Joe to the C's page

Congrats Todd and Bob! This is well deserved for you both!

Some lines are meant to be read between...others, not so much. We are not raising the level cap. Some groups playing Pathfinder RPG go to 20th level, but no one in Pathfinder Society Organized Play will ever reach 13th level.

Fair enough. Thought I had located yet another piece of great news. All things considered: very much looking forward to extending the careers of my higher level characters.

While most of our products to date assume the medium advancement track, some groups prefer using the fast or slow progressions to move more quickly to higher-level play or to savor each step along the way to 20th level.

Am I the only one who caught this? Are we removing the level cap to allow for advancement to 20th level too? Wouldn't that be a great way to reward all of those who have already retired one or more characters.

With that fire quenched, on to the next!

Now comes the surge of 'I'm angry that feat X, or class ability Y isn't legal'. Prepare yourselves.

Hyrum responded thusly in another thread.

The playtest version of the Magus is legal until the Additional Resources page gets updated, which should be today or tomorrow. :)

He followed that up with the confirmation. It is updated.

You present an interesting view that I hadn't considered.

Our group is fairly established, typically with 2 low level tables, and 1 high level table, depending on what mods are offered. However, given the number of judges in our area, we could certainly accommodate for higher turnout, if necessary.

That being said, it would be nice if all coordinators could be more like Todd Morgan. He definitely goes above what's expected, and it is definitely reflected in how well everyone 'plays well with others'.

Anyone see the difference there?

I agree with you Andrew. And having being present at a situation like this, it really does create an abrasive, almost resentful environment.

That being said, how is organization being handled prior to gameday? Is the coordinator (aware of these play preferences) able to muster the tables to minimize the odds of having this sort of thing from happening? When we play, we've typically announced who/what we are playing well in advance, so seating a 'balanced' table is much easier. It could give a coordinator a chance to keep Player X from being at a table with Class Y (or Jerk Z), and eliminate the entire discussion we've had so far.

But the whole thing is going to come down to this: Is the person who has the issue addressing it with the right people ahead of time so that we can minimize the possibility of someone wanting to pack up/move tables/leave?

A jerk can take any class and completely wreck tables.

Which is why I don't understand loathing directed towards classes. They're just tools. If you want to blame something, blame the users.

Well put, Jason.

I find it hard to believe that there are people out there who think to themselves 'How can I monopolize this module?'. And Gallard, if there is such an abundance of these people in your PFS group, you should probably look for a new group or stop playing altogether, especially if you are just going to walk away from a table or sit there with an underpowered pregen.

No player is going to change anything about how they utilize their characters if it isn't brought to their attention first.

Heresy of Man: Part I
GM: Kyle Baird
Character: Vincent, now known as Vincent the Altar Slayer

Kyle, if you want to reiterate the 'script' for this one, I wouldn't mind hearing it again.

(a) players don't know one another's characters

I couldn't agree with this more. Granted, we've all been new to a table at one point or another, but I think I see this most in character 'introductions'. This is the opportunity to give the rest of the table, especially those who you haven't played with before, an idea of what you're going to be like while adventuring (or why you would be considered useful).

Lately, it feels like pulling teeth to get people to talk about their characters in anything less than a '18, 14, 14, 10, 10, 10' way. I realize that some back-stories wont necessarily manifest themselves in OP, but it helps justify some of the feat or skill choices you have made, or why your character isn't fond of certain types of enemies. Character development is what makes us unique. Why not take advantage of that?

What to do if party makeup trivializes most of the combat in a scenario?

This is something that will happen from time to time. I've had a couple of isolated incidences where a lot of prep work went into an encounter that barely lasted 1 round. Needless to say, I was frustrated. After the fact, I praised the players who, without knowing, were adequately prepared to handle what I was about to throw at them. Who would have thought that Dazzling Display would serve any purpose...

All that said, it is most important to ensure that the group is having a good time. Enjoy those moments as a group when someone truly surprises you with great strategy/tactics.

There is a lot more than just combat to these scenarios. If that is what makes a scenario exciting/boring for an entire group, I think there's a lot that is being missed. That being said, you really can't fault a player for developing a character that they love playing and utilizing their best abilities at all possible times.

My thought is, why haven't the other individuals addressed this 'in game'? It could make for some interesting banter, and ultimately, a better experience for everyone. Have the other individuals considered coming up with a character type that is suited very well for another aspect of combat that would complement this character (a rogue, for example)?

It's up to experienced players to complete their faction missions. The only thing I do is make sure I know where they all are and give a good enough description if necessary. If the player isn't paying attention... sorry.

Agreed. On the other side of the coin, there are the individuals who care only to complete their faction missions, practically stating them openly and putting that ahead of the main quest.

Since this is the Pathfinder Society forum you could point out that Book of Exalted Deeds is not legal for society play regardless of question or statement! You could also point out that spending a feat on one average damage per round (situational, even) is bad form too, but that would be a different forum also, so I won't bother. :)

I was approaching it more from a character concept idea, as I'd find it hard to justify a Paladin who has taken the time to learn to be sneaky. I think this is a case of trying to compensate for class weaknesses that just doesn't make sense, in the long run. No class is flawless, and to try to patch the holes with other classes feels too meta to me. But, as others have said, in a non-PFS environment (as this obviously would be for) no one is stopping you from doing this.

Trying to understand if this is a question of whether it would work, or if you're just looking for someone to give you a 'Go Ahead'. I'm sure a lot of us have the Paladin code down. I don't like the concept, personally, but more power to you. Enjoy!

Much appreciated. Finally, I can refer to her as something other than 'Red 107'

About a month ago, I ran a new character at Gamicon, but hadn't yet come up with a name for her. Is there any method of updating the records now that I've come up with that name?

I'd suggest the Heresy of Man series if you're looking for a challenge.

2.) So what is your suggestion then? All characters must be badly designed as the encounters that they face for it to provide a challenge?

I don't think it's a matter of calling non-optimal characters 'badly designed'. Anyone can take a few hours to wring every last point of damage out of their fighter, or make their bard or rogue capable of pulling off every skill check that may cross them, but there are no real life parallels to these characters, and I think it makes them excessively unrealistic. Characters are supposed to have flaws. It adds to the flavor and makes success with them far more gratifying. Without the fear of knowing that your character might not survive, it just feels uninspired and dull, IMHO.

Thanks for taking the time to do this sort of thing ghaladen. As a new GM who is scouring these forums for suggestions on running mods such as this one, it is nice to have an additional point of reference when it comes to running it myself.

That being said, I did want to provide some feedback and had some questions, as well:

Are most or some of the players fairly new to PFS? It just seems that there is a lack of comprehension of the rules that seems to drag the pacing of the game. There were 15 minute segments in the video that had little to no activity due to rules debates, or people stepping outside for a smoke.

Most tables are going to vary, but it appears that your players' only motivation is their faction mission, to the point where they decide to delay the beginning of act 1 to work on things that will (always) cross their paths later in the mod.

Due to the time taken in early encounters, interactions, and the distractions that I've noted above, I was sorely disappointed to not be able to see your take on Act 3, as it is the one part of the mod that I think your players really missed out on.

Last thought for the moment: Have you considered a different camera angle, perhaps one that shows the entire table? Considering the amount of roleplaying that your group partakes in, and the minimal use of the battlemat, it might be nice to have a greater mix of shots, just to keep things from being monotonous.

Keep doing what you're doing. Again, I appreciate the work that you put into having these available.

Believe it or not, that happened a second time at Gamicon! There must be something in the water out in Iowa.

I'd say it's midichlorians, but we all know that's just a hoax.

Hello all!

I wanted to take an opportunity to voice my own opinions on this type of situation.

Less than a month ago, I had the opportunity to sit at one of Kyle's tables at Gamicon in Iowa City. I'd been told that Kyle was known as the 'tactical' GM, and that I should be fully prepared to part ways with my character. Needless to say, Vincent had made his peace ahead of time, and I had 2 new character builds already in mind.

To keep this as spoiler free as possible, let's just say someone wasn't happy their altar was decimated, and made it their task to destroy Vincent, ignoring everyone else around him. Had it not been for some particularly grapple-y summoned vipers keeping him from delivering his coup de grace (Thanks Kade), and an unconscious reflex save to avoid 1/2 of the death throes damage, Vincent would have been dead as of Friday night. Needless to say, I've begun to appreciate the lessons that 'tougher' GMs provide.

My point is, it is the times when we least expect to survive that make for the best stories. I'm already looking forward to Tau.

I see now. Much appreciated.

I'm making a half-orc bard using the sacred tattoo (replacement) trait from the APG. As one of my additional traits, I was considering taking "adopted" and choosing halfling luck (hence my character's interest in being a bard). Any thoughts on whether these two would be allowed in conjunction with each other?