Just Another Pathfinder's page

Thank you. I will take all of this into account and begin a few of the exercises listed, esp. the diary entry idea, and I also will feel better if I never get the hang of it; no one seems to mind much but one person anyway so I guess as long as it's fun I'm good.

So, I've played a few games and I admit I can't roleplay for crap. I tend to play the numbers and tend to think within the skillset rather than within a character. I don't know why but I just can't get over this and play Pathfinder like it were a puzzle instead of a supposedly continuous story.

Makes me a bit sad.

So what I've come to ask is how one gets over and around playing the numbers? I tend to over compensate with gear to make up for my failures ( my backpack has every tool it can carry in it ) and while I'm really good at thinking of new and smart ways to get around I'm really bad at doing this from an "in-character" point of view. If I was playing myself as a chessmaster I'd probably do better but that's breaking the 4th wall, etc.

Whatever the case I leave it rested here and now. RAW there is no reason to not be able to. RP there is plenty of reason to not be able to. GM decides as it's his game.

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

So effectively you can use any size crossbow you want. . .

Funny, but I'm not entirely certain you are joking.

Clearly not, otherwise we would all be running around with Colossal Heavy Crossbows.

Actually I was kidding to some degree. RAW you are allowed to use any size anything. For instant I personally rule you cannot use an oversized bow but RAW you can use one at least one size greater than you; even though it would be as tall as your person if not a bit taller ( Tallbow! :D ) it's legal to do. I just think in character, not in RAW, it would be too hard to pull back because if it's made for a bigger character it's got to have a larger and harder draw to it.

Putting aside "logic" though according to the rules and only the rules crossbows aren't a "handed" weapon, just like bows are always two handed but aren't constrained by size. You could literally, though RIDICULOUS, wield a crossbow the size of a real ballista with one hand, one in each hand, and if it were of the "Light" variety it would cost a move action alone to reload it.

This is actually why Unseen Servant would work; crossbows are just simple machines. They are not complex and when one takes into account that at 2 strength you can lift 14-20lbs as a heavy load and actually drag a lot more you should be able to pull the lever back however that is an RP question, because the force it takes should change based on it's size BUT as an RAW question there's no difference at all.

That's why I think this game is so fun; it's half-broken because you could technically use a Garguatan Dart, which could be interpreted by length or by with diameter, and may or may not actually be "that large" as if it's 4x the size of a regular dart that's going to be at most 5" in diamteter and just stupidly long? If that? You say that for a regular bow and one that's 4x as big is suddenly 16ft tall. Wonky but true.

Well to be fair I believe I see it the way you do. The reason I would you can only go up one size is to prevent the abuse of the system and you taking a -6 Gargantuan crossbow. The way I envision this is simple:

It is a Simple Weapon which means that anyone can pick it up which means it is mechanical rather than physical in it's use. Just like anyone can blow through a reed to create a blowdart anyone can crank a lever and it's specifically made as a tool to be easy to do.

There is no sizing, that is correct, so you could have a technically Garguantian Xbow and load it as normal every turn without a size limitation but if you stack Dex early on and take a few feats you can turn that -8 to at best a -1 on first level. Sure, you're a bit unbalanced, but you've a ballista and will probably take xbow mastery and/or get a repeating ballista. So it's really some b&%@@**@.

Simply put, melee weapons come in three categories: light, one-handed and two-handed.

Ranged weapons do not!

The section on Weapon Size has this to say:-

Quote:

Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.

This applies to ranged and melee weapons alike. Weapon category (light, 1H, 2H) isn't a factor on the cumulative -2 penalty.

This is not the case for the next part of the quote:-

Quote:

The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed.

This part only affects melee weapons, as only melee weapons have these three categories.

You can extrapolate to your heart's content, but your extrapolation is not RAW. there is no RAW equivalent for ranged weapons.

Shooting a crossbow is as simple as squeezing the trigger. If the weapon were tightly held in a vice then as long as you can pull that trigger then the bolt will be released. You can conceivably shoot a gargantuan crossbow in this way, and a medium creature would take a -6 attack penalty. This would not apply to a gargantuan greatsword. Conceptually, a sword could not be used while held in a vice! Rules-wise, a gargantuan two-handed weapon is unusable by a medium creature.

So effectively you can use any size crossbow you want. . .

That's even better! :D

Okay, okay, alright, so it's up to the GM at the time. Well, at least now I know it's not a definitive answer. :p

Onward!

Upon further review...

Quote:

Weapon Size: Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed.

Except that the Ranged weapons aren't listed by size category. So if we refer to the Projectile Weapons description...

Ranged weapons wouldn't have "size categories" specifically because they are mechanical items. For instance a bow, tiny, cannot be shot with one hand even if it is tiny. A greatsword, tiny, could be definitely wielded with one hand, albeit pointless. Mechanically grabbing a hilt and dealing with the weight of a weapon is completely different than using a mechanism, in the case of the bow it would be the string and grip; if you don't hold the grip the bow is useless regardless of being large or diminutive. In the case of a crossbow it's reload mechanism is mechanical therefore whether it be massive or microcosmic you cannot reload it based on your physical ability. Jamming a bolt into the crossbow will just break it. The same with firearms and "guns" in this game; you cannot pretend your Vash and reload your gun tossing bullets willynilly.

So that's how that works, or would work, if one looked at it realistically.

Quote:

Projectile Weapons: Blowguns, light crossbows, slings, heavy crossbows, shortbows, composite shortbows, longbows, composite longbows, halfling sling staves, hand crossbows, and repeating crossbows are projectile weapons. Most projectile weapons require two hands to use (see specific weapon descriptions).

and then to the Light Crossbow description...

Quote:

Normally, operating a light crossbow requires two hands. However, you can shoot, but not load, a light crossbow with one hand at a –2 penalty on attack rolls. You can shoot a light crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons. This penalty is cumulative with the penalty for one-handed firing.

To me, the most common sense interpretation is that projectile weapons in general, and the light crossbow specifically, require two hands to operate. So they are two-handed weapons.

This is a question of the same problem as above; a mechanical understanding of the weapon versus a physical capability. For instance you could not wield a large bow, and this is because the draw on the string would be too great for your meager muscles. You're not a giant therefore you do not have a Giant's strength to pull the bow back. An oversized blowdart has nothing to do with a draw. The crank or mechanism on a xbow would be the same; it is a mechanism and therefore is operated in a manner that is less dependent on your strength and more dependent on your handling of the item.

If you then size up such a weapon, you trigger this clause:

Quote:

If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.

So regardless of the "sometimes one-handed" aspect, you can't use an oversized Light Crossbow because you can't operate it in general.

And this is where we differ because if you consider the weapon as a mechanical functioning weapon with it's ability to be wielded ( which is very different from being wielded effectively or correctly ) with one hand then an oversized version would simply force 2h wielding. In a sense what changes is the flavor text that goes from "Normally, operating a light crossbow requires two hands." to "This weapon requires 2h." The caveat of "Normally" means that it is a mechanical change, as can be seen by the rest of the text, it is not at it's BEST when not stabilized ( thus the second hand ) and cannot be reloaded with one hand. However removing "Normally" for "Must" requires we go above assessing when it's optimal and start looking at what is required. It would be too heavy to hold with one hand, period, and that's where I see the issue. The weight.

The mechanism does not change at all regardless of whether the weapon is M, S, or L so if you had a Xbow that was SMALLER than you then your ruling also holds meaning a PC cannot use a xbow smaller than themselves because "Normally, operating a light crossbow requires two hands." kicks in regardless of weight.

Oh goodness I feel this is devolving. Regardless of the ins and outs of the reload function I'm more interested in Akerlof's idea.

Lamontius wrote:

Okay, hold on.

First, yes, you can FIRE a large-sized light crossbow as a medium-sized character.

...

Now, this can all be argued until the cows come home...which holds up the PFS game...and drops firmly in the "don't be a jerk" rule.

At which point, your GM will probably just tell you no.

I would rule that no, you can't use a large sized light crossbow: It says "Normally, operating a light crossbow requires two hands." That's the important part. End of story.

The fact that there is an extra rule allowing you to use a light crossbow with one hand does not mean that it counts as one handed for incorrectly sized weapons. Consider the bastard sword ruling: Unless you have EWP Bastard Sword, you cannot use a large sized one two handed, even if you stack the non-proficiency penalty on top of the size penalty. So I would rule that, for the purposes of size, even light crossbows counts as two handed the same way I would rule that you cannot use a large lance even though certain situations allow you to use it one handed. Expect even slightly conservative GMs to rule against you.

Don't expect a venture officer or coordinator to override a GM ruling that you cannot use a large light crossbow, it's legitimate table variation since there isn't a FAQ or errata or ruling by the campaign staff or clear consensus on the forums. I agree with Lamontius: Trying to argue it at the table is going to be disruptive and counter productive. If you have your heart set on using a large light crossbow, bring it up with the GM before the game starts, explain your reasoning, and abide by their decision; don't try to argue after they've made their decision.

Bastard Sword ruling wrote:

Exotic Weapons and Hands: If a weapon is wielded two-handed as a martial weapon and one-handed with an exotic weapon proficiency, can I wield it one-handed without the exotic proficiency at a –4 penalty?

...

Lamontius wrote:

Okay, hold on.

First, yes, you can FIRE a large-sized light crossbow as a medium-sized character.

...

Now, this can all be argued until the cows come home...which holds up the PFS game...and drops firmly in the "don't be a jerk" rule.

At which point, your GM will probably just tell you no.

I would rule that no, you can't use a large sized light crossbow: It says "Normally, operating a light crossbow requires two hands." That's the important part. End of story.

The fact that there is an extra rule allowing you to use a light crossbow with one hand does not mean that it counts as one handed for incorrectly sized weapons. Consider the bastard sword ruling: Unless you have EWP Bastard Sword, you cannot use a large sized one two handed, even if you stack the non-proficiency penalty on top of the size penalty. So I would rule that, for the purposes of size, even light crossbows counts as two handed the same way I would rule that you cannot use a large lance even though certain situations allow you to use it one handed. Expect even slightly conservative GMs to rule against you.

Don't expect a venture officer or coordinator to override a GM ruling that you cannot use a large light crossbow, it's legitimate table variation since there isn't a FAQ or errata or ruling by the campaign staff or clear consensus on the forums. I agree with Lamontius: Trying to argue it at the table is going to be disruptive and counter productive. If you have your heart set on using a large light crossbow, bring it up with the GM before the game starts, explain your reasoning, and abide by their decision; don't try to argue after they've made their decision.

Bastard Sword ruling wrote:

Exotic Weapons and Hands: If a weapon is wielded two-handed as a martial weapon and one-handed with an exotic weapon proficiency, can I wield it one-handed without the exotic proficiency at a –4 penalty?

...

The problem with this ruling is it ignores most of the text in order to justify itself.

Crossbow, Light: You draw a light crossbow back by pulling a lever. Loading a light crossbow is a move action that provokes attacks of opportunity.

Normally, operating a light crossbow requires two hands. However, you can shoot, but not load, a light crossbow with one hand at a –2 penalty on attack rolls. You can shoot a light crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons. This penalty is cumulative with the penalty for one-handed firing.

I don't think that's fair to avoid. I would agree with the ruling that you can only use ONE oversized crossbow and must use it with two hands, as that is how I understand it, so you can't do L. versions in each hand ( which I didn't attempt to do anyway, I was firing with two hands because the weight class, regardless ) but not that it's "impossible" due to the text description itself.

So while you could take a -4 if I were the GM I would rule that you could only take -2 for handling a larger weapon and could not, unless specifically a hand-crossbow, fire it with one hand due to weight class ( 1h > 2h ).

Just my opinion.

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

redward wrote:

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

Then everything is A-Ok. This is what I thought. -4 for firing one-handed, -2 for firing two handed. :D

...and you can't reload it.

That's okay! That's what Unseen Servant is for! :D

I can't imagine this working.

I'm not sure as a fighter how you're going to reliably cast Unseen Servant at level 1.

Even if you are playing with a friend who does cast it for you, an Unseen Servant has a strengh of 2 and can only perform simple tasks...so you are going to find, I would venture, a number of GMs who are simply going to say no to this.

GM ruled otherwise particularly because reloading a crossbow takes time, not strength, ( thus why you can't reload it faster despite how powerful you are ) and requires mechanical functions versus raw power like that of a bow. So the servant can perform the simple task of cranking / drawing mechanically back the mechanism which at 2 str is actually pretty easy. Bows required much more strength than crossbow mechanisms and at no point in the rules can a character be too weak to "wield" a mechanical weapon since it doesn't garner anything from strength either.

It was great reasoning and I think it makes sense. Otherwise getting your pet to do it for you, unless they have hands specifically designed for it, should be impossible as well. Yet it isn't.

All in all, you have developed a very complicated, rules-intensive strategy that is basically a wash, in terms of the to-hit penalty and reload complexity versus the marginal damage gain.

Well, not entirely. First and foremost it wouldn't be for a fighter, I just was dicking around because I am level 1, but a spellcaster would garner a lot from it. Secondly the Dex to Hit with Weapon Focus, etc. and eventual mastery of the crossbow would add a lot of damage options while keeping the odds to hit pretty high. Since str isn't required to wield them at any point you could ( and I have seen I guess ) lower your STR for your wizard and still use a backup crossbow to keep you in the action when you don't have a reason to blow a spell.

Actually this was all suggested to me by a person who has been playing for two years. :D I wouldn't have ever come up with this nonsense by myself.

To top it off, you're going to face some very dubious GMs. I would strongly suggest you not pursue this build.

Bards never listen. :D

redward wrote:

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

Then everything is A-Ok. This is what I thought. -4 for firing one-handed, -2 for firing two handed. :D

...and you can't reload it.

Just teach your large-size animal companion to do it for you!

OR THIS! :D

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

Then everything is A-Ok. This is what I thought. -4 for firing one-handed, -2 for firing two handed. :D

...and you can't reload it.

That's okay! That's what Unseen Servant is for! :D

LazarX wrote:

You can't properly use a ranged weapon that's sized for a category larger than you are

There's a rule for that. You take a -2 penalty on attack rolls with a weapon that's designed for a larger or smaller creature. Also, you have to increase the weapon's category (light, one-handed, or two-handed) by one step for each difference in size category. (or decrease the category for weapons built for smaller creatures)

Other than that, nothing prevents you from using oversized or undersized weapons.

As for purchasing them, here's what the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized play says about always available items:

Quote:

All basic armor, gear, items, and weapons from Chapter 6 of the Core Rulebook, including Small and Large-sized items.

This means, you can of course buy an item that's built for large creatures, but you'll have to take the penalty to attack rolls.

As for the light crossbow:

Core Rulebook wrote:

You draw a light crossbow back by pulling a lever. Loading a light crossbow is a move action that provokes attacks of opportunity.

Normally, operating a light crossbow requires two hands. However, you can shoot, but not load, a light crossbow with one hand at a –2 penalty on attack rolls. You can shoot a light crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons. This penalty is cumulative with the penalty for one-handed firing.

According to this, wielding a light crossbow as a one-handed weapon imparts a -2 penalty. You'd have to take this penalty as well if you want to wield a light crossbow built for large creatures (without the penalty, it's a two-handed weapon).

It also means, that you wouldn't be able to reload the large light crossbow as a move action (because you need two hands to do this with a normal light crossbow). I'd suppose you could reload it as a full-round action.

Then everything is A-Ok. This is what I thought. -4 for firing one-handed, -2 for firing two handed. :D

Thanks! I will inform the GM if I should play with him again, which I likely will!

Well I definitely won't be a jerk about it as I hate people who stagnate games with empty arguments and thus am not prone to do so.

Yes you are. You can't properly use a ranged weapon that's sized for a category larger than you are

Wait, what? I can use an oversized crossbow but not an oversized bow, right? Bows are 2h, crossbows are 1h. You lost me in translation.

A GM, in my first game, told me I could not and "took" it from me giving me a weapon that was properly sized for my PC at M instead of L. I just wonder if I really am bound to such. The weapon was a Light Crossbow therefore it isn't two handed, because I know you can't do this with 2H weapons, just before anyone asks.

OP, please start putting your PFS threads in the PFS forum.

If you are sticking to the CRB for your character, you technically do not have to bring that particular resource along with you.

As Kydeem mentioned, however, the onus for making sure you're correct on a rules issue is on you...and there are a lot of rules. If your roomy has one and is there with you, great. If you have internet access and can look up a core rule on the PRD, great.

If not, the GM will go with what they feel is right, and that will not always be what is correct by the rules.

Haha, these things do not occur to me. Sorry. I tried! :D

Also, I thought the GM got the last say anyway. -shrug- I mean except for numbers that are plainly stated ( which I've never had a problem with ) there's nothing else to it. Or do we challenge in this game? O_O

And I mean that even in home games. Because I do know a lot of the rules even from books I don't own which I can use in home campaigns but not in PFS; so I guess this really is an all-encompassing question now.

I went to a game last night and because I'm playing a fighter and I am level one straight out of the CRB with no additional resources after reading the PFS guide it says that all players are presumed to have the CRB and don't have to bring it.

I got asked by someone if I had it on me, and referred to that portion of the document as to why I didn't bother to bring it. Well beyond being a cumbersome book ( I carried a mere folder in there because I only have one chronicle sheet. Ha! ) I would just borrow from my roomy anyway I am pretty sure I just don't have to because the GM is supposed to. Am I correct?

Or do I really have to bring the CRB with me every time I go because I would I guess drag it around. It would just be a shared (physical) book anyway.

What an interesting thing to awake to! In one singular act you have defeated every single qualm and fear I've had of this game and the ability to establish the connectivity of the gamer!

I humbly thank you, and I promise to pay it forward, because that is the way of the spirit of community! There are not words in the English language strong enough to express how surprised and happy I really am with this!

I surrender. I will strike Cosmopolitan from my list forever.

Onward!

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

<snip> While my reasoning isn't whim alone it also doesn't answer my own question on how flexible a GM would be for a starter to just test various things on characters and the game in general. <snip>

If you ask a PFS judge if you can do something that is against the rules then the answer that I would expect is 'No you can not do something against the rules'.

Economic necessities can be harsh. Something that you can not afford to buy, Paizo can not afford to give away.

Since you can rebuild a character at any point prior to playing their first game at second level, I would suggest making a build that is very close to what you want and seeing how much your missing option comes up. When/where/how would it have made a difference. This will allow somewhat of a test drive and should give you enough information to know if you want to eventually buy the book that would allow you that option.

I am already well aware I can live without the feat and the trait. It isn't so much about playtesting as it is character creation. Let me express first and foremost that most of the book that Paizo would be "giving away" was banned by Paizo itself from PFS. You can't lose what you've discarded. That said being one of the four or five traits in a book I dare say it's a loss; now from the vantage point of a company it turns into "If you let one ..." but here I consider myself more noble than my ilk because I'm being open about it, and by all means no means no, whatever but I am more than aware of a number of people who just say nothing and smile. From items they can't legally have to pretty much playing with a specific person or GM buddy who will let them carry their stuff into the next scenario so it can't be taken there's ways around the rules but that just isn't my way.

I don't want sympathy, I want reason, particularly because it is by far unreasonable to invest in something you cannot use or has limited use that could be further limited at any time by a group you do not have control over on whim. No company would do this. Why would an individual?

Mind you that this isn't an economics thread. You said "no" and that's expected.

That is a fair ruling Higaki. I know there are many reasons and I didn't intend to sound as if I were using it for a testing field as that would be easily abused. I actually can completely understand why both sides, myself and my "opposition" ( don't take that literally ) want what we want. Paizo gets to maintain control over the game and control fairness amongst other elements. I simply want a trait that I believe should not be $8 to acquire and am holding out on the economic basis of fairness and price viability. Unfortunately there is no "medium"; if Paizo created a book of all the traits and charged $15 for it I would buy it, hands down, of all Feats for $30, the same, no problem.

I see it as a "waste" and as totalitarian behavior (because it cannot be shared)and Paizo sees it as a "profit" as well as "moderation". I respect, though I disagree, with this outlook but again if I were just capable of the simplest of things such as watermarking a book twice, once for myself, and once for a friend, and using digital copies with both watermarks from Paizo I would offer no resistance. I think a group of gamers investing in the books is fine as it gives them the moderation they desire but this also cuts into their profits so then beyond that point we have outright greed.

As a businessman I agree that they can do what they wish. As a gamer I feel they are constricting people unfairly. I am torn.

I wish to digress to the original question. I don't want to argue. While my reasoning isn't whim alone it also doesn't answer my own question on how flexible a GM would be for a starter to just test various things on characters and the game in general. It would absolutely kill me to, before I confirm my own dedication to the cause, invest in it.

I think the one person who said that it is likely I will be allowed to do this is right. After all if I don't like it then my PFS character will rot away anyway and no one will care and Paizo is out no money. If it were prolonged, that's thievery, and I am wrong, no doubt. I will simply ask the GM if it can be test driven.

Unlike Magic cards, Pathfinder books do not become obsolete on a regular basis. Even if a new edition comes out (which is unlikely for quite some years), you could continue to play the current version with your books for years and years. There's also less need to trade between players when everyone can see what they're buying up front. Magic and other CCGs rely on artificial scarcity which creates a need to trade between players to create the deck you want. In Pathfinder and other RPGs, there is no artificial scarcity or randomness of what you get when you purchase something. If you purchase the Dragon Empires Primer you know exactly what you're going to get.

Sure, maybe you're only buying it for one trait or feat right now, but another character you create down the line might find something different out of the book that is useful.

I fear after looking through the books (in question) there really is nothing useful that is LEGAL in PFS. That's the trick; it isn't that it's all useless, it's that most of it is illegal for play already and therefore it is undermined. That's also yet another reason why I'm so hesitant. I know the current rules but they change frequently enough that what is good today may be illegal tomorrow, much like Magic. Albeit that's done in more functional rounds than "random choosing by a committee."

Still, I can see that. Point. It is valid in relation to the fact that it isn't random and it can be researched aforehand albeit buying the rare ( or buying the book for the trait ) to make something work requires more dedication than I currently have. Still, it is valid, and I respect that.

I really don't get the community being tied to trading physical items. To me, a community is about the people and the shared experiences, not the ability to trade products between us.

No, no it isn't the "trading of physical items" it is the ability to incorporate new elements into the gameplay of others. That's the difference. You want to give away a card because you think it would go GREAT in so-and-so's deck, go ahead, you want to do this for a pdf? Not a chance in hell. The fact that you can have that impact, that "I think this would go great with your cleric-based build" and make MORE than an empty suggestion is what I'm getting at.

You say "Why don't you have Channel Versatility ( or whatever it is, I can't remember )?" and your answer shouldn't be "Well, I totally know of it and totally know where it is and totally own the book and I don't even use it but you can't have it from me. Sorry." esp. when it's enforced externally. Now if you chose not to share, well, you're a dick but it's a choice; when you literally cannot share that is a bit different. There are a few books that I know very few people required for their builds, primers being one such type, that work for others and their characters and their means and mode of roleplay; it's also a question of mindset! Even if something is "awesome" for a Mage perhaps no matter what you will just never value that attribute and thus are stuck with it, for ever, in your repetoire unable to give it to someone who would use it. Esp. someone you know.

Shared resources are ALSO impossible. Now if you just watermark MORE than one account on the items I'd have no qualms because I could go half or so with my friends who play but don't play with me because we live miles apart and our gameshops are also miles apart and we work different schedules and it's just not practical. We play together but we also play apart. So how do we share? We don't. We pay double to play. Meh. It's just not rubbing me the right way because to start a game like that and have them, who introduced me, be unable to give me what they don't use is ... sacrilegious to the spirit of "Community".

Think of it as Gift Economics. Games are the FINAL stage for gift economics. Once that is gone, all is lost, because how often can you say "I don't want this book" and just give it away when it's not a book, it's a file? This is also part of my hunt to get away from videogaming in general because this is no different, in my opinion, than DLC problems and choking where the content of games and the allure was to give you something basic and then sell you a bunch of extras spread out over a huge product line. It's smart, businesswise, but it's a trap I can't yet allow myself to fall into.

Let's just say at current Paizo's Diplomacy checks are too low for my Sense Motive checks.

For what it's worth, I think it would be a rare game day indeed that would turn you away if you didn't have the books, so long as the understanding was that it was your first few sessions and you were trying it out. The caveat there, of course, is that you'd be required to pick up the books if you decided to continue playing. A purchased PDF of the books would suffice.

To which I would not mind. If I did intend to continue to play I would gladly buy, and even subscribe no less, because I can see it in my future. I would integrate the game into me and myself into the game. I may indeed have to ask the GM about this in that light because I do admit my lack of decisiveness along with their no-sharing policy is the main "obstacle" for me.

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

I'm not new to trading games and card games of this nature such as Magic; no one watermarks the plains to you, or hassles you if such and such is "really yours", if it's in your deck you can use it and thus there's more of a borrowing system and a community effort.

While Magic and RPG are totally different, I can call out a few points:

1) Everyone playing in the store need their own Sphinx Revelations. You can't photo copy a new one. Just in the same way everyone needs their own copy of a Pathfinder book.

2) If someone knows you are borrowing cards, most people WILL HARSHLY harass you. I've seen it happen so often that I would wager more than half of the magic players really don't like it when they have to buy cards and you get to borrow them.

So I don't think you understand how much alike the two games really are in regard to buying your own copy of each part you need.

No, I agree, there are people who will judge you harshly and treat you poorly in all communities and walks of life in gaming. There are people who think people who share videogames are the scum of the Earth and look down upon those who go through systems like Gamefly and it's ilk. So it isn't even just physical media.

Yet the parallels are a bit different; everyone should own their own popularly used cards but let's say that you open a pack and get "dud X" whatever iti s, for a rare, and person next to you gets "dud Y" for them, you swap, you now have Gold Y and they Gold X. Trading is encouraged. Furthermore people do not "know" if the card is yours or not so when you do trade or share it is relatively not crass. It IS crass to do it IN the tournament. By all means shame them as I've seen such; it is pathetic, just buy a second copy of the card rather than refusing to play at the same time so that you can have the card in question. Yet at the same time, scolded or not, it isn't "illegal".

This doesn't translate to Pathfinder in the least. Owning a card that can be traded can cost a few dollars, for a set most rares are going to be something about $20, sure, and by no means is the game cheap, but if you tire of the rares or they become obsolete because you only complete in M:tG meta, you can sell them, you can give them away, you can dispose of them as you see fit.

This is not the case with Pathfinder. First, you cannot "acquire" pdfs, period, and the books, well they are 4x the cost so they are mini-investments on their own. To give up just three is to give away $120 dollars so to give up a real collection is to give away hundreds and hundreds of dollars. Furthermore because we can only compare the hardcopies to the rares in M:tG, that puts us at a real disadvantage. The cost is high, high enough to, since you did so, only be replicated by the most expensive elements of other games. That's a bad start.

As long as you have a genuine copy of the card you can play. Fine and fair. So long as you have a genuine copy of the book, you can play. Fine and fair. If you wish to give away the card, you may. Fine and fair. If you wish to attempt to give away a pdf, no, if you wish to give away a book, you may, fine and fair. Yet if you are to collect the books yourself why would you pay four times more for the privilege of giving it away?

Your parallels are, at best, obscure.

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

I have a feeling what's going to happen, which is also why I'm hesitant, is I'm never going to find that community feeling with this game on these grounds.

So we're talking about you joining a worldwide shared campaign where you can meet new people, exchange stories, make new friends, etc; and the inability to use a book without buying it is enough to prevent you from feeling a sense of community?

"The Game". Yes, for the books are the game, and if you cannot share the game, then you cannot connect. Sure, you can be friendly, do not get wrong; I see two senses of community.

For instance I read your guide and that was a sense of community, you brought to light many new ideas in my mind, you showed me a little more than I had considered, and this was "The Game." You did this with the CRB so there was no pain to suffer as everyone will have the CRB to play the game. I commend you for it.

Then there is this type of community. You and I have no connection. No innate reasoning. No inherent love for one another. While you may make friends with many you and I are not part of the same community, we are just tied together by means of the same interest, the same game, so when it comes to these two types I must consider both when investing.

If there is A then there is at least a reason to invest the time and effort should you not be able to play with people you enjoy at all times. Progression with the group you do enjoy is universal so if I play one game at shop A with people I get along with but aren't terribly social with and one at shop B where people love me and I them, every week it allows me to love my character, love the game, and love some of the people.

If there is only B I am crippled. Let us say that I am friendly with all but never find a group I really connect with or really can fit into. They are fun as am I and we enjoy eachother within the game but outside the game and almost outside of character we could not care less if one of the others died except if it would prevent our inevitable weekly game.

I cannot do B alone and invest because the odds that A will occur, that one trades knowledge and resources and aids in character creation possibly suggesting options that, while great, cannot be used is far more likely than B, a guaranteed "clicking" with others. Because even if you play an MMO with millions and millions of people the odds that you will meet those who like you that you like are not dependent at all on the multitude but on the realistic exposure to others, which is only at best hundreds, if that in any given smaller area.

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

I know what I'm asking is if I can ... "cheat". I know this. I wouldn't lie about it but I'm curious how you would rule.

I run games with the base assumption that no player at my table is cheating. Using a single feat from a book you don't own is technically cheating, as you put it.

I'd recommend changing the feat to a feat from a book you own or buying the book. In the whole scheme of things the cost to buy the book is well worth the hours you get to enjoy it. So it comes down to "how much you want that feat" and "whether or not you want Paizo to make more awesome books."

The entire reason I'm on the fence about buying the book is because I'm truly new to Pathfinder as well as tabletop RPGs in general. I don't mind dropping a few bucks to try something out but it's a different story when I'm buying these kinds of resources. For instance if I was buying only hardcopies of the books I wouldn't care because at worst I don't like the game, find someone who does, and give them the books! World goes on. With watermarking pdfs this becomes less possible. You can't "pass down" the resources.

Actually that is the root of this problem. I found the feat / trait in the actual book, not on a website, but the book was a pdf on a friends Kindle Fire. Cool as that is it also means I can't use it unless he's under my butt! We laughed it off but ... Now that I think about it it's kind of unfunny. He doesn't use ISP / DEP at all ( since the trait is in both ) or FoB ( which houses my feat ) but he can't give 'em to me.

I really am hesitant to invest in something I can't pass along because while I may be new to this system I'm not new to trading games and card games of this nature such as Magic; no one watermarks the plains to you, or hassles you if such and such is "really yours", if it's in your deck you can use it and thus there's more of a borrowing system and a community effort. It's why I played for so long; I found something, he found something, we traded, we loaned, we borrowed, we swapped stories, etc.

I have a feeling what's going to happen, which is also why I'm hesitant, is I'm never going to find that community feeling with this game on these grounds. Who wants to share $8 tips? lol

Rules state, that if you take anything from any other book than the Core you MUST have that book. I carry the Ultimate Combat book, Ultimate MAgic, Inner Sea World Guild, Inner Sea Magic, Blood of Angels, Dragon Empires Primer with me for my Musetouched-Aasimar Lotus Geisha(Bard). Ultimate combat is purely for the Fighting Fan and that's it.

I do have a question that is similiar to this one though.

My fiance and I have been collecting the books since Pathfinders inception, we own....a....lot....of the books. We are also both in PFS. We only have one copy of the books each (hardcover). What happens if we sit at separate tables and need the same book? We are not about to go out and buy all the books again, we have put down a great deal of money over the last 3 years. Is there a solution?

You can make a copy of the sheets in question and then refer to your buddy for ownership. So you need a book AND a copy but your copied material doesn't need to be watermarked.

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

Well that's actually the deal; these don't come out of "books" they come out "primers", A.K.A. the monthly magazine. I wouldn't mind buying the books, because they have content, but the primers have something akin to one page of useful items. For instance the ISP is 32 glorious pages long and has Cosmopolitan in it. It is not found in any "book". That's why I'm sketchy on doing so because the subscription doesn't cover back issues so it's literally $8 for character flavoring. It is why I'm asking here and being open about it because if the general reaction is "No" I'll just never use the trait and life will go on.

The books however I agree with because they are actually long and worthwhile.

Are you talking about the soft cover player companion books? Those are still books, with production costs.

My thought is, if you think the 6 cents per hour of a single character's life is too expensive for that feat, then use something cheaper instead.

If Linguistics was worth more than flavor I would agree. For instance if you were talking about Ioun Stones, even if you only wanted one, then SoS is very well worth it because it has heavy utility. If it was Infernal Healing, agreed. If it was anything that wasn't just simply passive: Agreed. But it's not.

Linguistics is the only skill, literally, that cannot be covered by a core book source. It's the only one. You cannot even increase linguistic ability via trait or feat without being of a specific race OR having Cosmopolitan.

Actually that's why I asked to begin with; the APG and all the core books and all the traits in the entire game don't do anything for linguistics for some strange reason. Boggles me. There is no "cheaper alternative" because there is no alternative.

Let me add quickly that I am not "stricken" with a bitterness nor am I complaining in a particular manner. While I do not sympathize with any businesses ( therefore I will not yield to arguments of production costs, etc. ) I also do not believe that thievery is the best way to handle things. I have no problem NEVER using linguistics, it is nothing, again empty flavor, and the one feat I love is definitely nothing to cry about if I am not to use it as it does nothing that is particularly "stellar" nor is it integral; I just like it. The reason I add this is because I wish to pre-empt the "growing storm" that could be brewed with the argumentation that I am just whining about costs when in reality I am asking a question of value. You propose $.06 per hour but to understand how much that actually is given a scenario you must pay about a quarter a week in order to use Cosmopolitan. That doesn't sound bad as it's a dollar a month but if this is the case the rest of the books and any given feat has an equivalent cost of less than a penny every six months. Yes, that's right, less than a penny.

I do like economics but comparatively that would be outrageously expensive, and that's just in relation to your math, of which I've no idea the basis.

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

Well that's actually the deal; these don't come out of "books" they come out "primers", A.K.A. the monthly magazine. I wouldn't mind buying the books, because they have content, but the primers have something akin to one page of useful items. For instance the ISP is 32 glorious pages long and has Cosmopolitan in it. It is not found in any "book". That's why I'm sketchy on doing so because the subscription doesn't cover back issues so it's literally $8 for character flavoring. It is why I'm asking here and being open about it because if the general reaction is "No" I'll just never use the trait and life will go on.

The books however I agree with because they are actually long and worthwhile.

Are you talking about the soft cover player companion books? Those are still books, with production costs.

My thought is, if you think the 6 cents per hour of a single character's life is too expensive for that feat, then use something cheaper instead.

If Linguistics was worth more than flavor I would agree. For instance if you were talking about Ioun Stones, even if you only wanted one, then SoS is very well worth it because it has heavy utility. If it was Infernal Healing, agreed. If it was anything that wasn't just simply passive: Agreed. But it's not.

Linguistics is the only skill, literally, that cannot be covered by a core book source. It's the only one. You cannot even increase linguistic ability via trait or feat without being of a specific race OR having Cosmopolitan.

Actually that's why I asked to begin with; the APG and all the core books and all the traits in the entire game don't do anything for linguistics for some strange reason. Boggles me.

And for what it's worth, most traits (including Cosmopolotin) are reprinted in the Advanced Player's Guide, which is probably the cheapest source of lots of good additions that you can buy :).

I have no idea when they do updates to the APG, etc. but it is not in the current one. Only the DEP and ISP have the trait. So it may be true in the future but at current it is not so. :(

We're required to observe the rules, but I generally don't go down character sheets and demand a hardcover copy or for them to pull up their accounts on paizo.com to show they own the book. I have a feeling under 20% of the people who play alt-Aasimirs own the otherwise-totally-useless-and-badly-written Blood of Angels book.

When I do audit is for major events (retirements is the only example) I will do the book check and full character sheet scan; but I don't have time to do that every time. With that said, you are knowingly breaking the rules; so if you're going to do it, at least try to "make good" and buy the books later as you can afford them (and they're solid reads anyway; and really $10-13 per book isn't too bad).

Well that's actually the deal; these don't come out of "books" they come out "primers", A.K.A. the monthly magazine. I wouldn't mind buying the books, because they have content, but the primers have something akin to one page of useful items. For instance the ISP is 32 glorious pages long and has Cosmopolitan in it. It is not found in any "book". That's why I'm sketchy on doing so because the subscription doesn't cover back issues so it's literally $8 for character flavoring. It is why I'm asking here and being open about it because if the general reaction is "No" I'll just never use the trait and life will go on.

The books however I agree with because they are actually long and worthwhile.

However, I am not a PFS GM or player. I know PFS GMs have to be pretty adherent to what is and isn't allowed in the Society, and I would not expect or ask them to be otherwise.

Oh I agree. I wouldn't "demand" anything. I'm just curious if I should even bother because it will effect how I write my stories since certain skills will just be off the table. I know it sounds "unbelievable" but it really is for role playing purposes only and isn't geared towards giving me more power. There's no point to that since that takes the fun out of the puzzle.

This should be in the Pathfinder Society general section, not the Advice section of the boards. (And you should probably be more explicit that you're asking a question about PFS rules.)

How strict your GM will be depends on the GM and the culture of your area. I probably wouldn't disallow your character the first time you used something from a resource you didn't have, but I would nag you about it. If you continued to try using something intentionally even though you don't have the resource, I wouldn't allow the character. I know quite a few GMs who would simply hand you a pregen, though. If it's a feat or trait or something, I simply might not notice that you were using something from an obscure resource. On the other hand, there are some really commonly used options from relatively obscure resources that they will pique a GM's interest. Infernal Healing, Blood Money, Cornugon Smash and Dervish Dance automatically prompt me to ask for a resource.

D20PFSRD changes some names. If you use one of their names instead of the official name, your character is not going to be playable at my table: I don't care how new you are, there won't be any Dervishes of Dawn sitting at my table. It's a personal pet peeve.

Some GMs will be halfway lenient, allowing you to play your character but not use an option that you don't have a resource for. If that's makes your character unplayable, there are always pregens.

So it's really up to you. But the more important the option is to your build, the more important it generally is to have the additional resource.

Pretending to be naive is bad, though. You are (pretty transparently) trying to deceive your GM and that will give you a bad reputation. People will cut you less slack. It's best to own up to it, tell them you spent all your available cash on the other books and didn't have enough left over to pick up a book just for one feat.

#1. How do I get this moved? :D

#2. You're correct. I admit, rather openly, this is the case. Also, I didn't intend to "deceive" and I did word it wrong and leave out something important.

My character sheet, unless it's from the CRB or APG, has the initials of the source for all items so it's not deceptive because the sheet would look like this for Cosmopolitan, for example:

Trait: [Regional] Cosmopolitan; +1 Linguistics; Becomes Class Skill :: ISP

So all of the stuff on my character sheets are "sourced" so A) I don't have to remember them and B) for referencing and rules. As a matter of fact that's WHY the GM allowed me to keep it during my first game, because it was referenced and he could openly ask me about it.

So I was hanging around the d20 last few days and found a feat that I just can't seem to go around but I'll be buying the crunch books and the core books and won't have the cash for the primer that contains this one feat.

What I want to know is how "strict" you actually are. I wouldn't lie about it if asked because I didn't lie about it at my first game and he let me use it anyway saying A) it's your first game and B) it's only one feat and it isn't game breaking or anything. I thanked him and we played on and so forth and so on.

Now I can totally understand shutting down someone who gathers stuff from scattered resources and everything under the sun and just kicking him out since that's just outright "thievery" I suppose. If half the character sheet is composed of stuff they can't legally use, sure. But about a person who has one or two items that make no major impacts of legendary status on the game? For instance there's also a trait I thought to take, but can't, and thus haven't in the DEP/ISP that grants Linguistics as a class skill and gives +1 in it. That's all it does. I thought it great flavor ( it does go with his background ) for my Half-Orc Fighter but knowing the rules turned it down and had nothing to fill the slot, haha! I am just curious if anyone "really" would have demanded to see if I could legally use Cosmopolitan or am I being a tad paranoid.

Again, it's more of a question of practicality because it would cost $16 to acquire 2 items, and I'm a bit too green to be that fanatical about it. I would of course bring any related print-outs as necessary but I'm not trying to take "good s#+!" like Infernal Healing. I know better.

Oh, and yes, I know what I'm asking is if I can ... "cheat". I know this. I wouldn't lie about it but I'm curious how you would rule.

Lamontius wrote:

Do you mean for Pathfinder Society, as in books to own in order to legally build a character?

If it's this, then I'd recommend that you figure out what options you want to play with using the d20pfsrd, and then once you have that figured out, buy the PDFs for the books you'll need to accomplish this.

If you want to play the odds, and get the crunchiest books, then CRB, APG, UC, UM, ARG in that order.

That is "as a player in PFS."

If you are playing PFS, and wanting to play a Druid, my answer is completely different, you'll need the Bestiaries!

Well that's no good; it changes based on classes. Um, well I did actually build something on d20 but the problem is that one of my feats comes from Faiths of Balance, and it's the only feat in the book, and it's $8 to own so while it's good for homebrew no doubt it's bad for economic reasons. I ended up having a trait like that from Inner Sea Primer, again $8 for one trait, and honestly I didn't want anything else out of the book, ever.

That's kind of why I'm asking for the most "bang for the buck" simply because I'm trying to avoid paying $X for only one trait at a time picking it out of random books. I'll forego a few classes for now if I have to in order to be able to play the majority.

Do you mean for Pathfinder Society, as in books to own in order to legally build a character?

Yes.

I'm not exactly a big fan of "fluff" anyway but putting that aside I have approximately $40 to buy pdfs. That said that leaves me with 3 or so not including the CRB. So what books do you recommend for a starter?

Edit: It's for Society so I have to legally own access to the books, etc.

You don't. I think his +3 AC/ 350gp amount is referring to heavier masterwork armors like mwk. breastplate over the light/medium armors.

Ah, I see. So he's talking about better basic armor with the 150g for masterwork lvl vs. a masterwork weapon then. That would make sense. That would make a lot of sense. That's probably correct I bet; goodness I'm silly.

Thank you for bringing that to light for me. I hate being new...

So I'm not far from the truth, this is good news, because that's what I gathered from the book for the most part, but that just leaves me more confused. How would one make, during level one, that much gold?

Here is what I know:

1. When you create a masterwork piece of armor / shield it gets -1 to armor check penalty. This costs 150g.

2. When you create a masterwork weapon you get +1 attack with that weapon. This costs 300~600g.

What I can't find:

1. How to raise the base AC / Dex Bonus of Armor through enhancing.

2. How to raise the base Dmg / Atk of a weapon through enhancing.

I can't say I understand how this particularly works; how do you raise the base bonuses of the armor itself and how much does it cost? For instance a +3 AC piece of armor is not the same as a +3 masterwork piece of armor I don't think. I might be wrong. Any help is greatly appreciated!

For reference I got the idea from Jiggy:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p2i4?Surviving-First-Level-in-PFS#1

No, you shouldn't have a masterwork weapon yet. That comes later, after you've gotten your armor sorted. Yeah, yeah, "if I kill them they can't hurt me", "the best defense is a good offense", blah blah blah. But do the math: for pretty much all of your first adventure's gold, you get a +1 to hit. For about half the price (masterwork costs are different between weapons and armor!) you can get about +2 or +3 to your AC. While "offense first" might (let's not debate it here) be a decent strategy for the long haul, at first level you're choosing between ~350gp for +1 to hit or ~175-350 for +3 to AC. Guess which one is more likely to get you to scenario #3?

I am just unaware of where this is in the CRB. I, for instance, don't know where he got the number 350 from.

Just Another Pathfinder wrote:

I think the books you can use upfront are the CRB and APG without buying them. To be honest I don't know what books to "invest" in. I heard SoS for the ioun stones and that's fine but I'd prefer NOT to invest in books that have one or two feats or pieces of gear.

The core rulebook is part of the core assumption that every player is assumed to have. If you limit yourself to options from that, you generally won't have a GM bother you about showing ownership of the source. (Although you will be expected to get it eventually, and it's a god idea to do so because it's exceptionally useful, go figure :P ) Anything else will require you to have the source either as a watermarked PDF, printout of the PDF or a book. (And I've always understood that the watermark needs to either be yours or a member of your household.)

There is a free supplement providing traits available at http://paizo.com/download/pathfinder/CharacterTraits.zip That is a legal additional resource for the traits so you don't need the APG just to make a legal character with two traits.

I would suggest downloading the free Guide to Organized Play. (http://paizo.com/products/btpy84k4) It explains how Pathfinder Society works, as well as explaining the factions (and offering a couple potential traits for each faction.)

I followed all of your advice! Thank you very much!

I was told by a friend the answer.

It is just as I thought, thanks so much!

I have one more question: Do Pearly ( Regeneration ) stones stack? They have a non-specific bonus.

Incandescent Blue Sphere has three stone tiers, tier 1 is +2 ENHANCEMENT bonus and tier 2 is +1 COMPETENCE bonus on a skill. Do they stack to +3 (+2) for the skill because they are "different"? These aren't the only stones like this so I'm just curious.

Let me restate that: Is APG legal without buying it? I planned on buying APG and SoS for ioun stones but beyond that I don't really know what I "need".

1. What books are legal without buying the PDFs?

2. What books have a lot of useful content for Society?

I'm trying to avoid books that have little content that cost $5~$10.

I. Am. So. Sorry.

I didn't mean to ask here.