I am an infrequent player who has been playing for 4 years. Maybe I average 1 game over every 2-3 months. And I am running into duplicate game problems. My choice is play for no value, don't play and leave, or go try D&D adventure league.
And if I am running into those problems, I can't imagine that players who play weekly aren't running into the problem all the time. Maybe I am wrong.
Maybe Paizo is trying to drive new blood in by simply forcing out older players--I hope not. But there really needs to be some kind of intelligent way for players to replay scenarios--especially with 2.0 coming. Why push players away?
I really don't get it.
A couple of thoughts:
1). Trash in trash out
2). Incorrect data or damaged data to start with
"It must be true. The Internet says so."
Perhaps a younger or newer model has either incorrect data or damaged data that would result in a faulty answer. As the robot grows, his ability to clean and improve his data improves.
3). Does Not Compute
I am working on a Gamma-World-esque conversion of Pathfinder for play in a post-apocalyptic, mutant-ravaged, super-science-science-fantasy game world. I realize there is a more literal conversion that has been done and is available in PDF.
I am working on something different, with more static races (which can mutate), defined classes, and a more familiar gaming context (good vs. evil, lost civilizations, powerful alien artifacts, and great evils).
If anyone is interested in collaborating/playtesting, let me know at firstname.lastname@example.org.
My 2 cents: I would like to see an unchained Fighter. But will multiclassing and all the options available, I think you can make an effective fighter character.
The build I am playing around with is an Unchained Rogue: Rake, Scout, Swashbuckler or thug (7-8 levels) and a Fighter: Tactician (12-13 levels).
It gives me some good fighty ability, wiht more skills, and some other options and abilities.
One more question. The Summon Pack ability states :
...she summons one additional animal of the same type. The summoned creature or creatures must be animals and must be of the same type as the hunter's current aspect or of a similar type (bearsfor bear aspect, dogs or wolves for wolf aspect, great cats for the tiger aspect, and so on).
Am I reading this correctly in thinking that if my Character is using the aspect of the Bull, that whenever he uses Summon Nature's Ally, he is always going to summon a minimum of 2 bulls?
Is that right?
I have a Hunter / Inquisitor: Sacred Huntmaster and I am wondering what to do with the Animal Focus ability. They both have it. Although the rules don't specifically say the levels stack--And I am more than happy to have two occurrences of the power that can be used at the same time--but I was wondering if there was something more official.
I would think it was simply an oversight, and like so many other powers that are the exact same, the level stack. But I was wondering if there was something more official out there.
My character is a good character who has agreed to allow Urgathoa to be more of his partner than a deity, to allow him to exact his revenge--thus the neutral alignment. He would otherwise be chaotic good, but the mix of the well-intentioned and evil magic makes him neutral.
I will have to talk it over with the GM and see what he thinks. But I think my take-aways are, that even though the spell is "good" and Urgathoa is neutral evil, that doesn't mean the spell is removed from my spell list; therefore, I could use a wand with a "good" spell; however, doing so could still make my deity unhappy to say the least--but that is all more of an RP opportunity than anything else.
Thanks for all the answers, comments, etc.
I have a neutral cleric whose deity is Urgathoa--the back story is that Urgathoa has saved the character who was slain by an evil necromancer. Urgathoa believes that one day the necromancer will threaten her, so she saved the character and would empower him to exact vengance upon the necromancer who killed him--and his step mother and father. Thus a nuetral alignment for a nuetral evil diety.
I accept that I cannot cast spells with a "good" descriptor. But can I use a wand of protection from evil?
It is still on my spell list. And given the back story, there may be just enough wiggle room to permit it.
What do you all think?
Elven Zapper Wizard
The concept for this PFS character is one that can put some hurt on encounters with spells (touch/ranged touch), but is still decent with other non-damaging spells (enchantments, compulsion, etc.). After looking and looking and looking, I finally came up with the following build. Any suggestions are appreciated:
Elven Arcanist/Paladin: Divine Hunter/Eldritch Knight
lvl Class Bab Caster Lvl Spell Level Special Abilities/Feats
1 Paladin +1 0 Detect Evil, Smite, Spell List for Wands, Bonus Feat: Precise Shot, F: Weapon Finesse
4 Arcanist +3 2 (4) 1
7 Arcanist +4 5 (7) 2 Exploit: Consume Magic, F: Heightened
10 Eldritch Knight +7 7 (9) 4
With the Magical Knack and Potent Magic exploit, the character gains a +4 to CL or +2 to DC for any spells he cast. And although he is limited in his spell choice, he only needs 1 really effective damaging spell—as the Versatile Evocation ability allows him to change the elemental type of the spell to whatever is more effective. Shocking Grasp can become Fiery Grasp, Icy Grasp, or Acid Grasp.
Why Paladin? I wanted access to some Cleric spells, specifically healing. The levels give me access via wands, as well as some useful feats (Precise Shot for free) and abilities (Detect Evil, Smite, and Divine Grace).
At 5th Level, he will have a touch attack at +6 to +10 (using Smite and Spectral Hand) and range-touch attack at +6 to +8 (using Smite), with a potential +1-+2 for increasing Dex using magic. The DC for spells will be +5 (Potent Magic) + Spell Level + 10, with an additional +1 to +2 for increasing Int with magic. All spells can be cast at a CL of 3 to 7 (Potent Magic and Magical Knack).
At 10th Level, he will have a touch attack at +11 to +15 (using Smite, Spectral Hand and Dex increase) and range-touch attack at +11 to +14 (using Smite, Weapon Focus, and Dex increase), with a potential +1-+2 for increasing Dex using magic. All spells can be cast at a CL of 7 to 11 (Potent Magic and Magical Knack).
The HP for the character is higher than normal as well, gaining an additional 12 points.
Skill points per level range from 5 to 7 at higher levels.
Any ideas would be appreciated.
Still, worth a try. I get there are othe rminis games out there, but the characters are all pre-defined. Using Pathfinder would allow you to build your own characters and play.
We have a game day in our area coming up--I'm going to give it a try, with a few tweaks.
Simple-Short Game Format
Any other ideas
I am looking at a Paladin 2 / Wizard X with the Magical Knack feat. I lose on spells-but not casting level and gain Detect Evil (SP), Divine Grace, Smite Evil (only 1 time but it's Cool), Lay on hands, and the ability to use healing wands up to the 4th level. Also I gain some great weapon and armor feats, and a bunch of extra HP.
I am looking to make a Gandalfi type character who hangs back and buffs the party for the most part. I think it will be fun.
In the future, if they nerf the rogue, the ability to add 1/2 his level to other skills, like what Trapfinding does, would make him interesting. Maybe every 4 levels he can select another aspect of a skill--spy, pickpocket, pick locks, etc.
That would make him relevant again as a master of skill use, and let the Slayer be the more combatant form of the rogue.
With the changes being made to the Warpriest class, I am looking to take the Holy Vindicator prestige class to keep him more of a beefy fighter.
The Holy Vindicator class states that it's level stack with the Cleric (Warpriest) levels to calculate Channeling capability. So I don't know if that affects Fervor, which to me seems to be a channeling capability--it heals/harms, and it's used to channeling. So what does everyone think? Do increases in level from the Holy Vindicator also increase a Warpriest's fervors.
Also, if I took the Extra Channel feat, how would that affect a Warpriest's ability to use channel?
Does Paizo eventually answers some of these questions?
So in our local PFS, we are trying to clarify a few things concerning buying gear. In the PFS guide, it states that always available gear is available in towns of 5,000 or more people.
At the bottom of the Always Available Items section, it states:
Beyond the gear noted above, your character is restricted
Then in the following section, Potions, Scrolls, and Wands, it discusses purchasing higher level potions, scrolls and wands that are clearly not on the Always Available Items list, and for which a distinction is made between potions, scrolls, and wands that can be purchased from a chronicle sheet:
All potions, scrolls, and wands are available only at the minimum caster level unless found at a higher caster level on a Chronicle sheet.
So my questions are:
1). Can I purchase potions, scrolls, and wands of various types which are not on the Always Available Items list, nor on a chronicle sheet I possess as long as I am in a town of 5,000 people or more and my Fame allows me to spend that much gold?
2). Can I upgrade my weapons and armor--let's say from a +1 to a +2--if I am in a town of 5,000 people and my Fame and gold allows me to?
3). Can I purchase additional magical items as long as I am in a town of...
Or are characters limited to Always Available Items and items on their chronicle sheets. So if I wanted to upgrade my +1 Battle Axe to a +2 battle axe, I would need to find an adventure that offered that as one of the purchasable options?
And if I am really that limited, what is the meaning of the whole Potions, Scrolls and Wands section.
I have been looking around, so far I haven't been able to find anything official.
IMHO, however, allowing a GM to simply rule death, regardless of how dire the situation may be, is just bad Karma for the GM, player, and PFS.
I would much rather agree with partial to full reward for incomplete scenarios, at the GM's discretion. Players who are alive, escape some how; players who are dying but not dead, are rescued as well, but at a penalty (-1 Prestige, -1XP, and/or -gold). And those who did die, can be resurrected by in-game players if they have the resources to do so, otherwise they remain dead.
As has been pointed out, regardless of whether the GM is efficient or not, sometimes you simply run out of time, and I would hate for a player, who has put so much time an energy into building up a player, to lose him or her, simply because the game ran a few minutes long.
Interestingly enough, the party was on the verge of a TPK: 2 members dead, 1 stabilized, and me with only 4 hp left, facing an Alip and a Carrion Golem--both wounded but not severely.
Odds were I was going to go down. But, the dice truly favored me. With no other choice, I stood and fought, killing the Alip, and with some help from a water elemental, took out the golem as well. So you never can really be sure what is going to happen.
I would say that we were being very cautious (we were playing up a tier), but not wasting any time. We were being thorough, looking and checking. I think that there were some poor dice rolling happening on all sides of the table that slowed things down, and then I--with 4 hp left, being chased by an Alip and a Carrion Golum--bolted hoping that a previous encounter we befriended would assist me. I suppose that stretched out the end.
But the real reason I asked is because I asked the question at the table, "what happens if we run out of time?" The GM said that he would simply rule a TPK, even though I was not dead and one other member stabilized, which I thought was odd.
Then he mumbled something about figuring out a rough and tumble amount of damage the bad guys would do and just hit me with it--as if that were an official rule. Seemed a bit presumptuous. So I wanted to see what the official rule was for incomplete scenarios.
Is there something official or is completely up to the GM? And if the players feel it is unsatisfactory, they can appeal to the venture organizer?
The GM was a good and impartial GM, but I thought his answered seemed a bit sadistic.
I ran Delirium's Tangle last night, and made a single tweak that I believe changed nothing, but made the adventure far more enjoyable.
I created a map to represent the labyrinth. It was a simple infinite loop of corridors, rooms and cave passages. It was a 2x3 foot print that costs $3 at Staples.
At the beginning of the adventure, prior to the first encounter area (beetles), I allowed them to wander in the labyrinth and start earning some of the hours needed to find their way to the central chamber.
This had two effects: 1). It allowed me to start building some suspense and intrigue, and it was just plane fun! For example, they found an arrow trap that had already been tripped. There was a corpse pinned to the wall--with nothing of any value on him. But it spooked the party.
They also found bones, partially eaten body parts, and the random large insect part here and their.
They wandering for a bit in the silence and darkness. Every time I asked for various checks and skill rolls they were freaking out. It was fun.
They rolled high enough that they didn't actually encounter anything, but it was a far better transition from the intro to the first encounter area.
Once they completed the first area, I sent them back into the labyrinth.
If anyone is interested--and it is just a real simple, black and white map, you can download it at http://skulltower.com/pdf/labyrinth1.pdf
On page 31 of the Pathfinder organized play rules, it says
"If you are running a home game of Pathfinder Society Organized Play, then your job is far less restricted by time constraints and planning, but still requires some extra effort on your behalf to ensure your campaign is recorded properly. Depending on how you play with your home group, you may take your time playing through a scenario and allow PCs to follow up on interesting sideline details or personal goals of their characters as you see fit. However, the PCs never gain additional Prestige Points, experience, or gold beyond the limitations of the scenario’s Chronicle sheet or the basic Pathfinder Society Organized Play rules."
I think this basically says that PCs are free to wander and interact in a sandbox environment (sideline details and personal goals), however, when they enter/re-enter official areas of the scenario being played, they can't bring anything that they wouldn't have officially gained with them... and at the end of the session, they still only gain the GCs and can purchase only those items that are legally available.
Anything else, magically vaporizes...
Just want to understand a few things...
1). Do I need some kind of PFS number as a GM to run PFS modules as part of my home campaign? And if so, do I contact my local venture captain or is do I get one online somewhere?
2). In order for my players to get PFS credit, I need to run sanctioned content as written. But, there is no time limit, and the characters are free to sandbox as much as desired in between/as part of a sanctioned scenario's elements? Is that right?
3). As a GM, I have complete freedom when the party is sandboxing between the official story elements, but any rewards of prestige points is based on them completing the appropriate requirements for the scenario?
Is this all correct?
1). They wouldn't expend any resources. They can shoot and pick up the arrows. The beetle wouldn't attack--there are dead beetles in other locations in the adventure. It is purely window dressing, that they can choose to overreact to or not.
2). Same with a failed perception check, which can mean that either they failed to see what is there, or misinterpret something that isn't there. I am not going to force anything. But a bad roll is a bad roll.
3). That much I get.
I totally empathize with what you are saying. And boy it is a fine line between too simple and TPK.
But I agree that the illusion of danger does not exist. In fact, the players I have been playing with (in 1+ level games) are apparently so starved for action, no sooner has the GM finished describing the situation that swords are drawn and dice are rolling. With little thought for caution or strategy.
Someone had a great example of a game that went totally out of whack though, with extra monsters, and then extra magic items (monty-haul style) to combat the extra monsters.
Maybe GMs need to be ranked somehow. And those who earn a specific ranking gain the ability for more leeway in a game. That would reward GMs for being good GMs and running the games.
It's not a matter of quantity, but quality.
First time PFS GMing. I am running Delrium's Tangle in a week, and after reading it there were some ideas I had and wanted feedback:
1). Entering the Maze
2). Area 1
3). In the Maze Proper
If a character takes 1 level or cleric and then the rest Warpriest, do some of their abilities meld:
Does the character get to leave spell slots empty Like a cleric? For all spell levels or only 1st level? And are the spell slots kept separate or they folded together? If he has 1 level in each class, does he get to cas 4 orisons and 1 spell for each class? How would that work?
Does the character get to use channel energy right away (1D6), and then add that 1D6 to the Warpriest 1D6 at 4th. And can he now use his channel energy 3+Ch per day and/or still have to use Fervor? Or is it kept separate, so he channels like a cleric sometimes and as a Warpriest other times?
He gains both the minor domain special abilities and then the blessing domain powers.
I totally get what you are saying, Jiggy. The flip side is when a group of players, x, y and z, approach the same situation differently. And regardless of what they do, the GM feels compelled to force the encounter to play-out the exact way.
What I was getting at was more along the lines of what Andreas suggested, if I do a little transitional GMing--very minor--that allows players to use skills and RPing that they normally never would--it is within the rules to give them an in-game, very temporary advantage.
One example I can think of comes from a scenario where we went from the PS offices, and in three words we were in another town, a few days ride away--And no sooner was the scene established than a fight broke out. It was jarring to the story, in my opinion.
Post game, I thought it would have been fun if while traveling via horseback, we connected up with one of the soon-to-be thugs along the road and struck up some conversation--and guess what, he was heading to the same house as we were--and guess what, his friends are now man-handling our PS contact. And suddenly there's that awkward moment of whose going to draw first, and the soon-to-be thug is standing right next to the party, and ...
The encounter is ultimately not changed--only where the bad guys are standing when the fight breaks out. But there is a much better transition from the start to encounter 1.
While traveling through the woods, allowing characters to make checks to see if they get lost or not. If they don't get lost, I would give them a better approach on encounter 2, where they would maybe see the NPCs--if they did get lost, the NPCs might get the drop on them.
Stuff like that.
But of course, if the scenario specifically says the NPCs need to be here and act like this because it is important to the story, I totally get that.
Thanks for your responses.