Harkaelian's page

I would humbly vote for SLOWER EXP progression as standard. I would like to see either a FLAT 4 mods per level (simple and easy) or perhaps a slightly tiered scale.

1st - 6th = 4 adventures per level
7th - 12 = 5 adventures per level

Having the split system of 3 adventures (WAY TO FAST IMO) and then if wanted you can manually choose to go slow leads to some really messed up groups in my experience. You have someone who insists on fast progression and another who goes slow and yet another who switches between. What this leads to is really messed up groups in our area where you work out 2 or 3 possible (and usual) group configurations but every other level 1 or 2 people out pace the rest then the whole entire group dynamic changes. Your main tank is a level or two ahead of everybody yet your rogue is a level behind everybody. So someone brings a alternate toon who is simply a filler or place holder and not specifically setup for the group. This leads to many games without a specific gap filled and less than optimal group abilities. OK this week we got the tank heavy group but 2 months from now we have the no heals group and in 2 months we will no longer have a rogue for a few games. Sorry but i really dislike the 3 standard mods = level and go slow if ya like model.

Flat 4 is super easy and gives people more time to enjoy the character and level and the split tier i suggest makes the mid-levels (where people like to play) more interesting, enjoyable (IMO) and really feels like you earned a new level!

Both models are simple and easy book keeping and give people a better chance to enjoy their characters. Also keeps the gap between characters closer together for better group\level cohesion for groups that perhaps have a varying number\type of players (8-10 people that float in and out). Someone can easily miss a game or two and not fall from 1/2 or 1 level behind to 2 levels behind because everybody else went fast progression.

First off I have only played a little but hopefully a few games in the next month or two. Gencon was nice and GM was pretty good. I am hopeful with this edition but it does need some work and they seem to have gone overboard with the nerf bat a bit on things.

LOVE
------
1) 3 actions is good. Needs more reactions for general use (general access for everybody) and few more specific fighter, rogue, monk, ranger, paladin uses but it is a start.

2) More prevalent use\access for Animal Companions\Pets and Familiars - still needs more work and refinement on the positive side but moving in the right direction although they were OVER nerfed. Give familiars a few choices like Eidolons had (maybe)(+2 to one stat, cast a cantrip as per master ability\effect at will, add an extra reaction ability to pet as it advances, add an extra feat from GENERAL list as it advances, et cetera)

3) Weapon Traits - although Monks need more monk weapons. Hooked Swords, Butterfly knives, DOUBLE WIELDING SAI's ( TWIN )!!! (They are MADE to be dual wielded after all - no brainer here).

HATE
------

1) Hate how over nerfed and simplified Pets\Animal Companions and Familiars have become. PLEASE make them more like PF 1st Edition in customization and allow them access to reactions(add more monster\animal reactions available to your pets and companions), actions like players and feats and even reactions just for the animals. There are a few but please allow more and specific ones available. Add MORE "builds" (Companion Types) and "Abilities" for them. Familiars seem really weak right now. Double the number of Master and Familiar Abilities to select from - PLEASE. Pets and Familiars also need gear access to scale with the party otherwise they will fall far behind and be completely useless in 7th+ lvl play. Seriously!! Figure something out!

2) Autoscaling bonuses!!!! ..NO.. !!!!

3) The amount of OVERLAP between spells lists - dear god cut down on the amount of overlap. I would eliminate no less than 20 spells of overlap to make the lists more unique. it REALLY feels like they simply padded the lists with overlap to make up for lack of unique spells and give each list a big enough size. Please just create new\more spells to fill the gaps. Don't put so many spells on 2 or 3 or even all 4 lists. I understand a few spells MAY be listed twice or possibly 3 times but seriously seems like every 5th or 6th spell is on multiple lists (usually 3 if not all 4). I realize some of this may be to limit the need for items and scrolls as you are trying to drive down the item dependency but still! Just eliminate a FEW ...... (just a few examples below!)

Air Bubble on 3 of 4 lists?? (Should be Arcane and Occult)
Alarm 4 for 4?? (Should be 2 Arcane and Occult)
Darkness 4 for 4?? (Should be 2 Arcane and Occult)
Mending 4 of 4?? (Should be 2 Arcane and Occult)
Ray of Enfeeblement 3 of 4?? (Should be 2 Arcane and Occult)

Ventriloquism 4 for 4?? (Should be 2 Occult and Primal)
See Invisable on 3 of 4?? (Should be 2 Arcane and Occult)
Water Walk 3 of 4?? (Should be Primal and Occult)
Remove Fear 3 of 4?? (Should be Divine and Primal)

4) Ancestries are weak and need an extra bit of punch like an extra feat at 1st level - minimum and maybe one or two more unique abilities per ancestry - be creative!!

(Sample )Gnome Ancestry Feat - First World Attraction - gain one extra perk or feat for your Familiar or Pet\Companion due to connection to The First World. They draw more magically connected pets and familiars (+1 to Will saves and automatically speak one language the Gnome speaks or +1 Will saves and can cast a cantrip for free as per caster Master or +1 Master\Familiar Ability or ...)

5) Untrained should be -3, Trained 0, Expert +1, Master +3, Legendary +5 along with NOT autoscaling to widen (slightly) the difference between unskilled and Legendary. Heck even just this would make things a bit better IMO and increase the difference between skill levels even if autoscaling stayed (not recommended)

6) SOME Combat Feats should be accessible TWO ways - by class\lvl and ALSO by skill\Stat + lvl. (Heh my Rogue has a Str of 16 so he can pull off a FEW (Fighter, Rogue, Ranger) feats (ex. Intimidating Strike: requirement of 4th lvl with a 16+ Str or Double Slice requiring 4th lvl, 16+ Str and Dex) even though he doesn't have 2nd or 4th lvl as Fighter because he meets the secondary requirements. OK maybe he can only get them 2 or 4 lvls behind a fighter but get them none the less and it takes the place of their normal Rogue-y stuff so ...). Would cut down on multiclassing in general. It would also add some flexability to builds and unpredictability to characters and NPCs without the added complexity of multiclassing.

I, for one, would like to thank the crew who ran the two rounder Iron Man round using PF rules. The round was a little disorganized for DMs but was very creative and enjoyable and very well preped for maps/figures. What was truly exceptional however was the single round the next day. The "Korvosa Irregular" event they ran on Saturday. The models and terrain they created for that one round event were AWESOME! The "adventure" presented six different challenges and they created each challenge in 3-d terrain. Although I did not win any paizo swag in either event(came in second in Korvosa Irregular event) it was different and very entertaining.

It was also very nice seeing Azmyth again this year, although I failed to share a table with him this time. Azmyth rocks! Also made some new friends, some locals. What up - Jake, Ben, Mike, Bryce and the lovely Sarah.

As far as question one is concerned this has been officially answered a long time a go. The evolution is available at 1st, 10th, 15th and 20th. What was not clear is that you have to wait from 1st to 10th to select again. Why would EVERY OTHER EVOLUTION clearly state - beginning at X lvl you may select this evolution and then this one single entry be different. The other entries clearly state the minimum level. This entry does not state a specific minimum starting level.

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/paizo/eidolons&page=1#29

Hi guys, I'm a gamer moving to the Houston area in the first week of April. This thread seems to have the most activity, so I thought I'd take the opportunity to introduce myself and hopefully meet some cool gamers in the area. I'm a Chicago native who'll be moving to the Westchase area. I'm hoping to find some Pathfinder Society play and maybe some Adventure Path campaigns or some homebrew. I've looked over some of the word documents in this thread with alternate rules and they're very intriguing.

Ideally, I'd like to get 4 hours of solid gaming in every other week at a minimum. I'm also willing to GM now and again although I'll be the first to admit that I'm not the greatest at it.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to my move and I'll hope to meet some of you in the not too distant future.

Hello and welcome to Houston. We have a semi-regular group that plays down in the Clear Lake/Pasadena area. ~1 hour SE of Houston. We usually meet at San Jacinto Jr. College in Pasadena, TX. every other Saturday. We usually play one round and sometimes two. There is also a new Thursday night group playing up in Houston on the West/NW side once or twice a month also. Feel free to contact Robert Love at ralove_69@yahoo.com and get hooked up on the mailing list of posted games. Also Charles Bailey demoyn35@hotmail.com does the Thursday night games. I think we can fulfill your gaming needs without much trouble.

heck just wait til level 3 to buy your heirloom weapon, nothing in the feat that says you have to buy it at first level, level 3 you should have 3 grand in the bank by then

It is a standard masterwork weapon. If you could afford silver or cold iron than fine. The item is purchased at character creation per pathfindersrd.

Jess,

I apologize again for that.
While I personally think that using suffocate on PCs in PFS is kinda a dick move, I feel responsible for the train wreck that mod became.

Team Cheliax's worst hour by far. (though we did get that Glabrezu)

Marcus

Dick move really? 4 saves before you die? Ever play LG? Following mods suggested battle tactics? Think there is some room at the kiddy 4E tables. Besides 70% of PFS mods are horribly UNDER powered/threatening anyway. Sorry just sayin

Ms. Feathers pops in and uhmm "waves" howdy to Jessdoor, Wolfie and scott(sorry dont know handle). Hugs and kisses BOYS and yeahhhh girls i guess, miss you. Pop on by The Pink Pony next time your in Kaer Maga, especially the BOYS!. Toodles
/swishes peacock boa

Hm, the updates really seem to be wonky. There's stuff in print not in the document, and there's stuff in the document not in print (like the sentence about the shaken condition from using Intimidate not stacking).

Wow you mean there is a problem in the editing and printing? Color me shocked. They (the printed and PDF) don't sync?

A few days ago, we added preview images, along with a diagram of how Map Pack: Shops can be used to reveal the interiors of the buildings depicted on Flip-Mat: City Streets.

We've also quietly revealed a new feature for GameMastery Map Packs: They now use the same write-on/wipe-off coating that we use on our Flip-Mats, meaning you can use dry-erase, wet-erase, and permanent markers with new Map Packs!

Can you say, that's incredible? Or did I just date myself? Seriously - Fantastic on both features.

I can pretty much say with confidence that Rob and I will make the whole weekend. For my part I know I will anyway. Rob almost always has half a dozen mods with him he has DMed already for emergency use and I will bring a few with me as well I am familiar with. We should be able to provide some flexability on rounds available. Like I said though Silverhair, although I can't commit to DMing specific rounds or numbers of rounds I would commit to the interactive to provide others the chance to play the special and not be stuck DMing something they have never experienced playing.

Harkaelian wrote:

I don't know why actually retiring would be necessary. Simply release a new AR with the mod. It is not actually necessary to rewrite the module. The wealth you receive in a mod is abstract anyway. I mean if a DM say adds 1 or 2 extra mooks to a fight to challenge the party he does not add two extra master work chain shirts and long swords to the AR gold. You simply reduce the gold by a third on the new AR as you adjust the scale to 4 mods a level. I feel 3 is a bit to fast really. Although not a huge difference 4 feels more accurate at least to me. Also lets not forget some of the year zero mods are already pulled from play and most current players have already played the year zero mods and thus unable to replay for credit those mods anyway.

It's not that simple. While the presentation of a wealth in the scenarios and on chronicles seems abstracted, those "extra master work chain shirts" are calculated into the total, and NPCs and general treasure are all accounted for when calculating what rewards PCs receive. Not only can a GM not add 1 or 2 extra mooks to an encounter within legal society play, but doing so would throw the wealth of the scenario off under the current system. There's a lot of behind the scenes balancing that went into all 62 existing scenarios to make them all roughly equal, and it would take more time and redesigning of entire adventures to convert them to a new system than we have the manpower to invest in the endeavor. You can't have it both ways; either you have three years' worth of older scenarios to play, or you get a new system of wealth and xp progression.

FYI I am fully aware how the NPCs are equiped is used to calculate the wealth on an AR. The point of the wealth being abstract however is the AR is not calculated on EXACTLY what is used or recovered in a module. In other words lets say a particular encounter has 8 thugs ambushing the party and the mod shows they each have 1 alchemists fire. The wealth provided on the AR does not change regardless of whether the thugs use those alchemists fire or not. Also if players drink all potions recovered from dead NPCs in a module the DM does not then lower the AR gold to reflect the party drinking 1,500 in potions found. Thus the actual wealth is abstract on the AR. It does not LITERALLY account for all wealth otherwise you would be deducting money for each and every potion or expendable used by the NPCs during a mod which would mean literally NEVER receiving max gold on an AR. Thus YES the wealth present on each and every AR is ABSTRACT. Not literal.

I was unaware that you were restricted to playing the mods "exactly as is". It was our understanding the GM had the freedom to adjust even in a small way the mod as needed. Don't get me wrong, I realize you can not rewrite the mod. Our local group does however add extra mooks or add a level to the BBEG on a regular basis. We usually seat 6 or 7 players and this is the only way to get even close to challenging us. Nothing ever changes the wealth or treasure in any way. Just simply provides balance against our average party size. After about the first dozen mods we routinely devastated we had to start adjusting the fights to provide a challenge. Keep in mind this is because like I said we almost always seat 6 if not seven. The encounters do seem fairly well balanced for a party of four or five though.

I would help run Shadow Lodge if you like Silverhair. Rob and I played it at Gencon this year. Rob also might help run it so others can play instead of run it.

Mattastrophic wrote:

Has slowing down the pace of levelling been discussed at all? Thirty-three scenarios from birth till retirement is just too few!

-Matt

Our first level 12s popped into existence about 22 months after the campaign began. That doesn't seem too quick to me. And if we were to ever change the pace of leveling, we'd have to retire everything released before the moment we changed the pace as the wealth-per-scenario is tied into the rate at which you level vs. gold per character level.

I don't know why actually retiring would be necessary. Simply release a new AR with the mod. It is not actually necessary to rewrite the module. The wealth you receive in a mod is abstract anyway. I mean if a DM say adds 1 or 2 extra mooks to a fight to challenge the party he does not add two extra master work chain shirts and long swords to the AR gold. You simply reduce the gold by a third on the new AR as you adjust the scale to 4 mods a level. I feel 3 is a bit to fast really. Although not a huge difference 4 feels more accurate at least to me. Also lets not forget some of the year zero mods are already pulled from play and most current players have already played the year zero mods and thus unable to replay for credit those mods anyway.

Devil's advocate: how does leveling ruin your roleplay? If you're, for example, playing a mournful goth elf with the Governator's voice, how does the possibility of going from level 1 to level 2 cause you to lose the ability to roleplay that character?

The quickness of leveling is, frankly, a myth. It takes you 18-20 months to hit the cap if you play every single scenario the month in which it is released. Considering there are many groups that finish an AP in less time (up to levels 16-18), I'm not so sure that hitting level 12 in 20 months is "quick."

Now I can certainly appreciate that one of the things you can sacrifice in an organized play environment, especially if you play different groups every time, is that story and character cohesion you can get from playing with the same people every session. Hopefully, though, you've created a character you enjoy playing with interesting rules or character quirks and you just play your PC the way you want to play your PC at every session. :-)

I've never had a problem roleplaying in any adventure in any game--roleplaying is largely up to the player, even if you have to create the opportunities for it to happen.

The error in your logic is that you assume someone starting at exactly when the modules came out and then progressing at the LIMIT at which the modules are released. Our group in Houston has half a dozen players who could easily be 12th level in only a year of play. We started playing PFS just about 1 year ago and we have seriously slowed down the last 2 months. What happened was people started hitting 6-8 and our play opportunities started to narrow. We were to low for higher tiered mods sometimes with no lower tiers written for them and to high as a full group (6-7) for some of the lower tiered stuff that stopped at 4-5 or 5-6. So we played higher when possible and were sometimes forced due to lack of available higher tier mods to start 2nd and 3rd characters. We have at least 3 or 4 people that have over 12 levels worth of characters. It is simply that their highest is 7th or 8th (11th for me) and then they have a 4th or 5th and a 1st or 2nd. Admittedly sometimes people wanted to test out the PF take on a class and voluntarily elected to start a new character even when a higher mod was available for us to play but the point is our little group alone has multiple people easily capable of having been 12th in less than a year. I personally did 8 rounds at Gencon. In one weekend I did one quarter of my primaries life cycle. Some in my local group might be a bit cheesed now because I am now basically out of play for their primes now.

The way I would do it is select say 15-20 people to do the game review informal editing. You send the file in question to only 3 or 4 (5 max) individuals on a Monday morning and request any input back by C.O.B. Friday or Saturday. You have your staff collect all corrections and compile and implement them the following Monday and do your normal in house review and normal, formal final editing for that week and prepare to send to the printer. You need a pool of 15-20 so different people are selected for each product and your volunteers don't get swamped by reviewing 3 or 4 or more products each and every month. Like I said earlier the people reviewing don't have to be editors or English majors just knowledgeable about the game and its mechanics. These people would be reviewing from a mechanics and critical point of view not a formal English major editing point of view. This would help eliminate things like rounds instead of minutes or bludgeoning instead of piercing or calling classes/prestige classes by wrong names. I would even suggest possibly asking the people they choose to be regional coordinators to preform this function. I mean they would have to sign a nondisclosure agreement of course. I would bet just giving people credit as contributor in the book would make most happy. Just my 2 cp

I think F33b is on to something here I have taken alook at all three books and this is what I have found.

APG
Falcata 18 gp 1d6 1d8 19 20/ x3 4 lbs. S

Campaign
Dueling sword, Aldori 20 gp 1d6 1d8 19 20/x2 3 lb. Slashing
Falcata 16 gp 1d6 1d8 19-20/x3 4 lb. Slashing

Armoury
Dueling sword, Aldori 20 gp 1d6 1d8 19 20/ 3 3 lbs. S
Falcata 18 gp 1d6 1d8 19 20/ 2 4 lbs. S

You maybe wondering why I have included the dueling sword in the last 2 well if you look it changes crit as does the falcata. Maybe it was the mythical cut and paste again but either way we now have 2 weapons that have diffrent stats and that have 19-20/x3 so which is it and what do people think about the dueling sword being 19-20 x3?

+1

Wow between James and Deanoth(notice I spelled his name correctly) I don't know what to say. I can understand Deanoth as he is a player and not affiliated with Paizo but James response is a bit less understandable. Yes I was a bit blunt but that is apparently what is required and I was honest but after 2+ yrs of practice(just on PF) and still having issues like these well...

I think after rereading my original post I understand James and Deanoth's response better. The comment about looking at the Bestiary and the amount of errata was not directed at Paizo. It was a general response to people stating that there was little errata in general and it was just some typos. They were comparing it to some 3.X books and stating they were comparable in errata. I just do not ever remember any 3.X book having 7+ pages of errata. I promise it was not a shot across the bow of Paizo, James. It was directed at some of the posters defending the editing(with fanboy zeal) and stating it was nothing out of the ordinary.

I have stated multiple times Paizo and the PFRPG are great. They have excellent content, great story lines, quality printing and artistry. The only real minus is editing. Maybe I actually like PF to much? You know how you meet someone you feel really attracted to but then the first time you hear them laugh it sounds like nails on a chalk board and you go "oh God if not for that laugh....". That is how I feel. Pathfinder is a real great system and I love how the folks at Paizo actually test things first and ask the public for feedback. That helps insure a good product. I did not come here to belittle others but to hopefully make a positive change to the way things are done. The good people at Paizo need to know how people feel whether it is good or bad. Kind of like tough love. Believe me if I did not like Paizo and its products I would not waste time or money on them. Since I have invested fairly generous amounts of both ......

While I am a huge fan of Paizo and the PFRPG, they do NEED to improve their in house editing process. Seriously did any of you guys look at the Bestiary? Even once? It had 7+ pages of errata. After I gave away my first run edition and got the second printing and began checking it I found 6 or 7 monsters still NOT updated in the first 50-60 pages. I stopped and walked away I was so mad. No excuse.

Adventurers Armory anyone? The second printing fixed nothing because the wrong version was sent to the printer. Seriously? Look, I would preview a soft bound book for $100 and ONE copy of the book and would do a hard bound for $200 and ONE copy of the hard bound. I am not stating I possess any special editorial skills but darn I can spot incomplete sentences, wrong formats, and items that have had changes in price/damage type/crit X/damage die. You know the ones that are BLATANTLY OBVIOUS even on first reading.

I can't believe nobody posted yet the newest must cast/always have available spell for clerics - Blessing of Fervor. I really think that spell is a bit broken. It basically just became a mandatory 4th lvl spell for clerics. If your group has no arcane of any type it certainly is a new absolute cleric spell load. Not a fan, wish I could nerf it in PFS play. I just don't like catch-all spells and "must cast every fight" or "big fight" spells.

Not sure Jlighter but I think AZMYTH is in the bay area. Maybe try to link up with him via email. Wish you lived in the other bay area. HAH. Gulf Bay Area. We would have ya covered down here Houston way. FYI AZMYTH does one of the two Pathfinder Podcasts I know about. Good luck and good gaming

Harkaelian wrote:

Hmmm guess I didn't make much of an impression. Hjonvard Fatesmasher - Ulfen Ftr. No more Dr.Pepper for you!

Can we call it a lost index card, compounded by tricky Ulfen spelling?!

Impression? I'd say impact! :) I'm only drinking the real sugar variety now! Thanks for the well timed energy boosts all weekend long!

Excellent! Another sugar Dr.Pepper convert. Although it is a semi-rare and more expensive alternative to regular but well worth it IMO. I must say Az, if I may be so bold, you and another DM from Florida (IT guy) were my two best DMs at Gencon. Very knowledgeable and excellent role play skills.

Hmmm guess I didn't make much of an impression. Hjonvard Fatesmasher - Ulfen Ftr. No more Dr.Pepper for you!

I really enjoy PF and PFS a lot. I have missed RPGing since 4E came out and I was not willing to go that direction. So I am very happy with this option for myself and my friends but the APG follows the same template as most other PF hardbound books. Excellent idea, excellent content, fantastic art and COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE editing. Unfortunately I am at the point were I am unwilling to purchase any new Paizo PF product until at least it's second printing. I have no idea who or how there editing process is done but it is totally unacceptable. As an example look at the recent second printing of the Adventurers Armory fiasco.

This is just my opinion and others I am sure have different ideas. My suggestion would be to buy the PDF until a second printing comes out. It is a great product after all.

I have already gone through 3 printings of the core and two of the bestiary and I am waiting for the new campaign book instead of getting a second printing of the original campaign book and I can't replace my Adventurers Armory for some time now since they hosed that second printing up. I just feel I am done like I said until a second printing comes out of most hardbounds.

Oh dear God don't open this can of worms! Invent whatever you like and leave it off the forums.

Vic, very glad to finally see these. I was the guy that had these custom made for me and my players and suggested they contact you guys about putting a set together for sale here. I personally love them.

FYI guys you do not have to put them under the mini. You can put them next to the mini or on your combat pad or in front of the DM to keep track of his minions. The reason they are each a different color is they do not have that many colors available. The other colors they have available are transparent and thus unsuited for double sided tokens. Already discussed this with Litko when I had my custom set made. These are much more useful for a DM as players are able to more easily keep track of their one character. These really help in larger battles trying to remember who was tripped and who was blinded and who is been stuck and bleeding et cetra. This earn some kinda discount? Maybe?
/Nudge

Just kidding. I hope people use and enjoy these. Like I said great for large battles and area affect spells use. Also if nothing else placing a figure on top of one is a reminder as pieces move around that this particular one is under the affect of a condition. Pick up the figure if you forget which one but how often do you affect people with multiple different kinds of affects in the same encounter.

Well of course you can change anything you like in your own home campaign and feel free to do so. Technically speaking though flanking has nothing to do with all around vision or 360 situational awareness. It is simply a matter of having no safe place to move when flanked on opposite sides. Both opponents can attack left and right and you can't move forward or retreat. There is literally no safe place within easy step or dodge distance to allow for moving away from an incoming attack. Also good opponents would specifically attack from opposite directions or await your attempted dodge then attack where your moving to. It is very difficult to commit to a move then redirect your momentum and then try to re-redirect again. That is why flanking works IMO.

Season 2 starts with the August scenarios.

Season 1 ends with the July scenarios.

The plot line for season 2 started creeping into the Tier 12 scenarios in April and with the lower-level scenarios in June. I don't want the seasons to feel like walled-off plot lines, so there will likely be some blending between them.

Also, with season 2, we're changing the naming convention. I should have the next few months up soon and you'll see them numbered thusly:

Season#-Scenario#

So August will be 2-01, 2-02, 2-03, and 2-04 and Season 2 will run through 2-28 and then start Season 3 with 3-01.

Wow sounds like a great time to make a switch to something like say, 4 mods to a level.

/wink wink
/nudge nudge
/nod nod

I shall say no more ;)

I do have to agree with Face_POllution. The only real down side I have seen to PFS is the 3 mods to level rule. You do not have much time to get to know your character before leveling to new abilities and feats. I feel 4 would be much more reasonable. Joshua has already stated though that is probably never going to happen. I really missed LG and DND 3.5. I was very unhappy after the 4E change and with LFR. I gave up all RPGing for almost 2 yrs. Some friends started talking about Pathfinder and the beta test and even PFS. I was skeptical at first but what I heard was encouraging so I gave it a try not to long (couple months) before the core book came out. I really was happy with what I saw in beta and we even dove into PFS. I must say everyone in our group who has given PF and PFS a try has been very impressed and very happy.

I love the response we as customers see on these boards from paizo staff. I love how they seem to take to heart what the fan base wants and respond accordingly instead of ramroding changes down our throat. The core of the Pathfinder movement and 3.5 centric group and core PFS people are very passionate and involved with the products and systems. This whole Pathfinder system (core and PFS) seems to have a very family and grassroots feel. Likable friendly people trying hard to make a great environment for others to play in.

The only other change I personally would make to PFS play, other than 4 mods to a level, would be a regions type setup like LG had. Regions and triads to spice things up and encourage travel to different regions and different cons. Also it would produce more play opportunities to players and some extra flavor. I am very happy though to have an improved rules set and world to play in again like Golarion and specifically PFS opportunities. My hat goes off to you guys at Paizo. Here is to many many more years of great gaming.
/salute

Sean is correct you add a dab of glue inside the slot on the round bases and then insert the vertical part into each round base and add another glob of glue on the outside. Just be sure to DRY FIT them first. You may need to use a small metal file and shave down the slot a bit to get a good fit. After they are loose dry fit then slide apart carefully and add glue and put them back together. FYI they do have square bases available too. I got some and actually recommended these guys contact Paizo so y'all are welcome ;-). I got mine and they are just fine. Love them. Like everything I got from these guys. I even got a custom set of pathfinderized tokens a la the 4E set they sell. They rock!

Why would anyone feel penalized for not getting the exp point? It means you get a small wealth bump for your character and extra play chances. Considering the fact at 3 adventures to a level you are already severely restricted on play for your character I would vote for MORE zero exp mods, not less or none. After all how many interactives are actually played each year? Paizocon and Gencon?

While we're slightly on the topic, I'd love to see a progressive XP rate.

• Levels 1-3 require 3 chronicles to advance (9 to reach level 4)
• Levels 4-6 require 4 chronicles to advance (21 total to reach level 7)
• Levels 7-9 require 5 chronicles to advance (36 total to reach 10)
• Levels 10-12 require 6 chronicles to advance (54 total to reach 12)

Scenarios designed for levels 5-9 and 7-11 would have to increase in numbers, but this would give everyone more time to develop their character. The argument of "Make another character" isn't appealing to everyone, and in my limited experience it isn't appealing (or at least favorable) to a large percentage of players.

Although a graduated system sounds good I believe it would become a monster to adjudicate. How do you handle playing up or down? If I play up at 3rd level would that mean it still counts as one of my 3 or would it count as 1 of four for that higher tier? I think graduated would be very difficult. I do not mind the flat system just STRONGLY feel 4 mods per level would provide much more play and adjustment for a player. Honestly if Joshua and the fine folks at paizo were to ever consider this - now is the time. It will only get harder say 2 or 3 years from now to make such a change.

+1 for Scipion del Ferro. FYI Partial charge has been around longer than PF JimmyNids
/just sayin

In all honesty Joshua my biggest gripe would be to switch it to 4 mods a level. More play opportunities per level per character would be greatly appreciated. 3 as you progress seems really fast.

Officially adding a small blurb to upscale a bit for 5 or 6 would be great because there are some players and DMs that would require an official suggestion like that otherwise they get a little bent out of shape if the DM does it on his own. Also consider giving those mooks a couple of alchemist fires or acids instead of healing potions.

I am very happy with PFRPG and PFS. I am back to gaming after almost 2 years of nothing after 4.0 rolled out. Thank you guys /bow

In my experience probably 2/3rds of all the mods are easy to moderate. Now I freely admit I am spoiled as we usually have a table of 6 and barring that then 5.

My gripes arise from an extreme over abundance of healing available in most mods. I think there has been half a dozen times in 35~ mods we have received 6 or more potions of curing as treasure during the mod. Also at least 4 or 5 mods were you can grab a wand of cure light during the mod. I understand giving bad guys some healing to use just as players have some but realistically the party captures it most of the time and then free heals after combat not even losing treasure for AR purposes.

My other problem is with scaling up modules by simply adding more low level mooks to a higher tier. Even the low level cannon fodder should scale up when a tier goes up not just adding 2 or 3 more. Face it, it is fairly easy for a 4th lvl wizard to handle 3 3rd lvl fighters and even easier for a 6th lvl wizard to wipe 5 or 6 3rd lvl fighters. Several adventures I have seen so far use this strategy of simply adding a few extra lower level guys to the next higher tier and then slap an extra 2 levels on the BBEG. At least add 1 extra level or so onto the goons. Also there is no reason to have creatures in a mod that are below 3 levels under the tier of the mod unless there is more than a dozen or two of them and they can actually hurt the party.

I would also second the idea that in the future mods might have a small suggestion area in each encounter for a table of 5 or 6 players facing the encounter in question. Nothing big just something like "For a party of 5-6 add one extra 3rd Orc Barbarian to this encounter." or "For a strong party of 5-6 add 1 4th lvl lieutenant to this encounter." Or simply suggesting add one or two HD to the BBEG.

FYI I do love and have really enjoyed almost every PFS adventure. You guys are doing great just need a few tweeks. I would also humbly suggest switching to 4 adventures to gain a level. No adjustments needed to the PFS scaling of wealth or PA needed. Simply stretch the same gold out over 4 mods instead of 3 and make a few extra 1 PA mods and a few less 2 PA mods. This way you still wind up with the same overall wealth and PA at any given level. Three mods to a level is simply to quick and to few play opportunities IMO.

Yo my prime is 8th lvl but my backup Ketswao is a 3rd Summoner. Now 2/3rds of my rounds are my high lvl but I am scheduled for 3 maybe 4 tier appropriate rounds for low play. Have faith ;-)

Harkaelian wrote:

Hello and welcome to the boards and PFS. I welcome a chance to sit at a table with a new player.

1) PCGen is perfectly fine. No worries about what or how the character is generated as long as the PFS rules are applied for generating stats and such
2) The companion is fully trained no worries there
3) Download the PFS rules under the Society section. Has all the allowed/forbidden feats/traits used in PFS play and rules for starting wealth and allowed animal companions. Also has other caveats and race and class specifics. It is not that bad but is mandatory reading for PFS play.
4) Consumables - potions of cure light, alchemist fire, acid, scroll of cure light, scroll of obscuring mist et cetra. Never hurts to have 6 or 12 in your backpack

No magic items or magical consumable can be purchased before your first chronicle.

This was a general new to PFS answer not a "before your first round do X" answer. Also you can purchase stuff after the scenario begins most times easily. Heck every other adventure starts in Absalom proper.

Hello and welcome to the boards and PFS. I welcome a chance to sit at a table with a new player.

1) PCGen is perfectly fine. No worries about what or how the character is generated as long as the PFS rules are applied for generating stats and such
2) The companion is fully trained no worries there
3) Download the PFS rules under the Society section. Has all the allowed/forbidden feats/traits used in PFS play and rules for starting wealth and allowed animal companions. Also has other caveats and race and class specifics. It is not that bad but is mandatory reading for PFS play.
4) Consumables - potions of cure light, alchemist fire, acid, scroll of cure light, scroll of obscuring mist et cetra. Never hurts to have 6 or 12 in your backpack

I know it is not "official" but since they have put pro-rated wands in modules that would appear to be the way to go.

That was my point but it does not spell that out in the spell description though. I did fore warn everyone next time I DM that it will work that way so plan accordingly.

This came up this weekend and we had a lively discussion about the following situation. Without giving spoilers the party was facing a fire based creature. One of our two Clerics used shield other on our Ranger and cast resist fire on himself.

When the Ranger eventually took fire damage he (the Cleric) applied HIS fire resistance to the shared damage he took. The discussion was, would the Clerics fire resistance apply to the damage shared to him from the Ranger? Basically is literally half the "fire damage" being transferred to the Cleric or is the spell simply sharing half the damage (regardless and independent of source or type) being shared. Our DM allowed the resistance to apply but I am afraid if I was DMing I would rule against that.

To me the spell transfers half the trauma to the other character not literally half of the spell or physical damage induced including properties/material/effects that caused the damage.
/pulls pin and tosses
//seriously looking for opinions especially official ones

Falcata = X3 crit. multiplier not X2

Well since it is automatic that ALL items made from Mithral are masterwork it would make little sense not to include that into the calculations for mithral. However if you need further evidence see Mithral Full Plate of Speed. Regular full plate has a AC penalty of 6 and M.F.P. of Speed has an AC penalty of 3. Thus 3 is the total negative number for all armors made from Mithral not 3 plus 1.

Hmmm Check your spam filter I promise I emailed it twice. I did not see any unable to deliver notice of any kind. Hmmm I'll try a third time in any case. Expect it shortly.

Although I do like where this mod headed I feel it did not scale well. For tier 1-2 and 3-4 it seems pretty well balanced to be challenging. However at tier 6-7 the party I DMed walked through the adventure. Unfortunately the module writer did not scale up most challenges from 3-4 to 6-7 well. They simply add a few more mobs in most rooms but they are the same HD as 3-4. I feel the Mites and Derro should have scaled up more instead of add a few more. Also Lady M. should have had a little more offensive capability IMO. Her defensive powers and spells do not scale up well to defend her at the 6-7 tier. DMing this at least once does make for a better played (DMed)second round for sure.

Have you updated the SMA file yet from the file I sent you? Just checking.

Shameless bump still looking for clarification

Finally got Store and Share up and running....

Summon Monster

Summon Nature's Ally

Summon Monster [Augment Summoning Feat applied]

Summon Nature's Ally [Augment Summoning Feat applied]

Heh Stuart I found a fair number of errors in your files on the Summon Monster Augmented creatures. Thats the only one I verified yet. What email address can I send the corrections too?

Although a bit liberal I would probably allow ingested poisons (to allow a bigger selection) but there is always contact poisons. Not allow acid? There are acid/base/caustic liquids that do not affect metal and are not affected by them. Feel free to allow acid. After all the EXACT TYPE is not specified. Hydroflouric, Perchloric, Butanoic, Tosylic, Nitric, Sulfuric, Phosphoric ... Some react with metal, some don't and some only certain types of metal. I would say acid is NP, that is a no brainer. As well as extreme base substances to use against slimes and oozes. Also Holy Water. Make the spear +1 and Holy and make it your primary undead slayer, especially for a rogue.

meatrace wrote:

I don't see that exact wording "making an attack roll" I see "The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature." I'd personally say that intentionally moving a flaming sphere into a square occupied by an enemy with the intent of hurting said enemy would be an attack. Any spell that calls the intent of the caster into play is going to be slippery.

Except it's not an Attack, it's a Move Action by the caster. That's relevant, is it not? I know the word "attack" and the technical term "Attack" are being conflated here, but they shouldn't be.

The mage directing a flaming sphere to move into an enemy is not making an Attack, he's making a Move Action. Therefore his invis doesn't drop. At least that's how I read the OP's question. The distinction with a Move Action vs. an Attack is relevant.

Just because directing the sphere is a move action once the spell has been cast does not make it a move action period end of statement. It is STILL an attack causing damage to an opponent. You are still making an attack intentionally damaging another creature by your DIRECT actions. That breaks your invis. Read carefully the invis spell. Any spell that is cast on an opponent (i.e. does not have to be an attack spell) OR area of affect that comes in contact with an opponent or contains an opponent breaks the spell. The definition of opponent is directly related to the INTENTIONS of the caster. As per the spell. It is very clear that the intentions of the caster are clearly taken into consideration.