Karys's page

*Honestly I'm sick and tired of trying to model Pathfinder off of D&D's expectations. Paizo should really look at removing the things tethering Pathfinder to D&D, it can't remain slaved to it. It needs to be its own thing in full.

I wanna give a small opinion based on this, because I come from a history of playing a lot of RPG video games moreso than TTRPG like D&D. For what it's worth, the necromancer as depicted in PF2 and especially with reading your write up, evokes exactly what I view as an iconic necromancer from the history of fiction and games I've dealt with. Same actually applies to summoner in this little side tangent, it is 100% what I expect a summoner to be in a game. So coming from other backgrounds instead of D&D does certainly help with perception of these classes and shows breaking these D&D expectations can work for different people.

Anyway, enjoyed your write up and necromancer certainly looks like a class I'll be enjoying someday in the future hopefully.

I like to imagine using the ranged trace option is using my weapon or a finger to quickly draw the rune in midair the same way Rohan Kishibe draws Heaven's Door in the air to affect someone with his stand. It's fine, it just works.

I'm quite fond of the rarity system, so I'd hope it gets improved rather than removed in future revisions or editions.

Seems like a good middle ground to me. Takes care of Paizo's financial reason for needing to cancel the agreement, and keeps AoN getting material early, works for me.

It was likely flagged as baiting because that post was making wild accusations and misinformation implying Paizo was having AoN being taken down for some nefarious greedy plot. Which is very different from criticizing the actual things that happened.

Also you do understand Paizo is in the middle of a heated legal battle where another company stole an unbelievable amount of their product, and thereby revenue, right? It's no surprise this last year has seen company restructuring and cutting business agreements that were costing them money. That's not greed, that's trying to keep the lights on. I dislike these decisions as much as anyone else but it's an unfortunate part of running a business in a time like this. Are they the right decisions? Heck if I know, but it's plain to see the Diamond fiasco has completely upended their plans for some time now.

Paizo isn't some multibillion dollar company that can just keep pushing through Diamond/JP Morgan taking a significant amount of inventory like nothing happened.

I received an email with a link to buy tickets online, the game is on August 9th.

link to the purchase site here

Nothing about the dice however other than mentioning it's "Mariners themed" so maybe a Mariners colors/logo on them in some way.

Maya Coleman wrote:

As the person removing comments, I am not just removing comments of dissenting opinion! If I was doing that, I'm not sure there would be a thread at all. We need the dissenting opinions to see where we failed here so it doesn't happen again. You can't get better if you only listen to praise.

Comments here have only been removed for breaking our forum guidelines, and so far the rule-breaks I have seen were mostly baiting, insults, and excessive swearing (I say excessive because on SOME posts, I have just removed the swear and noted that the post was edited to remove said swear so as to keep their feedback and opinion accurate and immortalized.).

Respectfully Maya, if that were true, can you explain why my latest comment appears to have been removed? While it had a snarky "rip bozo" about Paizo's PR handling of this situation, it wasn't laced with profanity nor did I insult or "bait" anyone in particular, and the comment I quoted is still place?

Perhaps, and especially in a situation where the company is already in a PR debacle with an upset community, if comments are removed don't simply make them disappear but instead leave in place a message that says why a particular comment was cleared of its content? It's an added PR problem for Paizo in this situation if multiple people are starting to ask questions about why comments are simply disappearing in a thread for people to express their reactions to Paizo's decisions.

I believe I was the one you quoted in your deleted post, so I'd like to second this question because while I disagree with the post, it didn't seem to carry anything that looked over the line. You're entitled to your critique same as I am.

Not only did Paizo destroy their deal with AoN, but now they also removed my comments dissenting against them. I will never purchase another one of their products if this is how they handle criticism.

This is literally not happening, judging by the still existing 8 pages of this thread full of dissenting opinions. I've seen some posts vanish, usually because they were particularly aggressive or looked like they were just trying to stir trouble, though unsure what your post may have been.

I'm endlessly amused by repeated claims that Paizo threw AoN under the bus by explaining exactly what happened. But AoN didn't throw Paizo under the bus by making an announcement with essentially no warning to Paizo after failing to follow up after an extended holiday weekend where staff was out of the office. Paizo failed at keeping track of communications received during the holiday, but it's absurd to ignore AoN's lack of common sense to follow up after a holiday.

The way a lot of folks are talking about it, I'd think Paizo was holding a gun to AoN's head demanding they shut down. I think it sucks there won't be art or speedier updates to AoN, but how does this honestly warrant this much vitriol and outpouring of how useful of a site it is like it's trying to convince them not to kill it? It's not going anywhere, unless AoN has decided they want to go nuclear for some reason to harm paizo and the community over free PDFs and art(doubtful).

Edit just to say, I'm old, I started PF1 using d20PFsrd to see if I liked it, the same as so many talking about AoN so I'm no stranger to how useful this content is. These sites have been around since before this license agreement and will likely continue to exist well after it as long as people still love the game. This kind of official partnership was more of an exception than anything, it's great but also not something I would expect to be forever or in any game in the first place.

Karys wrote:

Sounds like stupidity to me.

Edit: and in reading the blog post, yeah, lawyers really are expensive. So largely I'm not feeling far off in my assumption.

If we're counting a complete lack of regard for the customer and a long-term volunteer partner as stupidity, then yeah, I guess malice is in fact a form of stupidity as well. Unfortunately, the two are not mutually exclusive, and in my experience one tends to come with the other. I also find the lawyer argument to be profoundly dubious, given how the agreement seems to have boiled down to giving select people at AoN early access to PDFs and... not really doing anything else, it seems. Maybe take a cut of their money, if they made any? I'm not exactly sure how much time or money ending that agreement will save, unless Paizo is aiming to pare their legal team down to a skeleton crew.

When I say malice, I mean purposefully trying to harm AoN and players access to rules, likely in a bid to push a product of their own. So no, I don't currently view this as malice, which could change depending on any other future announcements.

Karys wrote:

I'm inclined to assume stupidity over malice, so I'm not jumping to any conclusions about the future of paizo based on this. We can cross that bridge when we get there and until then I'll just assume some number cruncher saw the negative profit of giving AoN free books, not getting a penny in return and went "we should cancel this" without thinking about the PR and ramifications.

I would argue that failing to account for the obvious customer QoL detriment of a business decision is in fact malicious, or at the very least negligent. I don't think there's really an angle where this decision can be argued to have been made with the best intentions in mind, given how AoN is such a useful community resource.

Sounds like stupidity to me.

Edit: and in reading the blog post, yeah, lawyers really are expensive. So largely I'm not feeling far off in my assumption.

I'm inclined to assume stupidity over malice, so I'm not jumping to any conclusions about the future of paizo based on this. We can cross that bridge when we get there and until then I'll just assume some number cruncher saw the negative profit of giving AoN free books, not getting a penny in return and went "we should cancel this" without thinking about the PR and ramifications.

The online rules sites like AoN survived before this deal and will survive after it. So while I believe it's a very stupid decision to make and will complain to them, hoping they reverse it, in the end life and Pathfinder will go on like before, if only a little delayed and without cool art.

If that changes in the future, then it does and I'll reassess my thoughts.

So is the Summoner being re-presented in whole in Impossible Magic?

That appears to be the case, alongside Magus. Likely because Secrets of Magic is so entrenched in OGL concepts that it was easier to just fit them in an entirely new book about magic for the remaster.

What/where/how/why are you talking about? Is the Summoner being Remastered?

Sure is, in Impossible Magic, which is about to drop to subscribers tomorrow!

I'm hoping for Dragon eidolon being expanded to every tradition, and the occult/divine options as a whole get touched up. (I just want psychopomp to be a little better.. psychopomps are neat)

Is battlezoo did it the pathfinder equivalent of saying to a 5e player that pathfinder did it?

At least you'd be suggesting an actual option for the game they're actively playing, so I think that's not a bad thing (probably haha)

I once again have come to as for a Bunny/Hare Ancestry.

We have several plant-based ones, but we do not have any bunnies whatsoever.
It's even better because it would be a PF2e thing, not something inherited from PF1e.

Seconding this, I desperately crave an option like bunnyfolk to represent me best.

On the topic of Runesmith's fantasy, I actually come from playing a lot of Final Fantasy XI, where there is a job called Rune Fencer. Its entire concept is activating temporary runes that give small elemental damage and defense buffs, that can be expended for bursts of damage or enhanced to give larger defenses and even retaliatory damage. Largely Runesmith looks like a perfect way to translate a favorite from there into Pathfinder and I'm very happy with what I'm seeing about the full version.

They've knocked it out of the park with this intro! A non-Jistkan automaton is a very interesting thing to see and makes him a very unique iconic.

In case Kitsune ever gets remastered:

Kitsune Ancestry Feat "Rampaging Form" has aspecial entry for the Frozen Winds Kitsune.
However the feat is only for Kitsune that have a Fox Alterante Form. Frozen Winds has a Humanoid Alternate form, thus could not take it in the first place.

Any Kitsune can take the Myriad Forms feat to gain the Change Shape option of another heritage, so Frozen Winds can still get a fox form.

I quite like Usharak, he sets a good baseline story for both heroic or villainous Necromancers, the tragedy feels like it could push him either way. And just happy to see some iruxi love, very nice seeing the iconics branch out a bit more in ancestries.

I'm happy for you, or I'm sorry that happened. I really can't tell what you're trying to say.

Anything could be anything if you file all the flavor off of it, so that's not really a great argument for anything. This is what an Exemplar is on Golarion, which is where everything is written from the perspective of. It's rare on Golarion. I'm not really understanding the issue here.

It's rare for the same reasons Gunslinger or Inventor are uncommon. You won't find them everywhere on Golarion, and you'll find someone with a spark of divinity in them even less, so it's rare. Seems pretty simple to me.

Not to mention plot warping lore implications.

Player core 269 "Generally an item that weighs 5 to 10 pounds is one bulk" That sounds like a weight to bulk conversion to me.

Generally =/= Always. That same rule goes on to say that different circumstances can shift bulk up or down regardless of weight.

Bulk is an abstraction of what someone can carry, not a direct conversion tool.

That brings to mind Fantasy Flight's Genesys system they released some years ago that was released as a generic TTRPG system with setting books that grafted on to convert it into fantasy, cyberpunk, sci-fi, etc. Genuinely one of my favorite RPG systems I've played for various reasons, so if there was a set up like having a core setting agnostic book with Starfinder and Pathfinder having books to graft onto that core, could be neat.

What game do you assume I'm comparing it to?

Haven't really seen you compare any games, I'm comparing them from my experience because you're ranting about the companies behind them and how they interact with their communities.

From my experience with other companies mentioned, Paizo puts considerably more love into what they're making which is considerably more important to me than putting up a blog post yammering about why they changed something. I browse these forums and other sites enough to see why they changed most things in errata, it's all of the people complaining about the problems with certain things. Why they made specific decisions? I don't particularly care why because even if they explained it how does that change the end result? It's a waste of their time.

And for clarity, I don't like the new weakness/resistance errata either, but I can hardly come out yelling that it's a bad change, I simply don't like it personally but it won't kill me either. As a whole I've seen Paizo's errata as a boon even if I disagree with some decisions and have no qualms with their errata schedule either, whether in the current form or when they only applied it on reprints.

On the topic of the thread, I think it feels a little silly that a resistance that can resist all forms of damage suddenly only applies to one form at a time, logically speaking. But eh, I can ignore that in games I run and just deal with the handful of times it may ever matter in anyone else's games.

Karys wrote:

Because Paizo is too busy making a better game than them

If that's the case, it must be something they haven't released yet. The current one has a lot of rough edges, a poor errata cycle, and leaves many of the more unique classes waiting years, if they're lucky, between getting any new rule support.

And yet, still a better game

Because Paizo is too busy making a better game than them

The way I see it, the first clarification was how they envisioned it in the first place, as it worked exactly how I read the rules since release. So the wildly different versions feels more because of how bad a reaction everyone had to being told it played differently than they thought, not because the developers don't know their game.

Question : Is there only poeple outside of US encountering this issue. Could it be linked to an Issue with Eu payment in the states ?

As far as I can tell it's happening everywhere, as a US subscriber experiencing the same troubles.

Adding my voice to the choir, same thing happened last month with Hellbreakers. Same payment method I used to manually order Hellbreakers, so I know it worked and nothing has changed since then.

The immunity override rule exists to fix/prevent a bug that would otherwise cause problems, where immunity to one type-trait, like [fire], would sometimes end up nullifying acid damage, because that spell effect has all the traits & damage in the same place, in one big instance. The system lacks the granularity to say "nullify only the child instance with the matching trait."

This has nothing to do with instances of damage and everything to do with how traits work in the game. Larger effects gain the traits of everything inside of it, so technically everything inside it has all of those traits, that would include both separate instances of damage as well as a combined instance.

If the acid damage was split into its own instance without the fire trait, that rule would not exist.

The rule literally has to exist regardless of separate instances of damage, otherwise trait immunity would immediately nullify the whole effect. You're grasping at straws to prove this whole "impact is one instance" idea.

This will finally reveal Aroden faked his own death to take a vacation.

Sounds like the gremlins are already loose if book listings are going up early then vanishing. I for one welcome our new fey overlords!

Also very excited to see a fey versatile heritage!

I would guess the devs did their math on the assumption players were using normal builds and not these outlandish builds people were coming up with to create and exploit weaknesses. When played normally, the original rule worked fine, but everyone panicked so they had to revise it because of a niche build supposedly everyone will abuse.

I'm not sure if this is a new store bug or not, but in the middle of the night last night, my Starfinder Adventurer Subscription somehow canceled itself and I only knew because I received an email about it at 3 AM.

Personally I'll stick to using the previous clarification, as that is how I was already reading the rules. But this new clarification seems pretty simple and will work fine if I need to use it ever (PFS or others tables)

Mangaholic13 wrote:

...Someone mentioned Blue Mage?

I'm now imagining a Tripkee Wandering Chef Slayer who hunts monsters mostly in order to use them as ingredients for experimental dishes. The trophies are more so they can remember the flavor of certain monsters in order to figure out what seasonings and other ingredients work best.

I didn't expect a Quina reference today, though being totally fair, the only other Blue Mage is Kimahri and most people forget he exists lol.

Are we really erasing Quistis and Strago? smh lol

A class built around adrenaline and using what they can around the map to do risky maneuvers? Guess it's time for me to build fantasy Jason Statham, virtually any role he's had, but primarily Crank.

Slayer I think means pulling out my old Bloodborne styled Slayer from PF1..

However, there is one HUGE problem in need of ERRATA:

"On Borrowed Time" does not list its action cost! Please fix that immediately, Paizo!

This was actually addressed in the surprise errata the other day:

Page 189: On Borrowed Time is missing its action symbol. It takes 2 actions.

I recall this being somewhat common with Starfinder 1e PDFs as well, particularly APs. Several ranging between 100-300 MB. Catches me off guard every time I see it happen, and mildly annoying to make space for on some devices sometimes.

Not in particular, no. I haven't noticed any significant change in quality since I started paying attention to Pathfinder 10 years ago, despite many claims to the contrary.

It's part of the standard rulebook subscription, it needed to be skipped if it was unwanted. Presumably something due to the new store.

It's entirely possible they copied the text from other caster archetypes that grant focus spells, like Sorcerer and Oracle in PC2, which uses that same specific line about gaining a focus pool if you don't have one. So it may be something to call for a clarification on whether it qualifies as a known focus spell or not for purposes of adding to your focus pool.

To be honest, I always wonder if the spell attack rolls were made this way on purpose or they just forgot to compensate for removing touch AC and/or the dueling wand after the playtest. They really are just in such an awkward position I find it hard to believe it was intentional.

Karys wrote:

I'm scrolling through this search you've provided and I have yet to see any "broken stuff" being patched with PFS rulings, so could you be more specific in what you're trying to show here?

I already did provide a link to an AoN search for pages with PFS notes so it's easy enough to repost that.

This is literally the search I am referring to scrolling through, so once again, can you be more specific about what you're trying to show me?