Jon Goranson's page

I am now running two PF2E groups and loving it. I'm still new to the system, so have questions. We use Foundry, so I think some of the questions I have are from its automation. When it works, it's great, but it seems my second level group overwhelmed Foundry with all of the automation such that it struggled to work. Movement is still janky with it. Those are Foundry issues, though, not PF2.

Crafting - Am I correct in thinking that the system still assumes X amount of gold, or time, spent on equipment? The crafter spends half the gold and four days then spends the rest to finish it then or uses the crafting table to keep going until the other half is paid for. (If I have done the math right, a 2gp level 0 steel shield takes four days base then 20 days at 5 cp per day, or 24 days total.)

I get that depending on the GM, world, that some equipment might only be available if the characters make it themselves, so it's a good option to have. It's either a lot of time or full cost + four days.

(For fun, level 0 chain mail would be four days then sixty days. A level 2 full plate, top mundane equipment, would be four days then fifty days.)

On shields, has there been a reason that they aren't usable for partial AC in broken condition? In the games I have going, I have not seen a shield get destroyed in a level+2 appropriate encounter. Immediately get broken by a critical hit, yes, but not close to destroyed. I think the option to use the broken shield for some AC, and some blocking, more meaningful than it can't be used at all and can be repaired.

If these have been asked and answered, point me to them! I searched but couldn't find anything like this.

Thanks for the discussion!

Greetings!

I have emailed and hadn't heard back so I thought I would try here.

I ordered several things back on July 18. I saw the update that it shipped Aug 5 but I have not yet received it yet. It's marked as Complete in My Account but I have nothing.

UPS has nothing on the tracking numbers and their system says to check with the shipper when that happens.

Can I get an update on this? Or an answer to my emails?

Thanks!

Jon Goranson

Greetings!

I'm late in getting to some things, so apologize but a quick search didn't yield anything. I'm playing around with Hero Lab Online (HRO) and made a 17th level Sorcerer and a 20th level paladin just for fun and to see the numbers. The numbers scare me.

Now, I'm sure that HRO isn't updated with final rules but I am curious if what I'm seeing is correct. My assumption is that a three level gap like the above isn't bad. I also thought they were flattening the numbers and not going to go as high.

In the case of the 17th level sorcerer v a 20th level paladin:

Paladin: +5 full plate for AC 44, TAC 40. Saves are F+32, R+25, W+30. +4 Bastard Sword. +32/27/22. Damage: 5d8+6 Hit Points: 328
Sorcerer: Mage Armor: AC 33, TAC 33. Saves are F+27, R+22, W+27. Spell attack is +24. Spell DCs are 34. +3 Mace is +21/16/11. Damage: 4d6+1 +3 Crossbow are +20/15/10 Damage: 4d8 Hit Points: 178

This sorcerer is outclassed at all points. Spells that require an attack means he can't get a critical, only hits on a 20, a 16+ for TAC. He only hits on physical attacks on a 20. Spells are saved on a 2, 9, or 4, for F/R/W. Reflex doesn't critical save often but other two might, which seems to be no damage.

The paladin is going to win. Assuming he can get close and the sorcerer doesn't run away, he hits on a 2/6/11, so more than half the time. A normal long sword gives him 29/24/19, which hits on a 4/9/14. Might take longer as the damage d8+6 isn't great for the level. I didn't intend for these two to fight and gave the paladin Angelic Form, so the sorcerer has to teleport to get away as flight won't do it.

To compare again, I made a 20th level Rogue.

Rogue: Dagger +30/26/22. Damage: 4d4+6 +2 leather AC 39, TAC 38. Saves aren't as important but F+24 R+31 W+26. Hit Points: 206

So, the rogue has a few more options. Legendary sneak to maybe get a +2 flank but still only hits on a 12 for flanking, 14 otherwise. Poisons might also help wear him down but it would be drawn out and not guaranteed as the Paladin hits on 7/12/17. Not to mention Lay on Hands to help. Maybe a readied action by the paladin allows one hit and his damage is higher for his weapon. Sneak attack is only +4d6 at 20th level.

First of all, do these numbers look right? I have made assumptions and corrections are fine. Second, from a numbers standpoint, is that what is expected?

Looking at an ancient Black Dragon, better numbers than the sorcerer but not by much. An Ancient Blue Dragon or Red Dragon would be tougher but possible. (Also, do I read it correctly that dragons can choose between bite, claw, and tail as they prefer in any combination up to three?)

I'm excited about PF2E the more I have read about it, watched videos, and played in the character creator. When I brought down the print outs of these characters, I was shocked at these numbers, so had to share and ask where I went wrong. Or if I did.

Thanks!

Greetings!

I got this as a PDF and went to print it out and it wouldn't print out start from page one. Eventually, I figured out that if I started from page 7 of the pdf, labeled 5 in the book, that I could print the rest of the book no problem. This was with a double sided printer.

Playing with it more, this is what I found.

Adobe will not print page one, no matter what I do. It fails on flattening and won't print.

Adobe won't print any double sided attempts with page one. Won't happen.

Adobe won't print page three and four as a double sided page. It just fails to go to the printer. I don't even see it show up in my printer spooler.

Adobe will print page two as a single page but not page three as a single page.

Adobe will print page four as a single page.

Adobe will print page five and six (labeled nothing and page 4 in the PDF) as double sided if printed by themselves.

I did have it still in a zip archive and so upzipped and tried it again with the same results.

Finally, I used FoxIt and that printed the first six pages double sided (although that's more of a printer setting, I'm sure) first time.

(Please note that Adobe will use absolute pages with numbers whereas FoxIt will use the document's internal number system when printing pages.)

Just in case this helps anyone else.

Greetings!

My group and I switched to Pathfinder and are trying to make 2014 the year of Pathfinder! To that end, we picked Council of Thieves as our AP. I thought that I would chronicle it and how it goes here.

My first thought was that it would be easy. I'm used to making up my own adventures but I decided to try an AP for various reasons. We have found that open ended games, with no goals, mean that we tend to lose steam with them about six to eight months in and then switch to a new game. I'm hoping not to do that so picked an AP. I'm a sand box DM but I can also bring things around to what I had planned for the most part, usually without the players realizing it. I say that because I didn't want to force them to play anything. Maybe I should have.

Two of the players decided to play LN characters, with one admiring the Hellknights! However, he picked the Order of the Scourge, which doesn't like thieves, so that works out well. And it was also my first challenge. After reading a lot about the AP and the Hellknights, it seems as if the HKs are painted as the bad guy . . . because. Except for the first module when they are being chased by them, though, the HK don't really make much of an appearance in the module as the bad guy. To that end, I might have the Order of the Nail be a bit rough but am still not sure if they will be all bad.

After a lot of reading, I was also sure that the opening idea wouldn't work for my group. (LN Fighter, who wants to be a HK. LN Inquisitor. NG Sor/Rog.) While the NG character might have no problems joining up with rebels or a resistance, the other two are doing well playing Lawful people and not wanting to break the laws but do want to make things better. Instead, I have had Arael making his speeches, especially in the Dospera, and the group caught it. As I figured, the two Lawful characters like the idea of working within the law to make things better. (I didn't include the speech of Janiven's as I agree it sets up a wrong impression of the AP as a whole.) But I did have Janiven talk to the NG character to introduce her and get that player's thoughts on things.

When that finished up, I then went into Mad God's Key, an adventure from Dungeon that several suggested as a better opening. The Fighter had really good AC but still got hit several times while the others weren't hit as much. It ended up a good fight and we stopped before they could go after the key. I thought it worked well.

(I considered the other module suggested, although I don't remember the name of it, but decided for my group that Mad God's Key fit better.)

I still have a lot of things to figure out. What I have figured out is that the Eponymous Council of thieves wants to take over the town and that would make it worse, especially for the characters. I'm hoping that will be enough motivation for them to see it through.

Questions and suggestions welcome. I hope to post more as we go.

If anyone is interested, I have a wiki for this as well. http://dmgaming.pbworks.com/w/page/71416606/PF%20-%20Council%20of%20Thieves

Thanks!

Jon

Just wanting an update on the status of this. I know I'm not that far out of the suggested dates but I'm impatient! :)

Thanks!

Jon

Or History versus Mythology

DISCLAIMER: I am not a game designer. I'm a consumer and merely putting my opinion out there. I'm hoping others agree but not assuming it.

When it comes to prehistory and creation myths, we are deliberately contradictory in print. We don't want to say "This is how it happened" since that transforms creation myths into plain old history. By presenting multiple versions of creation, though, even when they're not all exactly in sync, we can have our cake and eat it too by detailing the myth but making it impossible for any of us to know which one is right... or indeed if ANY of them are right.

I disagree with this. A lot. However, this goes to how I approach a game and what I want from my game world.

I see game worlds as having three "levels" of detail to them. The top level is the broad strokes of a world. It's a campaign setting book and it's a fine place to start. It's a map of the world and some general descriptions of those areas. However, everything listed in the book is important and plays a role in the world. I assume that more will be coming out but this level sets the groundwork of the world.

The second level, I see as getting down to a city-state or nation level. This is a source book on a city or nation. It covers all of the top people and what they are doing and talks about what an area has, such as this town having a baker, stables, smith, etc. It doesn't detail out every single person but does detail out the top people at that level, such as the mayor, council, or king/royalty. I think this is what many source books do. I'm also looking for what the designer sees as that person doing. There can be other people at this level not detailed out and left for the DM but I'm expecting to have an idea of what the designer intended for them if they are mentioned.

The third level would be detailing everything about a group or city-state. This completely spells out what the group or area is doing, their motivation, and their game stats. By the end of this type of book, I know everything there is to know about that group or city-state in regards to the game. I don't need or want every commoner detailed out. But with regards to the topic at hand, at this level, there are no secrets left about what anyone is doing.

So, what do I want? I want the creator/designers to have a plan. I want them to know as much as they can about the world. I don't want a supplement to point an organization going in X direction and then a newer supplement comes out and completely changes the organization to going in direction O instead. (In my head, I'm thinking about two things, FR and the new BSG. FR had several line managers working on it through the years but no overall picture. They were allowed to do their own thing but it created inconsistencies as I described above. BSG . . . is for another thread.) I want them to have a "world Bible" that lists out the hard facts about the world. This can be a living document. It doesn't have to be completely done before hand. I merely want them to be consistent so that when we learn about something, it ties things together and it makes sense. What I'm looking for, then is something between level two and three by the end of the run of that game world.

For example, to tie this part to Golarion, the Aspis Consortium. We get a high level look at them in the ISWG. That's fine. I do expect to be told one major thing that is true about them at this level but if the rest is hints, I can accept that. When the sourcebook of various countries where the Aspis Consortium are located come out, I expect them to give me something from that countries perspective. Again, I expect one thing to be true but if there are only hints at other things, I can accept that. When the sourcebook on the Aspis Consortium itself comes out, though, I expect it to be a true record of the Aspis Consortium. I am expecting something between my second and third level, as I detailed out above. What I mean by that is that I would want the Aspis Consortium's true agenda and charter detailed. I want anything they do as a group laid out and all true. Then I want the true (if there is doubt) leaders revealed as the designers saw them. Finally, I want X number of parts of the Aspis Consortium completely detailed out as per level three. I want an example of what the designer(s) would do if this was their game. Maybe there are twelve leaders and they detail out three. In doing this, they show the alliances and rivalries between these three. They show how one has worked for another and against the third. They show how well these leaders plan something or how much they rely on someone else and in what capacity. Finally, they show how they saw all of the leaders alliances and rivalries and say to use what they have done as a template to use for the others.

I get that I can change things. What I want from a company is to give me their vision of something knowing that if I don't like it, I will change it. But at least I have a strong starting point and know what the designer intended. I don't want vague hints or mysteries in most aspects of their design. Their design should do a lot of the work for me in something that I can use a template for my own creation if that's what I choose to do. What I would then expect, then, is that any major things listed in the campaign setting would get that kind of treatment but any minor groups would not.

Again, going to Organizations from the ISWG, I would expect a sourcebook on the main groups of Golarion, namely Aspis Consortium, Eagle Knights, Hellknights, Pathfinder Society and Red Mantis but not Blackfire Adepts, Free Captains or other minor groups. As I listed above, there would be more than enough for me to pick it up, read it and use it without having to add anything else to it. I completely have that option if I want to do so. But I don't have to do so.

Again, to be specific, I'm thinking about the gods of Golarion. I am involved in another thread on that. One of my points about the gods was that, imo, you could remove the specific gods listed in the Gods chapter of the ISWG and put in any gods and it doesn't seem to change anything. The gods, at the campaign guide level, seem to be there because the game requires it but not the game world. That's not what I want. I want to know what role the gods play in the world and then what each god does to fulfill their role in the world. How do they direct their followers to help fulfill this role? How do they direct mortals, if it isn't obvious in their portfolios? (In the other thread, I am advocating for a list of fifty roles or things the gods do and each DM can pick as many as they want for their own version of the world.) Here, I would say the creators should tell us about the gods and what they are doing specifically to the DM. It is then up to the DM to make them mysterious to the characters. Whether the *players* know or not is up to how that group plays. But it allows the DM to be consistent with the gods and what the gods are doing. I really do think right now you could get rid of the chapter of the gods and replace it with "see another world" or "YES. Mystery." and you have the same thing. (I apologize if that's too harsh.)

So that is what I want to see in game design. By the end of its run, with many supplements, adventures and stories, I want to see the complete picture of the world. I want top level things known. I want to see how three different areas saw the Aspis Consortium differently and they were all correct but didn't have the full picture of the group but once it was revealed, it explained why they did things they did in those areas.

tl;dr I really like Paizo, its authors and its game world. But I want to know there is a plan that would come together with the very last source book they do, tying up loose ends and giving us history, not mythology. I'm a strong believe in Twain's quote "Of course Truth is stranger than Fiction. Fiction has to make sense." I want the game world to make sense as well.

Thanks for reading, whichever version!

Jon

Greetings!

I was wondering if the new Order of the Stick book has been shipped? I know that you update the site but I am wanting to get it! :)

I have also read that others received theirs from you so wondering if I just got unlucky and mine was delayed.

Any information on it is appreciated.

Happy Holidays!

JG