Haruki's page

I can't wait!

You even going that far to use remaster demons is awesome and I appreciate the effort.

Alex Speidel wrote:

Hello Pathfinders and Starfinders,

Today we are asking for public comment on the following revisions to the Guide to Organized Play, specifically the section entitled Run as Written.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **...

Hi Alex,

I think the rule "No banning of legal character options" could use some clarification. Is this saying that the Common/Uncommon/Rare traits must be ignored by GM's?

This is saying that anything that is legal (and a character has earned, like through a boon as an example) must be allowed by the GM. The GM can't say "no gnomes at this table" but they can still audit character options to make sure a player has earned those choices.

This is such a great idea and I am happy it is happening.

Honestly, the advice in the 1e threads is still applicable and since there is an inventor in the party, it seems there aren't really any restrictions on class/themes. Arcane casts are about as good a story fit as anything can be for this AP and wilderness type characters will really get some work in 3, 4, 5. Beyond that, you really can't go wrong with classes. Each book is thematically different enough that you'll likely be fine. Exception for Gunslinger and Inventor which have close to no thematic connection to anything.

That said... what about the Alignment tips did folks find most useful, beyond us suggesting which of the 9 alignments are best to play? Does the rest of the Player's Guide do the job as a whole helping to guide a cohesively themed party that'll fit well into the campaign (as I suspect it might)?

Using Blood Lords as an example, it specifically details how a specific type of good character could very well function in that AP and gives some minor guidance to doing so. Outside of that alignment section, there isn't really anything else to suggest that type of character would remotely function in it. So, it would be harder on players to have "appropriate" characters that don't directly match up to the theme or expectations. Without that little section in the BL PG, I wonder how many people would even think to play a LG type character in that campaign.

James, sorry if you mentioned this elsewhere already but will the Dooms Player's Guide be out in time for this adventure, or at least the way to tie things together? I plan to run them back to back but I'd like to be prepared for the connection before running this.

Putting into writing before it actually hits but my guess for 200+ is Runelords, Xandergul, Varisia, and probably some other callback to early APs. While another trip to the darklands is needed, I suspect they want to de-OGL a lot of what's there even before the OGL fiasco and I suspect that will happen after whatever 200+ is. I think it is also somewhat telling New Thassilon has barely been touched in nearly 5 years.

Alex Speidel wrote:

Donald wrote:

So the event list for Gen Con is up and there are four listings for the special. They all have levels 1-2 in the title but one of them has levels 7-8 in the description. Are the others meant to be for different levels?

Event listing

Yes, Gen Con edited my titles post-submission. I'll be contacting them this week to have them fixed.

Do you have any recommended adventures to play at Gencon for people new to PFS2e? Thanks to adventure paths, my group will have 5th level and 1st level characters to play with, and are trying to put a schedule together that maximizes our PFS experience

In addition to what Alex said, any 3-6 adventure that isn't a metaplot adventure will also be fine to use the level 5s. Most society scenarios are fairly standalone and call-backs to previous adventures, while existing, often are there as easter eggs for players are not something necessary for enjoyment of the scenarios. Society itself, other than the episodic nature, plays just like normal PF2 Adventure Path play so you should feel right at home.

I just hope Wyvaran…

You keep saying you aren’t a troll and yet you keep bringing your personal agendas into topics and missing the overall point just to spout the same arguments you are making in multiple other places. Stop doing this. Flagging this for baiting because until it can be proven otherwise, I’m just assuming that’s what this is.

There are lots of little things I hope they tune up for core and there is of course the issue with caster accuracy being abysmal which I'd like to see changed but my "one big thing" is to open advanced weapons up to the other classes in a usable way. It is very weird that an entire section of the armaments in this game are effectively restricted to a single class (fighter) or ancestry (tengu). Being -2 to hit is never going to be worth it and other than a certain recently released sword from taldor, none of the advanced weapons would even be spectacular because you need to give up a feat to get them.

I finished it in about 1:45 last week with newer players but it was very mechanical with little roleplaying from the group.

Then the answer is really quite simple. Stop engaging with society play as it is clear you have no interest in actually participating. At this point, the most logical conclusion is that you are purposely being a bad actor towards society with no interest in actually participating. If that is the case, move on. If that isn't the case, you are doing everything in your power to drive away all the people who are actively trying to help you while also setting such a bad precedent of your behavior that your ability to get non-society games is rapidly dwindling. I am not sure what you actually want to get out of your online presence but your actions resemble a troll and a troublemaker more than someone who actually wants to play the game with good intentions.

But this is PFS, where GMs have to follow the rules to a T

You keep saying this and venture officers keep telling you that you are mistaken with how inflexible you perceive society play to be. At some point you need to realize that it isn't society that is the problem, but how you view it. And again, you keep making these grand assumptions without ever having played a society game. Please, I am asking you to stop commenting on society play and what it is like until you actually have some experience with it.

Edit: Also, are you actually interested in society play? Just today another beginner game was posted on RfC and yet again, you did not sign up for it. The vibe I am getting is that you don't actually want to play society, you just want to use it as an excuse to complain about something. That has been your most consistent interaction with society as a program.

>No Alignment

I'm out. Sorry. Don't know what kind of a bait & switch this is, but I'm out.

"Your existing books are still valid" my ass.

Pretty strong stance to take when you have literally no idea what the replacement is, or if a replacement is even needed. Could be as simple as decoupling alignment from PCs and turning alignment into traits for NPCs.

Thank you soooooo much. Now I can make non-horizon hunter characters!

*grabs popcorn and looks around the room*

“No one suck the fun out of this.”

Alright GMs, I have been assigned to run a Bounty Table (last minute) at Con of the North this Friday night.

I'd love suggestions for which bounties you've found the most fun so that I can run some adventures that engage me as much as my players! Tell me... what bounties do you really love?

B10 continues to be my favorite bounty. If you have any new players, it brings out some childlike happiness.

I've been GMing on the Paizo forums for about a year now and am comfortable with it. I played one game on Discord a while back and it seemed to drag on, much like Pirate Rob's Experience.

I found the PbP GM's Kit very useful in getting started on the Forums. I have had a hard time finding a similar repository for playing/running on Discord. I'll be trying Discord again during Outpost VI, so I am currently looking for all the info I need to be a good player on Discord.

Is there a repository of how to run/play information on Discord available that I have missed?

I think you are signed up for my 4-01 and I can promise it won't drag on. I run fairly quick games and that is the norm in my experience. There are some discord GMs that run slower games but I've gotten to the point I just avoid those GMs and if you spend enough time in the discord lodges, you will likely find GMs who you enjoy being at their tables. In fact, with my 4-01, the other 4 players are all players who I have had and often seek my tables. All that to say, I think you will find discord to be enjoyable, albeit different than paizo in some ways better and some ways worse.

As for there being some sort of guide, it's a thing that has been discussed ad nauseam and each lodge has some form of guide but nothing "great" yet. Us VOs have really given it a lot of thought lately, especially with the influx of new players and GMs. While that isn't a super helpful answer, I just want you to know it is being worked on.

As for being a good player, the easiest thing to do is be attentive. Discord has the luxury of allowing notifications and pings so you know when there is new things to read without needing to log into the forums. As long as you are engaged, the rest of it is easy. For my table in particular, I just ask my players to use a tupper (bot that pushes an avatar) and maintain a post a day when there is movement. Feel free to hit me up on discord if you have any questions though as I am very responsive over there.

Beginner Box change is welcome and I look forward to the different styles it is run with now.

Dusts of shoulders and shakes cobwebs off from the quick summoning.

Hello Ramlatus,

While I can't promise you that Cayden's Keg is the exact place you are looking for, it is certainly a great place to hang out and interact with a bunch of others who love this hobby. As was mentioned, we do offer a plethora of Play-by-Discord (PbD) games but even if you don't partake in those specifically, there are tons of people talking day all day about different parts of the hobby and sometimes just life. Here is the link to our discord (Cayden's Keg).

In addition to our lovely lodge, Find the Path (FTP) and Roll for Combat also are similar places to hang out to talk or possibly grab PbD games.

Bravo Paizo, Bravo

silversarcasm wrote:

Oooooooh im so excited, i was talking recently about how excited I was a certain story thread form legends was brought up again in Impossible Lands and now it seems we're getting a whole ap about it? Lets gooooo

Am sad to see its not a 6 parter though, hope they havent been completely abandoned!

If folks want us to do more 6-part Adventure Paths... PLEASE let us know! The 3 part ones seem to be engaging people more and allow for more stories to be told in a year, and I'm hoping that we'll be able to settle into a rhythum that allows for more frequent higher level 3 part arcs, but if people do still want 6 part ones... we need to know. (And that includes seeing evidence in sales and reviews and the like for parts 4–6 of those Adventure Paths, not just requests at the front end.)

There are some six part APs that are truly spectacular and there are some 1e APs that would have been so much better as 3 parts. So I don't want to see the six part games go away. In fact, ideally for me, I think 6, 3, 3 yearly would be awesome. A yearly massive AP and a couple smaller ones that tell big but not as far reaching of stories. I can't imagine AoA as a three parter but Extinction Curse could easily have been two separate but related APs.

This is excellent news. The variable level ranges for low level games is my biggest draw to quests and I am excited to get new ones.

willfromamerica wrote:

I need to write a review for this at some point, but I wanted to say here that this is absolutely fantastic. I wish every AP came with such a rich array of NPCs. It's going to make our one-on-one game of Kingmaker so much better.

This is a new kind of book for Paizo. I think it has given the editorial team #ideas. Feedback is encouraged.

In addition to this fantastic book, I also hope this encourages Paizo to consider more 2e conversions of some older APs. While Kingmaker is unique for a number of reasons, I do think the demand is there and there are some truly great APs that deserve the modern treatment.

Yeah, my table had a delay in starting act 2 for a couple days and the combat in the first temple room took a bit of time. And now, that's all of act 2 they will see other than the finale. Timing is very weird after we had no trouble finishing act 1.

To make sure I am not going nuts, if the PCs set off a trap, it does not count as a success correct?

I can also confirm the layout of the PDF had me confused and it took rereading the intro a couple times to realize Table GMs kicked it off for intros. Definitely a weird layout.

Lesrek wrote:

How is asking for Blood Lords to be sanctioned like other APs asking for special treatment?

Demanding they “reward your most loyal fans!” Puts yourself on an altar for no reason out of a sense of entitlement, you’re not more special than anyone else (most loyal???) and don’t have any room to ask for such special treatment.

Lesrek wrote:

Using the logic presented here, shouldn't AV be restricted as well then?

AV doesn’t require Evil alignments, so no.

Lesrek wrote:

Why does this matter. If someone walks into a store and sees Blood Lords being played and it goes against their sensibilities, that same argument can be made about every single AP or adventure paizo has ever released.

The obvious that you are failing to grasp as a proponent of organized play.

Someone one seeing someone play a game vs someone seeing someone play a game and then declaring they’re getting official credit for doing so are two very different things.

You are putting words and actions onto me that I never said and building a strawman around it. I do not appreciate it. Loyal is colloquial for most invested customers. That is not an objectionable statement. I didn't demand anything, I offered my disagreement. Also, using your arguments here, I assume you have come out strongly against the sanctioning Mark of the Mantis?

I understand the disappointment and frustration around the Blood Lords sanctioning decision. Speaking for myself, it was not an easy decision to make. Of course I want people to have more sanctioned content for Pathfinder. Of course I trust our community to handle content responsibly. And I wrote Zombie Feast (the first volume of the Blood Lords AP) myself! And it was my first AP volume! Imagine how difficult it was to balance my excitement about my first full adventure path, my responsibilities as the Pathfinder Society developer to provide excellent content for organized play… and the harsh reality that Blood Lords is, ultimately, not suitable for organized play sanctioning.

At the end of the day, no matter how responsible you are about how you portray the content in Blood Lords, no matter how much you sanitize the grimmer aspects of the adventures, the Blood Lords AP assumes your characters are abhorrent people, that you work for and support an abhorrent totalitarian government, and that you can and will routinely have opportunities to do abhorrent things, either for self-gain or in the name of Geb. In that way, it is unlike the vast majority of our content. Even when there is uncomfortable content in our other adventures, the assumption is usually that your characters are *not* willing to do abhorrent things. Even if they aren’t exactly heroes, the assumption is that they’re definitely not villains. The exact opposite is true in Blood Lords.

Again, speaking personally, it was a difficult decision. That might not make it any easier of a pill to swallow, but I hope you understand that our reasoning is far from “ew, this is kind of gross, we can’t trust our community to portray this well.” I’m not so worried about the content that goes against individual sensibilities—that’s something we absolutely trust our players and GMs to handle well. But the very premise of this adventure path, and the foundational assumptions of who your characters are and how they will behave, go far beyond “sensibility”
...

I appreciate this insight Mike and I understand it was a difficult decision. I think part of the issue is that I haven't read the adventure yet but it was portrayed to be more ambiguous than you are suggesting here. Thank you for taking the time to write this.

They literally are.

How is asking for Blood Lords to be sanctioned like other APs asking for special treatment? It is literally asking the opposite, that it not be treated differently and simply barriers be put in the sanctioning doc if there is content they don't want played publically.

How are they treated as “worth less”? Should Paizo never publish Evil options again since that has never been allowed in PFS (barring Charity boons and special scenarios).

The argument is that normal org play characters can be restricted from being evil and no one is arguing that should change. Having an AP sanctioned isn't changing the rules for the campaign itself. Using the logic presented here, shouldn't AV be restricted as well then? I doubt you'd argue that would be a good change despite that AP having some very troublesome content for public play. Extinction Curse as well.

To an onlooker, what’s the difference?

You’re playing them for PFS credit.

Why does this matter. If someone walks into a store and sees Blood Lords being played and it goes against their sensibilities, that same argument can be made about every single AP or adventure paizo has ever released. Unless sanctioning is going to start dictating what alignments characters can be, what actions they can take, and how the game must be run, adventure mode by default allows for objectionable content. I simply do not buy the "think of the children" argument as a good one in any context.

So run it! Literally no-one and nothing is stopping you and your players having an awesome time and running the AP in its entirety! it sounds like you'd have a great time, so why not?

Because my players want to be rewarded with their time in OP as well since they dedicate time to both. Given the choice of two options of two APs, they will always default to an AP that will have carryover benefits to their OP characters.

However if content is sanctioned that by default means it can be played in a public format, be that a FLGS or a convention, that means people can be walking past, watching, etc and see the content and the results of players playing evil characters and the sort of things they can get up to. That should be pretty obviously something that could cause some serious issues, or create a poor view of Organised Play. What is cool for a home group who have consented to any problematic content, is very possibly not cool for a public setting.

That's also true if it isn't sanctioned. If there is problematic content, it's still being sold and advertised by Paizo. Is Paizo not going to sell their new AP at GenCon? Of course they are. Are groups going to have demo games of it at the hall? Probably. The idea that a few people might see objectionable content in a public game should get rid of all APs from sanctioning then. Paizo's most popular 2e AP is full of objectionable content and yet it is not only sanctioned but it just got a hardcover and a port to a competitor's game.

Point being, I understand the "why" but I just disagree that risk even exists in any meaningful form. And if they are so concerned about it being played in a public setting, why can't the sanctioning doc simply say that the game isn't to be played as an open game. Isn't that the whole point of the sanctioning doc in the first place? Provide limits on the "how" content is run?

One other bit of news that didn't quite make press time: after discussions internally, the Organized Play team has decided not to sanction the Blood Lords AP for Pathfinder Society play. The adventure has a number of horror elements that are not appropriate for public play, and the core elements of the adventure assume that the players are either evil or tolerant of evil actions, which is not in alignment with the Pathfinder Society's values.

We will aim to sanction the less-icky content for Pathfinder Society play via boons closer to the release of the final volume, but we will not be releasing chronicles. We hope you enjoy playing it with your home groups!

I want to acknowledge I understand the reasons for not sanctioning certain APs. I get that OP doesn't want to encourage or endorse certain content in a public setting.

Having said that, I want to say I disagree with that approach. I don't think sanctioning content shows an endorsement of the content of an AP anymore than Paizo making the AP in the first place. However, sanctioning the AP volumes is a way to support the most loyal Paizo GMs/players who will be playing in OP as well as going through the APs. Furthermore, the difference in demand from the players I run for when something is sanctioned or not is a lot. I wanted to run AoE for a second group and they decided on a different AP solely because of sanctioning. This is a home group so no issues with content or what the AP is about, just getting "credit."

And that is my issue. I want to run Blood Lords. I know the people I would run Blood Lords for. I know the style of game I would run it as, what content would be off limits, and it would still be a great Paizo AP. Why can me running that as a private game with willing adults not be sanctioned? What does giving 12 xp/12 rep/30 downtime as a reward for me and my players have to do with the content of the adventure? Fundamentally, that is what people look for in sanctioning. The items are nice and the archetypes, feats, and class options can be a draw but what most want is to just boost a character in OP.

All that to say, I really think OP should stand behind the Paizo APs regardless as content. Sanctioning is not an explicit endorsement of the content, just a recognition it is a Paizo AP. Reward your most loyal fans!

Each season has been better than the previous and so I am very excited for season 4 and what is in store. I also appreciate the blog into why the season is about what it is about. The introspectives into the "why" of things I really enjoy. Thanks Mike.

I can say that I am in the same boat. Both scenarios are still pending for me as well.

Baby shark is no longer baby shark!

I am curious about the large reduction in PF bounties. While I am excited there are going to be level 3s (and 4 of them thankfully), it seems strange something so popular gets a reduction in volume.

Personally, less numbered PFS scenarios is less pathfinder my group will play. We do not enjoy the one-shots, don't run APs due to rotating players because of schedules, and don't play SF or SFS. This announcement just means we need to find a new game system to play multiple times per month now and frankly, that's a bummer.

Additionally, this makes having the Paizo advantage less advantageous by decreasing the actual value of the free subscription. Not really a fan of that either since one of the primary reasons I have 4 subs is access to the PFS scenarios as they release.

It appears the player's get no XP if they don't kill Jabaxa and her crew, if they learn all of the details they can from her, should they receive XP as though they defeated them in combat?

Also the same thing happens with Clara-247 (no apparent XP if they don't kill her), should the PCs also get XP as though they defeated her if they convince her to ally with them?

In general, PCs should receive the same amount of XP for avoiding combats as fighting in them.

Regarding the music in Fusion Queen, I am going with the Afterlife Club music from ME2 since that about sets the mood for everyone.

Afterlife Theme.

I am on my third run through RotR and every time it gets better and better due to all the hard work you all do. Thank you!