropriate for a VC.
I think getting VC support may be harder than people realize. I’ve asked for any VC willing to evaluate me at a table at Origins in the VO forums and not a single person has replied or contacted me. It’s gone completely ignored. I have 3 VCs within 2 hours of me, so I’m not worried about the ability to get my evaluations done. I’m at 96 tables with 4 scheduled before Origins, but I want to meet other VCs and hear feedback that isn’t from people who know and see me regularly. I want outside, unbiased feedback that I can use to improve because I enjoy trying to reach my highest potential in everything I do. If I can’t get a single VC to be willing to even open a dialogue about it for Origins where I will be running 8 tables, I can’t help but have concern for the ability to do this at major cons.
Level 21, right! Meant to say that, not 41. I literally just sprayed Mountain Dew laughing at this in a restaurant. Now people are looking at me like there’s something wrong with me. I’m also wearing a Starfinder shirt. Thanks for the laugh and the story I can laugh about BNW!
@Kishmo I print them on 36” x 48” with decent quality using GIMP (which is a free image software). Using Adobe Acrobat, loaf the scenario PDF
In GIMP, ctrl+shift+v to paste as a new image of the same size, DPI, etc.
If you’re lucky, you can convince them to print as a blueprint for a fraction of the cost. I pay $11for full color 36”x48” and $6 for a 24” x 36”. All but one of the employees at mine will do that for me. I hope this is helpful and best of luck to you. For those wondering why I don’t just do this in the future for an out of print map pack, it’s just the frustration of Paizo saying “Hey, we’ve got this great product you can use to show this on something much more portable than a roll of architectural paper, but just kidding. You can’t. Print it on photo paper and spend a fortune if you want it to be as nice as the product we’re referencing but not making available. At least if it were called a custom map when it’s really a custom arrangement of map pack materials Paizo fully intends to eventually stop production of, it would feel less like an IDGAF to meas the customer. I try to give the highest quality physical experience, depicting the author’s descriptions as I can afford time and money for, as I can. My 8 year old is a better artist than I am. When I draw maps, crates that provide cover are confused for doors. Areas of varying terrain types get mistaken and it just tends to take away from the overall experience when the players have to spend time clarifying which part of my Jackson Pollack is which mechanical advantage or disadvantage to them. Here’s a great thing you can go out and buy, but just kidding. We won’t sell it to you. Figure it out. I just don’t look forward to that day. At the end of the day, it’s still a business and the business needs to do what it deems in its best interest. Sometimes that might mean the author uses a material that may become forever unavailable 6 months after publishing, but best fits their writing. I can accept that, even if I disagree with it.
Subject says it. Pfstracker.net will not let me or anyone else report SFS 1-06 for me as GM or player. I have opened up my profile to allow others to report for me and so far no one can report that scenario for me. In fact, if anyone here thinks they might have some luck reporting it for me, my number is 241400. In lieu of that, does anyone know who I should report the issue to? The website seems devoid of contact info.
I appreciate the response. I’m trying to figure out what map packs I might need to buy before they go out of stock to cover the future scenarios (I really dislike trying to draw maps of far inferior quality to the published art for my players). I’m trying to balance this against the possibility that as a customer, I can’t see which are out of print, only which (if any) are out of stock. This is part of my season 2 SFS budgeting for the year. Thanks again for the response. I’m not sure it helps me anticipate anything more than seeing the map preview a couple of months out does, but I know what to expect, and that’s something.
I seem to recall that Paizo had decided to halt production of Map Packs in favor of the newer tiles system. As recently as 1-34 scenarios are still being designed to use them. Is the intention to continue using them in scenarios to help clear inventory with the knowledge they will eventually become difficult to obtain then you have to print or draw on your own? Is there a QC process in the works to avoid map packs and maybe use tiles instead, where applicable? If the intention is to use map packs anyway, I would personally prefer to have them listed as custom maps (which would also save the frustration of maps with misaligned, stretched or gapped spaces). If tiles become a thing, could we please make it a requirement that the tiles not have to be partially stacked and leaning on each other in a map design?
So rather than chastising, why not use this community forum to help the community learn and grow? I would invite you to respectfully rebut our errors, explaining why and provide a citation so that we may learn firsthand and fully understand exactly where your position is derived from within the source material. I would further point out that your comment only makes sense if you disregard the part about hiding and remaining hidden. Your post and the context of this is about casting from concealment supported by the skill stealth.
I had a good discussion with one of my local VA's recently and we both thought it worthwhile to put on the boards based on some local player confusion that may not be isolated to our geographical area. With the prevelance of replays currently available and upcoming between GM nova replays and SCS(Jadnura) replays, the replay for credit rules in the Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide have a seemingly lesser-referenced paragraph worth knowing, that I myself am guilty of violating through simple ignorance of what is written.
You can only have 1 bonus copy of a chronicle from replays. In other words, if your -701 plays Live Exploration Extreme normally, you can only ever accumulate one additional bonus chronicle from a replay. So now your -702 happens to be SCS (Jadnura) and has tier one. They can then play Live Exploration Extreme, resulting in your first bonus chronicle for the same scenario. Now, you REALLY love Live Exploration Extreme, so you make a -703 and get them to tier 1 of SCS (Jadnura) so that you can play it again. You can't. You already have one bonus chronicle for playing that scenario. The only way you can play this again is only if you are the third and final player in order to make a table. In which case, you can play for no credit as outlined below. Skipping down to relevant rewards section... Rewards: Replaying to make a legal table doesn’t earn any rewards. The Chronicle sheet for the adventure is a placeholder. It should note that the scenario has been replayed for no credit and awards no credits, Fame, Reputation, XP, boons, item access, or any other benefits or disadvantages. You must track consumables, purchases, and conditions acquired by playing the adventure. This is the only exception to not having two copies of the same Chronicle sheet assigned to one character. So a valid no reward replay should not count against this. Keep in mind there are restrictions on when you can play for no credit. Keep in mind this can only be done if you are necessary to meet a minimum legal table. This would only apply to you being part of a 3 player table. The SCS (Jadnura) boon even specifically references the replay rules on page 9 for using it. I brought this up because this is exactly what I mistakenly did. To further complicate it, this brought one character to level 5, who then played a 5-8 scenario, meaning that if I were to undo shred the chronicle, then I have a tier 5-8 chronicle I wasn't eligible to play in. It's a mess to clean up my books for this in order to make myself legal. All of this of course is separate from the GM chronicle, because that is not a bonus chronicle for a replay. Nor does this apply to the Repeatable scenario tag. I welcome any feedback or corrections to my interpretation of the guide in this regard.
No, you're just reading too much into that rule. I'm going to respectfully disagree and suggest that you aren't reading enough into that rule. Stealth explicitly allows you to MOVE silently. From the CRB page 147: "You can stay hidden and move silently to avoid detection, allowing you to sneak past foes or strike from an unseen position." This does not supercede clandestine spell casting. It goes on to elaborate on the two things it does. Hide/remain hidden and move silently. Just because you can move silently doesn't mean you can summon a demon from hell silently and unnoticed. In fact, as soon as you cast a spell from stealth the NPC gets an opposed perception check, even if you are concealed. That's like saying it's not possible to clandestinely fire a gun. Ok, but see the Stealth skill and sniping rules. I agree it's exactly like that. So, use your standard action to attack an opponent who is flat-footed, then take a -20 to reattempt a stealth check as a part of that action. Concealment does not equal automatic, successful, subsequent stealth. From the CRB page 148: "If you have already successfully used Stealth to hide from a creature that is at least 10 feet away, you can briefly pop out of cover or concealment and make a single ranged attack against that creature. As long as you can reenter cover or concealment, you can attempt a Stealth check to hide again as part of that attack with a –20 penalty." Spells get called out because they have no components and the introduction of psychic magic in Pathfinder infamously required them to state that all spell casting was always visible regardless of direct spell effects or components being sensed. Can you cite your source for this being the Starfinder logic or is this a personal opinion that you can't substantiate? They still haven't addressed in either system how and whether that interacts with invisibility, total concealment, and stealth rules. Until they do, I think the reasonable assumption, given the history of why this rule exists, is that spell visiblity is subject to the usual stealth/invsibility rules - it's only meant to stop you from casting openly but unnoticeably in social situations. If they want it to go further, they need to say so explicitly. I feel like I've provided ample evidence of it being addressed in this system. Page 330 isn't caveated. It's definitively stated.
The gunnery checks would not be impacted because no one suffers a crit until all shots have been fired. Think of it as both ships squeezing the triggers before the other shots finish traveling to the opposing starship. From the CRB, page 320:
Remember, a colossal ship (over 15,000 feet or 3 miles long) fits in one hex. There is a significant distance between ships, even in adjacent hexes.
A few points from a different lodge that what seems to be the vocal majority. First, in Saint Louis, we run every new scenario twice every month. We also run 4 back-plays a month. We still need more to satisfy our player base. Because that doesn't seem like something that is going to happen anytime soon, we also run APs. This isn't some way to power game or manipulate the system, it's a way to continue to offer SFS in a community which regularly plays so much SFS that we simply run out of things to play. Second, congruent to my first point, we sometimes have to offer repeatables in a way that affords more play opportunities without forcing people to make even more characters. Thus, we have characters that are level 5 on repeatable content alone. (Quest, 1-01, AP1, AP7, 1-12, 1-16, 1-25, 1-32). Putting a glass ceiling above these players just because others do not have the same option is not in the spirit of the society. Growing the pyramid by expanding both outward and upward ensures lots of content for everyone. The mentality of holding others back because you can't advance is frustrating. So is the mindset that content should only grow upward like a tower. I am grateful for the plan moving forward. Third, I have to agree with Bob. Handing a level 12 soldier with 2 combat styles, 12 feats, 3 gear boosts, several conditional abilities, possibly powered armor to track the charge level of, weapons of multiple damage types, maybe DR and adaptive resistance, a jet pack to track charges of, etc. to a newer player just so they can play would be obnoxious. At that point, they aren't playing, you are playing for them. That's just what Obozaya could easily be. Now let's add Quig and have them run 2 characters of level 12. You run the risk of potentially overwhelming a new or low level player. Or worse, you're going to turn them away and tell them they can't play, but they can sit and watch the grown ups. In my opinion it's better to pull out a repeatable and include everyone in a compatible tier and include the low level or prospective member of the Society than it is to exclude them or overwhelm and discourage them. I understand there are also times when a level 8 character will want to play at the 9-12, and that would be perfectly reasonable and a much smaller jump. But for those of you using your low table frequency and preponderance of mostly low or mid level players, the addition of a level 12 pregen this early in the campaign seems contrary to your needs. Fourth, I am completely in favor of level 12 pregens when there is so much content that a player is playing said pregen in that tier because they genuinely want to try a level 12 class. I know I said it in three, but I'm going to say it again. In my opinion, it is better to change the table to something everyone can play than it is to exclude people or split the tables and offer it again for the other half that graciously ensured no one was turned away. No one should feel unable to play in an OPF game if you have 4 or more people present.
Doesn't being a Maraquiois take up your personal boon slot? That seems to be the big deal with the wayfinder tier 4 race boon as compared to the others. Way late, but just saw this. Tier 3 Manifold Host Boon. Manifold Host Exemplar. 8 Fame, allows you to slot a personal if you already have a permanent unique race boon.
IDK how many tier 11-12 tables of 2-00 will be offered at Origins, but I will be GMing tier 11-12. I'm looking forward to studying and prepping that. I'm looking forward to seeing a full table of characters that high wreck face (or have their face wrecked if I know Thursty). I hope to see some of you there!
My suggestion is Foundation Points (for OPF). You could acronym them into PFP, SFP and CFP. This shows that you are active in one system and when explained to newer society players it’s a way to help expand the OPF’s visibility/ recognition level. This could be useful 5 or 10 years down the road if Paizo ever gains other third party content/system partners in OPF and chooses to support them in a similar fashion to what they are doing here.
I wouldn’t mind another flashback scenario like 1-00 offered as a quest pack to give 5 short backgrounds. There’s no reason Guidance, the Forum, faction leads or any VCs couldn’t have a small story segment that present day Starfinders could learn as an interactive memory or vividly related experience. I personally would love to see 1-01 followed up with a quest pack or scenario to learn more back stories.
I have played this once and GMed it three times. 75% “Above my pay grade” and 25% “Let it live.” I’ve only had two players vote to lobotomize and one to kill outright. Almost half of the players seem to vote to let nature take its course, but end up outvoted by the people saying “Who am I to decide the fate of an entire planet’s worth of life?”
+1 for promotional slot... (which means no shirt reroll) for a one time use by that player at that game, but deck is subject to inspection and shuffle by GM at their discretion. May only be used by a PC, not an NPC, even one under the control of a PC. My personal opinion.
Maybe I'm blind, but I have been unable to find the pregens mentioned in the blog post. Are those available somewhere? I know of some players who want to try the new mechanics in play before they commit to building a character when we run at the LGS.
I ran this 2x at Origins and saw some very creative solutions. In one party they [/spoiler]...they had two level 8 pregens who were unaffected by the medium radiation in their ilvl armor suits. We had a Ysoki (we'll call him Ysoki A) who happened to be high enough ilvl armor, but then we had the other Ysoki (we'll call him Ysoki B) in ilvl 5 armor. Ysoki A grabbed the Mk2 Null Space Chamber they found and Ysoki B hopped inside to reduce his exposure time, at which point Ysoki A stuffed the chamber containing Ysoki B into his cheek pouch. When skill checks were needed or combat imminent, Ysoki A would spit out the chamber as a swift on one turn, then summon Ysoki B out of the pouch on the second turn, at which point Ysoki B then fell prone out of the pouch and began participating in combat for 30-42 seconds, then hopped back into the pouch. As he was the only one initially affected by the radiation, he was the only one eligible for the boon.[/spoiler] On a note regarding the personal boon, I totally took the first option for my GM credit for my Manifold Host Maraquois. Now when he hits Tier 3, he will be able to use it combined with the race boon. Let's be honest, a Daredevil (Versatile Movement) Operative Maraquois with that particular benefit is too much fun to pass up the opportunity to play!
Awesome! Thank you so much for the clarification on this. I had a lot of fun running it last night and the players had a blast. You might find it entertaining to know that a Technomancer used a spell grenade to target "something" in encounter D2 that had a confusion effect. I was not prepared for that, but had a great time working through it with the players at the table!
Second question: Since Ipsoth’s Balloon attack requires the foe to be adjacent and immediately lifts the opponent 30’ into the air, this would also provoke an AoO, but it’s currently his turn. If a second PC were to approach him, (he has reach) would they provoke since he hasn’t acted since his last turn, or would provoking on his turn count as “after” for those purposes?
|
