Malthus Salvitto 2e's page

Prey for Death: an adventure about being members of the notorious Red Mantis Assassins. I have personally had an obsession with the Red Mantis Assassins since I first learned of them because they are just so cool to me. So now that my offline game of Prey for Death (where I was a player) has finished, I need to come back to tell the story myself.

First off, *Inhales!* For some of the NPCs there is sometimes no image given so I have to improvise using Google and my own lackluster editing skills. If there is a discrepancy between the image and what I write as a description then that is why. All credit to the original artists, etc. etc. etc.

Okay, important stuff:

Once again, I expect posts as frequently as possible, but bare minimum of once per day (with some leeway for weekends).

I frequently use spoilers to keep things organized and not too crowded, so for future reference, any spoilers in any of my posts contain public information that can be viewed by everyone with three significant exceptions: Any spoiler labeled with a specific check along with the DC (i.e. "Perception 30"), any spoiler specifically directed toward a particular player, or any spoiler labeled "GM Screen." Additionally, I sometimes put spoilers inside of spoilers, but I have to get creative with the labels for spoilers inside of spoilers (you can't label it normally or else the coding breaks), so I put such labels in bold and ooc; if there isn't such a label directly above such a spoiler then don't open it unless prompted to do so. Example that uses 1e skills because much of this was pre-written:

I do have a google document of my personal house rules/GM interpretations for certain things in 2e; I keep the link to it in the profile of my GM alias here on the website, but I will also link to it right here and will put it at the top of the campaign thread. This document is mostly full of minor adjustments to keep the game internally consistent or to bring the RAW in line with the RAI. I periodically update this document when other weird stuff comes to my attention. Most of it has to do with some minor stuff in monster statblocks, but there are some changes to the wording of specific spells that I added in. Most of the document is written to the benefit of the players or to the benefit of internal consistency.

Finally, I believe that Pathfinder is a game of remembering, so if you forget an ability, a bonus, or anything of the like and don't correct yourself of said mistake soon thereafter and I as the GM don't call you out on it, then we continue onward; I'm not going to do a fleshed-out retcon to satisfy a single mistake and if you expect that of me, then I'll shrug and say "Sorry! Remember next time." Likewise, if I make a mistake and am not called out on it in time, then I will say "Welp, the players reap the rewards of my lack of remembering" and move on. There are exceptions to this, such as when a retcon would be simple ("Just heal X damage since you didn't take it because the attack missed.") or if PC death is on the line.

Some campaign-specific stuff to follow.

Not long ago, the leader of the Red Mantis—Blood Mistress Jakalyn, who has led the organization since the death of Aroden (inexplicably still youthful despite being a human) Character Profiles Updated—was visited by an unnamed messenger representing a mysterious patron with an outlandish and shocking request— the assassination of none other than Tar-Baphon, the Whispering Tyrant. The messenger claimed that Tar-Baphon was no legitimate ruler, and argued that the Tyrant was a power-hungry fool attempting to become a god, a clear offense to Achaekek and the Red Mantis.

When Jakalyn grew frustrated at the patron’s attempts to remain anonymous, she had the messenger imprisoned and announced the request and incarceration publicly in the hopes of learning more about the agent’s commander.

After months went by with no one stepping forward to admit their association with the imprisoned messenger, Jakalyn left Mediogalti Island on a secret mission, spawning several rumors about what she might have learned from the agent. Is she seeking to slay the one who sent the request? Meeting with them to iron out more details? Or has she begun moves against one of the Inner Sea’s most dangerous villains? So far, no one can say, but for the moment, she has not returned.

Really delayed, but I’m finally getting around to writing up my initial thoughts for the playtest stuff upon a read-through.

Really delayed, but I’m finally getting around to writing up my initial thoughts for the playtest stuff upon a read-through.

So here’s my regular “first impressions” stuff that I do for these playtests.

My only real complaint is that I think a traced rune should last longer than “the end of your next turn,” with the runes’ effects being nerfed to compensate. Maybe not, like, lasting 1 minute—it could last 3 rounds or something—but as it currently stands it creates a weird action economy bloat of wanting to Trace a Rune on an enemy, be able to Strike that enemy, AND have enough spare actions to occasionally Stride, invoke, or do some of the other fun actions the class provides. The magus’s action economy bloat makes some sense, because their Spellstrike creates very potent effects that needs to have some balancing, but the runesmith’s equivalent effects (invoking) just doesn’t feel potent enough to justify the action economy bloat when you can only really invoke one or maybe two runes at a time.

So here’s my regular “first impressions” stuff that I do for these playtests.

My first thing is that necromancers are…kinda problematic. I know that during PFS1 there was a whole controversy regarding using animate dead in PFS, since that was kinda…corpse desecration. I’m a bit hesitant with how usable this class would be outside of evil campaigns when there’s regular “raising undead” stuff going on. It makes it weird that this class is common. Like, doing basically anything around a Pharasmin is gonna cause a lot of uproar.

Overall, I think this is a really fun class, I’m just concerned about the rarity of it, because it seems like a lot of the thematics of it are very disruptive. And this is, like, the first class that actively locks you out of certain deities, like Pharasma and Sarenrae. It feels like this class would be better as, say, a class archetype of Wizard, because I really can’t see this class being used outside of evil or morally-gray campaigns. The class talks a lot about the “respecting death,” but then has a lot of stuff about utilizing undead. It just seems like there’s not a lot of wiggle room for stuff that isn’t explicitly pro-undead. Like…undeath is meant to be unholy. There’s zero unholy things in this undead-riddled class.

TL; DR: Here’s my conversion guide

For those of you who don’t know me, I semi-regularly make conversion guides for Pathfinder 1e Adventure Paths into Pathfinder 2e and publish them on Pathfinder Infinite (check my profile for more info on that). This thread is to be my connection to my personal conversion guide of Wrath of the Righteous.

I will be using this thread as a changelog for my conversion guide. I will be going through and converting things as I read through the AP, which is also as I will be building my FoundryVTT world (see FAQ) for the campaign I will inevitably run using this conversion guide. Do not expect me to necessarily update this on a regular basis. I’ll need the spoons to be able to do this, and real life happens.

Currently what’s in that google drive folder is a bunch of random stuff that I made as I was throwing stuff against the proverbial wall waiting for War of Immortals to release. It will eventually be trimmed down to the following:

Foreword My regular opening spiel regarding how I do my conversion guides.
Players’ Guide A document to be given to players that is meant to be a supplementary document for the regular Players’ Guide. Initially a work-in-progress, as I’ll be filling it out as I make my conversion guide.
Books 1 through 6, each as their own separate document
Appendices

And with that, I hope you all enjoy what I have to offer.

Down with Thrune!: A Hell's Rebels 2e Remaster Conversion is now live on Pathfinder Infinite!

Special thanks to B. Romero (the author for the other Hell’s Rebels conversion on Infinite) for being kind enough to give me permission to use a variation on their rules for the final combat of the campaign.

Leaving this here for the soul going through the forums looking for a 2e conversion of the AP.

Important!
The book fails to use the phrase “toolkit” where applicable.
The word “advanced” has two different definitions with relation to equipment: “advanced weapons” being a category of weapon for proficiencies, and “advanced equipment” being a category of equipment grade. I would VERY MUCH recommend changing the equipment grade word to something other than “advanced” to avoid confusion.

Lashunta
What part of limited telepathy is “limited”? It has the exact same wording as PF2’s telepathy.

Vesk
Armor Ace: giving every armor bulwark at level 1 feels weird.

Ysoki
Tinkering Fingers: Isn’t the penalty for not using a toolkit an item penalty?
Underfoot: An enemy treating its own space as difficult terrain does nothing; difficult terrain is only applicable when moving INTO it, not OUT OF it.
Grandmother’s Chosen: pseudo-immortality feels like it should be kept behind the uncommon trait.

Borai
Etheric: That’s…not quite accurate to how void healing works. You are not healed by void DAMAGE, you are healed by void HEALING. A vampiric fest doesn’t become a healing spell against a borai that uses this reaction, it just does nothing.

Prismeni
Triune’s Chosen: The last sentence is unnecessary, as that will happen since everyone is trained in simple weapons.

Envoy
Guns Blazing: Maybe reword it to “make a ranged Strike what has a multiple attack penalty against an enemy”
Wise to the Game: This class feature feels very meh.
Improvised Mastery: I feel like changing it to a static bonus would be a better idea.
Steel Yourselves!: Uh…what is Brace for Impact?? Is this a special action granted by Steel Yourselves!? I initially thought it was an already-existing activity that Steel Yourselves! reduces to 1 action. The use of capitalization confused me, because capitalization usually means it’s a specific action.
Indiscernible Agenda: Something about this class feature feels…wrong. I can’t quite put my finger on why, though.
Silver Tongued: Wait, so this could make you go from untrained to legendary in a skill instantly?? That seems excessive.
Search High and Low: Based on what I know about PF2, I think this ability should cap out at a +4. +5 just feels like a step TOO much.
Get Your Head in the Game!: Wait, so…can this just negate flanking?
Unstoppable Directives: Why specify your key attribute instead of Charisma? This is a level 12 feat, so you can’t take it through an archetype.
True Leader: Usually these kinds of capstone feats mention that you are permanently quickened, so this one just being “change a directive to a free action” is definitely noteworthy.

Mystic: I feel like this class has so much going on that 4 slots per rank feels like a bit much.
Vitality Network: So, the use of the word “vitality” makes this ability confusing on whether or not it can be used on undead allies; RAW it CAN.
Force Connection: This sounds like it should be a spellshape action.
akashic assistant: So can the assistant only Aid skill checks, or could it also Aid, say, attack rolls?
data drain: If you give alternate degrees of success, it’s no longer a basic save. Is the Recall Knowledge on a failure a free action?
elemental weapon: So, do you have to have an uninstalled upgrade in hand for the weapon to use it? Or can an installed upgrade work?
Healing connection: maybe add “instead of the vitality trait” to the harmony.
Infusion: This should probably have the healing trait. But then if it does, it wouldn’t work on undead despite having the void trait. Maybe just replace void with healing, that way the connection’s harmony would make it work.
Rhythm Connectipn: I would modify the wording of the harmony to be that you Sustain instead of increase the duration by 1 round. Additionally, maybe change the last sentence to specify that it only works with epiphany spells.
Shadow Connection: Why is this a divine connection? Usually shadow stuff is connected to occult (like the shadow sorcerer bloodline)
shadow prison: Maybe adjust the wording on a crit fail to “swallowed by its shadow for 1 minute.” The current wording made me think that swallowed was its own condition for a bit.
Eldritch Bond: Maybe specify that these unarmed attacks are unaffected by handwraps of mighty blows (or whatever the Starfinder equivalent is).
wild Bond: Maybe specify that these unarmed attacks are unaffected by handwraps of mighty blows (or whatever the Starfinder equivalent is).
Adaptive Defense: doesn’t have a transfer cost.
Cloud Storage: unclear on when the transfer cost is paid by you.
Ebb & Flow: So this is a spellshape that can affect a Strike??
Mental Interference: Should have the transfer trait.
Databond: maybe change “learn” to “add to your spell repertoire”
Divine Fighting Technique: This feels like it should be built into Martial Disciple.
Convert Illumination: The last part of this ability has weird implications for stuff like turning bright to dim light.
Vitality Web: The description doesn’t specify what the transfer cost is.
Network Attunement: What benefit would this give to anyone other than mystics?

Operative
Do operatives not get a feat that lets them be better with advanced guns? That’s…odd.
Sniper: Ignoring volley is pretty huge; I would recommend getting rid of that and just giving BOTH of those operative feats. For the enhanced exploit, I’d replace “sniper rifle” with “weapon in the sniper group.”
Hair Trigger: I feel like this feat should either be unique to skirmishers or should be something like level 6, because giving a better Reactive Strike at such a low level is ridiculous.
Mobile Reload: I feel like this ability would work more fluidly if it were a free action that triggers on reloading a weapon.
Double Draw (operative): this feels like it should be set up as being a free action with a trigger.
Stop Them In Their Tracks: so is there no way to Escape from this immobilization?
Switch Targets: Amusingly, this ability would not apply if your mark dies.
Explosive Deflection: This feels like it should be a whole new reaction instead of adding onto Deflecting Fire.
Instant Reload: This should be written as its own free action.
Relentless Aim: This feat does seemingly nothing, since Aim already ignores up to +4 circumstance bonus to AC.
360 No Scope: I feel it would be more beneficial to say that you can Aim then Strike at any point during the movement, because otherwise you’d only get the benefits of the aim AS you are falling.

Solarian: The class seems to have a weird thing with rounding up a lot, which is just…really odd to me. I don’t see a particular reason to be rounding up that much.
Attune / Attunement Control: I think it would be more intuitive if you removed Attunement Control and the Special section of Attune, and just created a separate free action that triggers when you roll initiative. That way you wouldn’t have to create an entire exploration activity just to make an exception to how Attune works. Something similar to the remastered barbarian’s Quick-Tempered.
Solar Shot: So…the Trip on a crit success while graviton-attuned still uses MAP, which makes it not super great. Also, does the “Level (+4)” also increase the persistent damage for being photon-attuned?
Solar Weapon: Wait, so…am I unable to draw my solar weapon unless I’m NOT in my favored attunement? Or can I just use Attune on its own to draw the weapon similar to Interacting to draw a regular weapon? Also, do the versatile traits count separately? i.e. does it take both weapon traits to give a slashing weapon versatile B and versatile P? I also think it would be beneficial to lay out that you make the choices for your solar weapon during your daily preparations, because I initially was a bit confused on if you could swap that stuff when you drew the weapon (until it started explaining Re-Forge Solar Weapon).
Willful Defiance: Kinda weird that solarians can only bump up their degree of success on certain Will saves despite being a master.
Black Hole: It should specify a 30-foot emanation.
Defy Gravity: Maybe remove the Requirements, since it modifies graviton attunement?
Singularity: I feel like this activity would benefit from being Sustainable and able to be moved each time you Sustain (maybe, like, 10 feet at a time). Otherwise it just creates a fairly small area of “don’t go in here.” Also, based on the wording, does this thing straight-up destroy the equipment of a creature that dies from it?! That seems REALLY punishing.
Solar Wind: Maybe remove the Requirements, since it modifies photon attunement? Also, do you treat the unwilling creature whose space you move through as difficult terrain (similar to Tumble Through)?
Big Bang: What’s the counteract modifier on a critical failure?
Solar Shield: Wait, if the shield doesn’t always have Hardness, then there’s basically no point in Shield Blocking with it while photon-attuned.
Reactive Strike: Solarians can get this as a level 4 feat?? Usually it’s level 6.
Solar Barrage: With this being a level 6 feat AND have both flourish and disharmony, I don’t think removing that -2 to the attacks would break a whole lot.
Stellar Paragon: the “stacking with their multiple attack penalty” is unnecessary.

Soldier: Why is the key attribute Con.? Why does soldier get weapon expertise at 5th (normal for martials), but then doesn’t get weapon mastery until 15th (2 levels later for most martials)?
Suppressed (trait): I would change the name of this trait just to minimize confusion.
Suppressing Fire: The text here contradicts the suppressed condition (which only imposes a -5-foot penalty to Speeds). Is this meant to say that the soldier’s suppression is more potent? Or was this improperly translated from internal playtests?
Fearsome Bulwark: This ability is just…weird. The system tends to not deal a whole lot in attribute-swapping for skills.
Pin Down: The wording on this feat is weird. Why not just say they have to make a save against your class DC or become suppressed?
Ready Reload: Why wouldn’t you just reword this feat to say you Interact twice to reload your weapon?
You’ll Have to Go Through Me!: Is the damage the soldier takes subject to things like resistances and immunities?
Overwhelming Assault: The MAP for a third, agile attack should be -6, to keep it in line with similar PF2 abilities (like Combination Finisher)
Shoving Shot: You should specify that you don’t need a free hand to make this Shove. Also, do you have to position your Area Fire/Auto-Fire to MAKE the target your primary target, or does it just BECOME the primary target?
Intimidating Taunt: the prerequisites are redundant, as all soldiers are trained in Intimidation.
Offensive Defense: While cool, this feat would never be used with a shield. All of the soldier’s stuff revolves around weapons with the area or automatic trait, which are ALL TWO-HANDED. And those that don’t are still centered around, say, a two-handed melee weapon.
Ammunition Conservation: The Requirements entry is unnecessary, as this feat changes how Auto-Fire works.
Bring It On!: Why didn’t you just say that the soldier is off-guard?
Deflect Missile: does a grenade count as a bomb or missile?
Overwatch: A better pseudo-Reactive Strike is really powerful; I kinda think this should be nerfed in some capacity.
Run Hot: So…MAP applies normally? I would at least let MAP not apply to the second Area Fire.
My Little Friend: This would work more smoothly if it had a trigger.
Shell Shower: This would work more smoothly if it had a trigger.
Death Blossom: The use of “equal to the range of the weapon” is VERY dangerous, because technically the “range” of any weapon is equal to SIX RANGE INCREMENTS!
Scattering Fire: I would replace “Shove” with “push,” solely because Shove has its own definition.
Special Delivery: I feel like this feat should be a bit lower level, since its most comparable equivalent is PF2’s Friendly Toss (a level 8 feat).
Vector Reflector: Maybe specify that you don’t need a free hand to do the Shove.
Excavating Bombardment: I mean, cool? But it’s such a nothing feat if it only provides a benefit to prone creatures (especially since that would literally just negate the AC penalty from prone). At most, this would be a feat that creates shapable difficult terrain, which is far from the intent.
Light ‘Em Up: I would adjust the wording of this to match that of something like revealing light.
Overkill: Despite the name, this feat is honestly kinda tame for the level you get it at. One (MAYBE two) die of persistent damage is not really a whole lot at level 16.
Soldier’s Training: Why not just make this apply to any soldier reaction?
Spread the Love: You usually don’t GET to choose your primary target, so does this LET you?
Hybrid Technique: This feels like it SHOULD be a three-action activity, but I could also see otherwise, since it’s a capstone feat.

Witchwarper: Wait, it’s key attribute is Int. now?? That’s such a random change. Also, several witchwarper feats mention the witchwarper’s class DC; is this meant to instead be against its spell DC? Also, the witchwarper has so much going on that I think 4 slots per rank is excessive.
Warp Reality: “You can choose whether creatures in the area are affected by your quantum field.” Did…did you mean “you can choose which creatures in the area are affected by your quantum field”?
Warped Infinities: Does the last sentence mean you can just pick and choose which squares the quantum field affects? Or that you can lower its radius however you wish?
World warp: The spell doesn’t tell you what the degrees of success are. RAW the Fort save is only necessary for if they crit fail it; the damage is otherwise automatic.
Zone Overlap: This ability feels like it would be a nightmare to futureproof for.
Parallel forms: So does this spell give you any action economy benefit AFTER the initial casting?
Warp presence: I’d change “undetected” to “hidden,” because undetected means that the creature has no idea that you’re there.
Forget: It feels like the mental damage from this spell is really situational, especially since changing creatures’ memories about the target lowers the likelihood of them trying to Seek or Recall Knowledge about the target. Also, this is just straight-up a better rank 4 invisibility.
Reality wipe: doesn’t specify an area (I assume it’s supposed to be your quantum field, but it doesn’t say that).
Warp time: That Fast Forward effect may be a bit too potent for a one-action spell.
Accelerate: I would add in something that lets you Strike, Stride, or Step as part of casting the spell, that way you can “get the quickened benefits” on the turn it’s cast.
Precog: so does the Quantum Field effects only work if you START a movement in the quantum field?
Restorative Recollection: You can never reduce stunned with this action, because you’re only able to act once your stunned value is 0. And reducing your slowed value is really powerful; it’d make more sense if it reduced the duration of your slowed. But also, it wouldn’t do as much to slowed because, again, in order to take an action you have to have already lost the actions from the condition.
Focal Point: Why would you let the witchwarper have both this AND Steady Spellcasting?
Tangible Object: is the circumstance bonus to Perception checks constant while the bonus to Will saves only against illusions/holograms? The wording could be taken that way.
Anchoring Strike: I’d remove the fortune trait from the feat and put it specifically on the rerolling effect on a crit success.
Otherworldly Spell: As a spellshape, this is really meh. As a, say, level 2 feat that’s constant, it’s pretty cool.
Quantum Pulse: Why not just say you Warp Reality? Well, by that logic, why does Warp Reality require it to be your turn??
Fundamental Understanding: I get this is supposed to be a rework of Recognize Spell, but the reaction never asks for a roll, nor does it say what the DC is.
Warp Wounds: Does this damage to the person in the quantum field have a damage type?
Enlarge Quantum Field: So if I use this, then use it AGAIN next turn, does that mean it increased my field’s radius by a total of 25 feet?
Butterfly Effect: Why does this feat have the misfortune trait?
Danger Zone: Is this meant to be damage per square moved?
Quantum Negation: I like the IDEA, but even 20d10 untyped damage is A LOT, especially for a focus spell. Cataclysm uses a spell slot and deals 21d10 of different types of damage. Also, this spell has no casting actions listed.

Skills
Hack: How long does it take to Hack?

Feats
Additional Spoons: Well…the Starfinder team definitely knows their audience, haha
Bargain Hunter: How does the “you start play with an additional 2 gp” work in Starfinder? I assume it’s the normal conversion rate of 1 credit = 1 sp, but I still thought I’d ask.
Akashic Eye: How does this feat work with Dubious Knowledge? Likewise, you might want to replace “creature” with “topic,” just so it is clearer.
Arcane Intuition: Is the bonus to counteracting constant? Because it doesn’t list a duration.
Critical Care: I assume this check is made as part of administering the serum?
Crowd Surfing: Why is this feat level 2? Was this meant to require expert in Acrobatics?
Deific Obedience: Was this meant to be a level 1 feat? Otherwise the whole “if you’re a master in Religion” thing doesn’t make sense, since mastery in Religion is a prerequisite.
Dive for Cover: I would argue that this could be a non-skill general feat.
Digital Diversion: So, a couple of questions about the limitations of this feat. Could this not be used on a creature that has the tech trait, but doesn’t “have” a tech item? Likewise, what about if there’s a prominent tech item nearby, like a combat taking place in a computer lab or office cubicle?
Divine Weapon Training: This being uncommon is…odd. Similarly, why is this a level 2 feat; there’s no normal way to get a general feat at level 2.
Fabricator: This feat is…definitely a problematic one. For one, it just makes Crafting (the activity) using Crafting (the skill) obsolete. Second, it would be a mess to implement in, say, SFS, because it would allow PCs to feasibly Craft something mid-scenario. Third, “multiplying the reduction of materials necessary to complete the item by [varies].” I have no idea what this really even means. I get that 3D printing (in real life) makes creating new things a lot faster and cheaper, but this feat seems to just completely break the careful balance created by Earn Income and Craft. I feel like it would go smoothly if this just allowed you to Craft using Computers.
Feign Death: I feel like there should be a clause about something like “if a soldier at full HP takes 1 point of damage.”
Fool the Camera: Shouldn’t this be a Stealth feat, not a Computers feat?
Kiss It Better: Does this allow you to increase the DC, like with Treat Wounds?
Machine Magic: Shouldn’t this be a Crafting feat? After all, you don’t use Computers to Craft (outside of feats like Fabricator).
Master Troll: While fun, this feat seems really situational.
Method Actor: Why is this feat level 2 if it only requires trained in Performance.
Percussive Maintenance: Is this meant to have the attack trait? I KINDA get why, but then it implies this suffers from MAP, which creates weird implications.
Power Slide: Why is this a level 3 feat? It should be level 2
Predator’s Eye: Well…that just seems powerful.
Programmer: Doesn’t coding apps require Computers to Program?
Sanctify Space: I assume the area is meant to be a burst? Also, what if you’re in an area already sanctified/consecrated to a different deity? It’d be really weird for a Pharasmin to be able to use this feat in the middle of a temple to Urgathoa.
Spiritual Eye: I think this might work better as a level 7 feat than a level 15.
That’s Not What I Heard: So, does removing the condition from this feat actually take 3 actions? One to take out a comm unit, one to check the comm unit, and one to put the comm unit away. That’s…a bit much.
Take the Wheel: Why is this a level 3 feat? It should be level 2

Equipment
Grades of Equipment: “Armor, shields and weapons gain more upgrade slots as they improve. Upgraded armor…” This particular paragraph is a bit misleading. I initially thought that this paragraph was saying that giving bonuses to saves and extra dice of damage required using upgrade slots, due to the paragraph’s continued use of “upgrade” in two different contexts. It would probably be beneficial to replace all use of “upgrade” BESIDES “upgrade slots” with “higher grade.”
Upgrading Equipment: This does bring up something interesting. With runes being replaced with equipment grade, that makes it a bit more difficult to, say, take the “striking rune” from a weapon no one in the party will use and put it ON one someone WILL use. But the other side of that coin is that upgrades put in upgrade slots are A LOT easier to shift around, since it only takes 10 minutes to install an upgrade. I’m not sure how this will turn out in play, but it is certainly an interesting direction.

Armor
Environmental Protection: “This protection doesn’t protect you from smoke inhalation, inhaled poisons, thick or thin atmospheres, toxic atmospheres, or corrosive atmospheres.” Why not? Like, I know that the answer is inherently BECAUSE the developers don’t want to make inhaled poisons, etc. completely obsolete, but how does it work where it can protect me from drowning underwater, but DOESN’T protect me from toxic air? I was under the assumption that it was canisters of oxygen (or whatever relevant gas) that would pump in to allow you to breath in an airtight suit, similar to what actual astronauts use. EDIT: Okay, so it seems that it’s because the suits are made to only work in a vacuum or non-damaging liquid, which seems like a weird (in-universe) design flaw. EDIT 2: And THEN it says that you can activate or deactivate it yourself. It’s very unclear whether or not these things are meant to be manually activated or automatically activated.
Armor Specialization Effects: Okay, ceramic armor specialization is SIGNIFICANTLY better than all others. Most armor specializations give resistance to one damage type, whereas ceramic gives FOUR! That’s kind of ridiculous.
Armor Improvements: Wait, is the item bonus to saves SUPPOSED to improve at the same rate as the item bonus to AC? Because that’s not how it’s supposed to work. The +1 to saves isn’t supposed to come online until level 8, but you put it at level 5. The only reason to go from tactical to advanced is for an extra upgrade slot. And on top of that, paragon armor does LITERALLY NOTHING that ultimate armor doesn’t do. And there isn’t a consistency with when extra upgrade slots occur: advanced to elite gives one slot, but then elite to ultimate ALSO gives a slot. The progression of armor improvements makes absolutely no sense and doesn’t really relate back to the armor rune progression whatsoever.

Shields
Mobile Bulwark: Doesn’t list a Str. requirement alongside its hefty trait.
Shield Improvements: So…these improvements differ significantly from PF2’s reinforcing runes. The shield improvements give a handful of extra HP, but is one level higher?? AND the benefits of an elite shield are basically the same as those from a greater reinforcing rune, so why is an elite shield one level higher? These should honestly just be a one-to-one replacement, which IS reflected in the price, since a paragon shield and a supreme reinforcing shield cost exactly the same, despite being different levels. And why does ultimate give another bump to Hardness?! Major reinforcing doesn’t!

Weapons
Arc: I feel like the extra damage from this trait could easily be doubled without breaking the game too much.
Area Fire/Auto-Fire: Sooo….how does MAP interact with this?
Deadly: This trait works differently than PF2’s deadly trait. In PF2, the weapon only gets a second deadly die once it deals 3 dice of damage.
Powered: Wait, so…powered weapons don’t use charges when used to attack? That’s…odd. Was it like that in SF1? Can’t remember.
Professional: This trait is just…weird. I…I guess it’s a good way to give a caster better proficiency in an advanced weapon, but it’s just…so odd. It doesn’t BREAK the game, but it’s…definitely a choice that was made.
Thought: Again, this trait doesn’t break the game, but…it’s so odd.
Sonic (Weapon Spec): I feel like 1 minute is a lot more punishing when most other conditions from weapon specs only really last a round.
Crossbolter A simple weapon that does a d10 damage?! Holy crap, that’s ridiculous!
Sonic Rifle: I don’t think this is meant to deal slashing damage.
Assassin Rifle: Doesn’t list a volley range.
Boom Pistol: I don’t think this is meant to deal slashing damage. Also, this is just…a straight-up worse sonic rifle. The only thing the boom pistol has going for it is it’s one-handed, but I think the sonic rifle is better because it’s boost 1d4. It feels like these two weapons SHOULD be identical save for the handed-ness and the fact that one is simple and one is martial.
Shirren-Eye Rifle: Doesn’t list a volley range.
Screamer: I don’t think this is meant to deal slashing damage.
Streetsweeper: I don’t think this is meant to deal slashing damage.

Grenades
Oh man! Where’s our sticky grenades!? (Yeah, I know it doesn’t work well with how grenades are codified into the game)
Grenade Launcher: So…does the grenade launcher have a magazine of 6? Or is it two actions to reload a single grenade into it? It’s very unclear. Also, the grenade launcher has a REALLY random Price.

Missiles
Missile Launcher: Same as with a grenade launcher: is it considered a magazine of 4, and thus two actions to reload all four? Or is it two actions to reload a single missile? Also, using Area Fire as its Activation makes things really weird, because Area Fire has specific rules (such as targeting an intersection), but this breaks pretty much all of those rules.

Armor Upgrades
Cloaking Device: The flavor text of this upgrade makes it sound nonmagical, but the upgrade itself uses magic.
Explosive Defense Unit: The bonus to saves is basically worthless, since it doesn’t stack with the bonus from armor of a high enough grade. Also, grenades detonate in a burst, so Defensive Detonation would need to specify that it explodes from a corner of your space.
Force Field: This seems to be doing…a lot. It basically gives you bonus HP, weird fast-healing, and a weird fortification rune. Also, the iten is not clear if it’s crit-negation effect still functions while the force field is inactive (whether from damage or just not activating it yet).
Glamor Projector: The flavor text of this upgrade makes it sound nonmagical, but the upgrade itself uses magic.
Mobility Enhancers: Isn’t the whole balance around heavy armor the fact that it makes you slower?
Truesight sight: Shouldn’t the commercial version’s Seek the Truth make invisible creatures concealed (like see the unseen does)?

Biotech
Dragon Gland: I personally think this ability should be increased to two actions, because the damage is a BIIIT much for those levels.
Shielding Skin: What’s…the point of this? Armor already gives you an item bonus to saves, and when would anyone NOT wear their armor?

Cybernetics
Autorecognition Lens: It kinda feels like this SHOULD count against your implant limit, in much the same way that glasses of sociability count against your investiture limit.
Hideaway Limb: The bonus to Stealth checks is not given a type of bonus.
Nano-Optics Node: Shouldn’t this be an uncommon item for the same reasons that x-ray vision is uncommon?
Speed Suspension: The increase to Speed should be listed as an item bonus.

Magitech
Morphic skin: Uh…can you Dismiss the effect at all? Or are you stuck like that for the next 24 hours?

Magic Items
Aeon stones: Shouldn’t aeon stones no longer be categorized by their shape and color, due to the whole OGL debacle?
Kaleidoscopic icosahedron: Shouldn’t the activation be a free action or a reaction?
Diva’s microphone: First: is there any way to choose NOT to have your voice amplified? Second, isn’t 1 Bulk a bit heavy for something that is (I’m assuming) a headset microphone?
Pain journal: Wait, how is this a worn item?
Programmer’s plushie: Shouldn’t the tactical and advanced versions be levels 9 and 17, to keep up with when PCs should get item bonuses to skills?
Spell ampoules: Why is it one action to activate when you’re getting the benefits of a spell without needing to be a caster?

Medical Items
Hypopen: Shouldn’t the hypopen come with its own static counteract bonus instead of some ad hoc one?
Sprayflesh: I…honestly don’t like this item. I think it breaks the balance surrounding Treat Wounds.

Spells
Adhere: Why does this say it’s a basic Reflex save?
Akashic Revival: This seems kinda overpowered at first, since it basically gives an extra life, but the major downside is that you do NOT have any of your equipment, including your armor. I still think an extra life with a rank 8 spell is a bit overpowered, but I could see where the balance is.
Atomic Blast: So…here’s the problem. The extreme radiation, by RAW, is still DC 27.
Avatar: Lao Shu Po’s avatar form is a bit different from how it is in the Tian Xia World Guide. Specifically, the nightmare rat swarm should deal 3d6+2 piercing and 3d6+2 mental.
Carcinization: I don’t really see why this is an incapacitation spell if it only does some debuffs. If it were a weird “you turn into a crab” curse, THEN I’d understand.
Caustic Conversion: This is just straight-up acid arrow.
Cellular Stimulant: Why would you ever use this spell offensively?! And by that same coin, the rank 6 version of this spell is just a worse loose time’s arrow (a rank 2 spell).
Chrono Push: Time magic tends to be arcane/occult, so why is this spell only on the occult list?
Corrosive Haze: This spell does A LOT of damage! The closest equivalent I can find to this spell is flame vortex, which does an average of 18 damage, meanwhile THIS spell does 27 plus some persistent damage. AND I feel like this should be a three-action spell as well, since it creates a moveable AoE.
Death Sentence: This is just straight-up execute. Why even make this spell?
Delete: This spell gets really really weird with what your counteract bonus is, and I don’t think it needs to be that complicated.
Destruction Protocol: This spell is nigh useless, especially at higher levels. It has the same scaling as summon spells, which means that for a rank 10 version to work, you have to happen to be fighting a level 15 creature, which only makes sense WHEN YOU ARE LEVEL 19! The rules don’t recommend you fight stuff that’s APL – 5 because it’s too easy. I would recommend just getting rid of the level requirements for this spell and keeping it an incapacitation spell, because then it actually feels useful.
Doom Scroll: Remove the incapacitation trait; this spell is far from powerful enough to justify it. Also, if the caster stops Sustaining the spell, does the frightened and doomed conditions go away?
Dream of Home: I’d personally give this spell a bit more oomph, because fascinated on a failed save is REALLY meh.
Explosion of Rot: How long does the enfeebled condition last for? Also, I think Heightened (+2) is a bit harsh for this spell, but it would also take some reworking to make it something other than a weird fireball, so I dunno.
Flashfire: So do creatures who are INSIDE the fire ignore the concealment?
Glow Up: I think the clause about Gathering Information could cause a bit of weird disruption.
Gravity Field: It should specify that flying creatures descend 40 feet WHEN THE SPELL IS CAST.
Gravity Tether: So does the spell not deal double damage on a crit? Also, is it intended for the spell to cap out at two targets?
Howl: Solid spell. On the crit failure, I’d say “full persistent damage,” to minimize confusion as to whether or not the persistent damage doubles. I’d also give it some kind of heightening effect, like “Heightened (+2) Increase the sonic damage by 2d12 and the persistent damage by 1d10.”
Life Seal: So how do the higher-ranked versions work? Can you only target a creature if it triggered it? So you can only target 12 creatures at rank 10 if all twelve triggered it at the same time?
Light Scour: Does the heightening also increase the persistent damage? RAW it technically does.
Mind Skewer: Wait, is this spell meant to force a save or make an attack roll? And the scaling is really weird because a crit only does an extra 2d6 damage.
Promession: I feel like the spell should be reworded to just be “if it hits, it takes 6d10 sonic damage with a basic Fortitude save” to avoid the weird scaling of the spell.
Recharge Weapon: Does this spell automatically reload the made ammunition? If so, then this seems like a cheesy way to completely ignore stuff that takes more than one action to reload.
Rocket Dash: How long does the dazzled last for? Also, you said “creatures in the area,” when I think you meant “creatures whose space you move through.”
Root of all Pain: I feel like this spell would work just fine if you increased the range to, say, 20 feet.
Selective Invisibility: I feel like the rank of this spell should be a little bit higher to accommodate for the fact that it’s a more versatile invisibility.
Share Pain: Why not deal double damage on a critical failure?
Singularity Seed: I’d change this spell into a 50-foot emanation around the singularity, because the spell being a cylinder just…doesn’t make sense from a logical standpoint. This is basically akin to a fireball somehow exploding outward further in one specific direction than another; it just doesn’t make sense for this spell to NOT affect a spherical area.
Skim Data: I don’t like the last sentence of this spell, because it undermines how an entire subsystem works.
Soul Surge: This should be a divine/occult spell; the primal spell list shouldn’t be able to do spirit damage.
Subjective Reality: I kinda feel like this should be a two-action spell, just based off of its effects.
Vital Prism: How long does this effect last, and how does it work when you target someone else’s weapon?
Void Vessel: Wait, is this spell a range of touch or a range of 30 feet?
Void Whispers: This would likely have to be renamed to avoid confusion with the new whispers of the void spell in the remaster.
Wall of Steel: Why is this necessary when wall of metal exists?
Wave of Warning: So this is a better chain lightning? This spell’s “chain” doesn’t end if someone crit succeeds on their save.

Deities
Some of these deities grant four spells, which feels like it’s against the design philosophy for how most deities work.

Conditions
Untethered: “You are clumsy and off-guard” Clumsy what? Clumsy needs a value.

Hey all! It's been a while. I think the last time I posted on this side of the forums was when I was making my campaign log for Tyrant's Grasp.

Well, I have exciting news: after a long time of working on it, I have officially released my Remaster conversion guide for Tyrant's Grasp on Pathfinder Infinite!

I needed to wait until Monster Core dropped to do my last bit of conversion, but now things are golden!

I also want to give a shout-out to user rkotitan. While I did not actively reference any of the things that they personally made, they DID start working on a 2e conversion of Tyrant's Grasp A LOT sooner than I did.

Anyway, enough rambling. If you want to go for it, the conversion guide is now on Infinite!

That's it. That's the post. I just think needing to take Additional Ikon for another weapon ikon to dual-wield is a bit too restrictive. Especially since they made the perfect dual-wield feat in Twin Stars.

Alright, time for my regular massive post on an initial read-through of playtest classes.

The table for the exemplar uses “ability boost,” when it should be changed to “attribute boost” in the Remaster.

Okay, you can Shift Immanence as part of rolling initiative. I’m very okay with that.

I feel like Spark Transcendence could have been simplified into a trait. And the transcendences from the epithets have that trait??? I dunno, feels like it could have been more streamlined.

I feel like Humble Strikes should only apply to a weapon ikon, but that’s just me.

Okay, the implementation of epithets is really cool.

For Restless as the Tides, there should be a specification that the exemplar is immune to this splash damage (in case the weapon ikon is a melee weapon).

Reap the Field from the Peerless Under Heaven epithet creates a weird circumstance: what happens if either of the Strikes are crits?

So…Complete the Hero’s Journey creates a weird situation, because…as soon as the transcend ability is used, the ikon no longer grants the aura. And then it gets weird; since the spark is no longer in the worn ikon, does that mean that the immanence that increases the aura to 30 feet doesn’t apply? So how close does the target of Complete the Hero’s Journey need to be?

So...Spirit Walk makes it so that you and your party don't trigger reactions of haunts while in exploration mode. Haunts, like all hazards, need a reaction to roll initiative. So barring very weird exceptions, Spirit Walk just straight-up makes a party immune to haunts, because they will never trigger.

Similarly, does it constantly make Apparition Sense a precise sense? Or only in exploration mode? And what happens if the animist doesn't have Apparition Sense because they attuned to Imposter in Hidden Places? Do they just not get that?

Alright, time for my regular massive post on an initial read-through of playtest classes.

I was…a bit surprised to see the “animist” was more connected to spirits and such rather than the primal essence of Shoanti animism. Similarly, really surprised that the iconic isn’t a Shoanti practicing Shoanti animism—that was…just right there.

Wait, animists have a spell DC and a class DC? That’s a first. EDIT: Yeah, animists shouldn’t have that. It’s literally not used. Why is it listed with its other initial proficiencies?

Okay…the fact that you attune spirits during your daily preparations feels…a bit TOO versatile. I get that the main subclass seems to be the “Animistic Practice,” but the fact that stuff like an entire “spell list” and a focus spell is something that can be changed every day feels a bit too flexible. I think it would maybe make more sense if it was done like the shaman in 1e where your primary spirit was chosen at 1st level and couldn’t change.

Interesting that animists have only one focus spell at 1st level, but start with 2 Focus Points

Maybe in Apparition’s Possession, add “Sustain an apparition spell” to the list of actions that can be taken.

Wait, Third Apparition is a 4th-level class feature? And Fourth Apparition is a 12th-level one? I thought class features like that only really came into effect on odd-numbered levels? Because, y’know, class feats are at even-numbered levels.

The subtle trait??? That’s interesting.

Okay, Grasping Spirits Spell is so weird and I love it!

Channeled Protection is weirdly worded. It has the aura trait, but doesn’t explicitly list an aura. I’m sure it meant to say a “5-foot emanation,” but right now it’s not really an “aura.”

I feel like the void/vitality damage of Grudge Strike should scale. But also, +2 circumstance bonus to the attack roll, so it’s probably fine where it’s at.

Roaring Heart seems…a bit overpowered. Two actions to get four actions plus some temporary HP. Sure, the Shoves apply MAP, but that still seems like a lot.

So…Spirit Walk makes you literally immune to any haunt in exploration mode? The hazards need a reaction to roll initiative. This seems like an absolute must-have feat since it just straight-up trivializes an entire category of hazard. This REALLY needs to be nerfed. Also, is apparition sight only a precise sense in exploration mode? Or does that extend to encounter mode too? This feat is waaaaayyy too powerful.

Okay, mentioning “true name” in Banish Falsehoods of Flesh makes it have a weird overlap with the true name mechanic from Secrets of Magic. Does “true name” here mean the same as “true name” there? And if so, then why doesn’t this have the true name trait?

Okay…Eternal Guide creates a very interesting munchkin scenario of a character committing suicide so they can retrain all of their ancestry feats with only a week. I dunno, that feels kinda icky to me.

Darkened Forest Form just seems like a straight-up better wild shape since it’s only one action.

I feel like the Stride from river carving mountains should be given for free upon Sustaining the spell…

Shameless self-promotion, but if you're looking for a 2e conversion of Mummy's Mask, my conversion document is live on Pathfinder Infinite.

Shameless self-promotion.

If anyone's looking for a 2e conversion of this AP, I got one up on Infinite right now.

As always, I do a massive post regarding my first impressions for a class.

Overall, I like the idea, but some of the execution leaves much to be desired.

We now have stuff in the Guild Guide for disabled PCs. So, I love how things were done with PCs with disabilities for the most part, but I have concerns with one particular area: blind PCs. I am aware that what follows is a super nitpicky approach that heavily sticks to RAW, but it’s PFS; nitpicking RAW is what we do.

To start, the rules from the Guild Guide:

Characters that are blind from birth or are otherwise permanently sightless cannot detect anything using vision. They automatically critically fail any Perception checks based on vision, are immune to visual effects, and can’t be blinded or dazzled.

Blind characters who either can’t or choose not to remove their blindness hone their other senses. They are not flat-footed to creatures that are hidden from them (unless they’re flat-footed to them for reasons other than the hidden condition), and they need only a successful DC 5 flat check to target a hidden creature. Normally, such characters can’t remove their blindness later; if they somehow do, they lose these benefits.

Now, technically it never says the PC constantly has the blinded condition, but for the sake of argument and common sense, let’s say that a blind PC is “blinded.”

These benefits do offset some of the downsides, but not all of them. Blinded creatures:

•treat all terrain as difficult terrain.
•take a -4 status penalty to Perception if vision is their only precise sense. (Being accustomed to blindness doesn’t automatically grant true echolocation)
•still need to make a flat check against hidden creatures.*

*As far as I can tell, a hidden creature is just one that can’t be detected with any precise senses (unless I’ve VASTLY misunderstood those rules), meaning a blind character would still need to roll a flat check against a raging barbarian standing right in front of them.

The PFS rules for disabled characters address NONE of these hindrances. The only possible way that the rules would make sense as they currently stand is if it’s implied that being blind and having the blinded condition are two different things, in which case a) that needs to be very explicitly stated, and b) that is some absurd levels of nitpicking that implies that a blind PC can become more blind by gaining the blinded condition.

My overall point: Depending on table variation (which is not a good statement to start with in organized play) a PC born blind has significantly more trouble adventuring than any other kind of physical disability, which feels like the exact OPPOSITE of what the organized play team was going for, so I feel those rules need to be amended in the Guild Guide.

Ricochet Shot confuses me significantly. The wording seems to suggest that it applies to every attack once you take the feat, but the fact that it a) has the one-action symbol, and b) has the concentrate trait seems to imply that it’s supposed to be it’s own action that you have to go out of your way to do (and this can’t combine with other special actions, like Quick Draw. I’m just really confused about how this feat is intended to be used.

So, I had a player say something along the lines of "send magic missiles at X, if they die then any remaining missiles go to Y." And with the PF1 wording of the spell I nearly contradicted them, but I double-checked the 2e wording and it just says "you choose the target for each missile individually" and "If you shoot more than one missile at the same target, combine the damage before applying bonuses or penalties to damage, resistances, weaknesses, and so forth."

So...is that valid? Or am I forgetting about some wording somewhere that says that you must choose targets when you Cast a Spell (unless otherwise noted)?

SUPER random question: Is there any way of accessing shears in PFS besides being a cleric worshiper of the Followers of Fate?

Say a PC is going up against a devil. Would they be able to overcome the devil's physical resistance by casting telekinetic projectile and hurling a single silver piece with the spell?

The main issue comes from the sentence "No specific traits or magic properties of the hurled item affect the attack or the damage.” Now, it gets weird because it's a question of if the word "trait" is referring to the 2e-specific definition (i.e. forceful, deadly d8, etc.) or if it's using the general definition of "trait" (i.e. "a distinguishing quality or characteristic").

By a similar vein, how pure is a silver piece? Going by how calculating silver items work, a low-grade silver coin would be worth 20 gp (20 gp per bulk, minimum 1 bulk), but we fundamentally know that a silver piece is worth one-tenth of a gold piece. So...would the coin not be pure enough to be able to trigger the properties of the silver?

I get that by pure RAW you would be able to apply the material property, but from a RAI standpoint it seems kinda silly that an adventurer can get over any and all silver-related weaknesses/resistances due to almost always having a silver piece on hand.

Pretty simple question: If several casters perform the clone ritual, what would the ritual's tradition be? The ritual rules say that the primary skill check determines the tradition, but...uh...the primary check is Crafting in this case. And there's two "tradition skills" among the secondary checks, so we can't base it off of that. This is the one ritual that does not have Arcana, Occultism, Nature, or Religion as one of the primary skills, so it seems like a strange oversight.

Welcome to Hell’s Rebels, an Adventure Path centered around sticking it to “the man” and fighting for the rights of the people!

This is actually my second time running this AP, the first time being for my offline home group. Honestly, this quickly became one of my favorite Aps from Paizo and probably the only one that I would willingly run again (hence why I’m here).

Admittedly, the most prominent complaint about this AP that I’ve seen is that the players aren’t really telling their story, but rather the story that the AP wants them to tell—the PCs are more like cogs in a bigger machine rather than making their own proper mark on the world, if that makes any sense. I can see this being a turn-off for some people, but I’m personally okay with it, and having gone through this once already I know that even though the AP is telling Kintargo’s story (rather than the PCs’), the PCs still play a major part and still carry an air of importance in what they do.

With that out of the way, let me get to the official stuff:

First off, *Inhales!* For some of the NPCs there is sometimes no image given so I have to improvise using Google and my own lackluster editing skills. If there is a discrepancy between the image and what I write as a description then that is why. All credit to the original artists, etc. etc. etc.

I expect posts as frequently as possible, with a bare minimum of once per day (with some leeway on weekends; I personally do not look at my PbPs on Sundays).

I frequently use spoilers to keep things organized and not too crowded, so for future reference, any spoilers in any of my posts contain public information that can be viewed by everyone with three significant exceptions: Any spoiler labeled with a specific check along with the DC (i.e. "Perception 30"), any spoiler specifically directed toward a particular player, or any spoiler labeled "GM Screen." Additionally, I sometimes put spoilers inside of spoilers, but I have to get creative with the labels for spoilers inside of spoilers (you can't label it normally or else the coding breaks), so I put such labels in bold and ooc; if there isn't such a label directly above such a spoiler then don't open it unless prompted to do so. Example using PF1 skills in the example:

I do have a google document of my personal house rules/GM interpretations for certain things in 2e; I keep the link to it in the profile of my GM alias here, but I will also link to it right here. This document is mostly full of minor adjustments to keep the game internally consistent or to bring the RAW in line with the RAI. I periodically update this document when other weird stuff comes to my attention. Most of it has to do with some minor stuff in monster statblocks, but there are some changes to the wording of specific spells that I added in. Most of the document is written to the benefit of the players or to the benefit of internal consistency.

Finally, I believe that Pathfinder is a game of remembering, so if you forget an ability, a bonus, or anything of the like and don't correct yourself of said mistake soon thereafter and I as the GM don't call you out on it, then we continue onward; I'm not going to do a fleshed-out retcon to satisfy a single mistake and if you expect that of me, then I'll shrug and say "Sorry! Remember next time." Likewise, if I make a mistake and am not called out on it in time, then I will say "Welp, the players reap the rewards of my lack of remembering" and move on. There are exceptions to this, such as when a retcon would be simple ("Just heal X damage since you didn't take it because the attack missed.") or if PC death is on the line.

I’ll address campaign-specific stuff in later posts.

"I am Kintargo’s lord-mayor, yet Kintargo is not my city. Nor is it Cheliax’s city. Kintargo belongs to no one person, but to all who live here and make it the greatest city in Cheliax. We call it the Silver City not only for the gleaming waters of the Yolubilis, but for its purity. Kintargo is unique in the nation of Cheliax in this way. We are not the nation’s largest city, nor its strongest. We may not have Westcrown’s history, Ostenso’s naval superiority, Corentyn’s trade dominance, or Egorian’s power, but nor do we have Westcrown’s decay, Ostenso’s violence, Corentyn’s slaves, or Egorian’s damnations. Kintargo is our own, and as Cayden Cailean is my witness, I intend to do all that I can to ensure our silver shall never tarnish under Thrune’s touch!”

—Lord-Mayor Jilia Bainilus, two days before she vanished

This is kinda a rant more than anything else, but I don't like the new format for chronicle sheets in Year 2. Separating items by subtier was done away with, and starting with 2-05 much of the columns and boxes were done away with ("Starting XP," "Starting GP," "Earn Income," "Final GP," etc.), and now there's only "XP Gained" and "GP Gained." I can see why they had to make a new format, since they did away with Fame in favor of the AcP system, but it makes properly tracking XP and GP more difficult, in my opinion. Basically the only thing about this new format that I agree with is expanding the space for Reputation that was gained.

I'm not sure about everyone else, but I just really don't like how over-simplified the new format is. Like, I don't understand why they don't just make the Items section smaller horizontally and expand the Rewards section into a column in a way similar to how it was before.

But that's just me.

Most of this has been pre-written so that I can just copy-paste it from my GM profile and not have to write all of this out because I'm lazy. If some of the information below doesn't apply (wrong edition, wrong system, etc.) then that is why; just ignore it and move on.

First off, *Inhales!* For some of the NPCs there is sometimes no image given so I have to improvise using Google and my own lackluster editing skills. If there is a discrepancy between the image and what I write as a description then that is why. All credit to the original artists, etc. etc. etc.

Okay, important stuff:

Player Name:
Character Name:
Character Number:
Faction:
Day Job (roll now):
Slow Track?:
Notable Shenanigans:
Email (see below):

(Because this is technically for the Online Support Program I need people's emails in order to properly fill that out. Some are not comfortable with having their emails out in the open on the forums, so by all means feel free to PM me your email if that would make you feel more comfortable).

Once again, I expect posts as frequently as possible, but bare minimum of once per day (with some leeway for weekends; I personally do not look at my PbPs on Sundays).

I frequently use spoilers to keep things organized and not too crowded, so for future reference, any spoilers in any of my posts contain public information that can be viewed by everyone with three significant exceptions: Any spoiler labeled with a specific check along with the DC (i.e. "Perception 30"), any spoiler specifically directed toward a particular player, or any spoiler labeled "GM Screen." Additionally, I sometimes put spoilers inside of spoilers, but I have to get creative with the labels for spoilers inside of spoilers (you can't label it normally or else the coding breaks), so I put such labels in bold and ooc; if there isn't such a label directly above such a spoiler then don't open it unless prompted to do so. Example using PF1 skills in the example:

A few other miscellaneous things:

Mostly 1e specific, but kinda applies to 2e as well: I understand that I must run the scenario/module/whatever as written, but I consider a clear mathematical error in an enemy's stat block (i.e. an attack bonus of +25 when it's written as +23 or a Con-based DC being written as 15 when it's actually 19) to be a typo of the scenario/module/whatever and I subsequently change it to be mathematically correct, whether it's to the players' benefit or detriment; if you feel that's overstepping my bounds as a PFS GM, then by all means report me to a VC and I will happily make my case.

Finally, I believe that Pathfinder is a game of remembering, so if you forget an ability, a bonus, or anything of the like and don't correct yourself of said mistake soon thereafter and I as the GM don't call you out on it, then we continue onward; I'm not going to do a fleshed-out retcon to satisfy a single mistake and if you expect that of me, then I'll shrug and say "Sorry! Remember next time." Likewise, if I make a mistake and am not called out on it in time, then I will say "Welp, the players reap the rewards of my lack of remembering" and move on. There are exceptions to this, such as when a retcon would be simple ("Just heal X damage since you didn't take it because the attack missed.") or if PC death is on the line.

With all that said, good luck and happy adventuring!

So objects are immune to nonlethal attacks. Does that mean that when you Shield Block a nonlethal attack then the shield doesn't take any damage (obviously the wielder still would after subtracting the Hardness from the damage)?

Moving things over to this thread to keep things organized and clean on the forums. Below is any previously discussed things that is even minorly relevant to the topic at hand from the recent blogpost. There may have been other posts in between these ones that I am quoting, but they didn’t have relevance to the topic at hand so I didn’t include them.

Learning Spells - Some members of the community raised questions about how their cleric and druid characters could use the new spells from the Advanced Player’s Guide. We’re happy to provide a solution! Any prepared spellcaster can use the Learn a Spell activity to learn any common spells they have access to from tutors at the Grand Lodge. This adds no additional material cost beyond the standard cost for the Learn a Spell activity.

*

Wait, so to learn a non-Core common spell you still need to pay gold? I feel like I’m missing some of the nuance of that whole thing, but isn’t the common trait supposed to mean that it’s available to anyone? So a 1st level Occult witch could get summon instrument for free (because 10 free cantrips at level 1), but a cleric would have to pay 2 gp AND make a check to be able to prepare it?

*

My wizard is so happy with the ruling on spells for prepared casters!

*

KingTreyIII wrote:

Wait, so to learn a non-Core common spell you still need to pay gold? I feel like I’m missing some of the nuance of that whole thing, but isn’t the common trait supposed to mean that it’s available to anyone? So a 1st level Occult witch could get summon instrument for free (because 10 free cantrips at level 1), but a cleric would have to pay 2 gp AND make a check to be able to prepare it?

It's a subtle few words added to Clerics and Druids in the Core Rulebook. I missed it myself when I first started playing 2nd edition.

Divine Spellcasting wrote:

At 1st level, you can prepare two 1st-level spells and five cantrips each morning from the common spells on the divine spell list in this book (page 309) or from other divine spells to which you gain access.

Emphasis mine (and Druids have almost identical text in their class entry). Since Wizards and Witches have to pay gold to learn spells beyond what they start with, this still leaves Clerics and Druids better-off, since they automatically know all common spells from the CRB, but to get access to the ones in other books, they're now a bit closer to the rest of the prepared casters in the game, financially.

Also,

Learn a Spell wrote:

If you have a spellbook, Learning a Spell lets you add the spell to your spellbook; if you prepare spells from a list, it’s added to your list; if you have a spell repertoire, you can select it when you add or swap spells.

Emphasis mine. So you only have to do the activity once, and then the spell is permanently on your list! :)

*

Mike Bramnik wrote:

KingTreyIII wrote:

Wait, so to learn a non-Core common spell you still need to pay gold? I feel like I’m missing some of the nuance of that whole thing, but isn’t the common trait supposed to mean that it’s available to anyone? So a 1st level Occult witch could get summon instrument for free (because 10 free cantrips at level 1), but a cleric would have to pay 2 gp AND make a check to be able to prepare it?

It's a subtle few words added to Clerics and Druids in the Core Rulebook. I missed it myself when I first started playing 2nd edition.

Divine Spellcasting wrote:

At 1st level, you can prepare two 1st-level spells and five cantrips each morning from the common spells on the divine spell list in this book (page 309) or from other divine spells to which you gain access.

Emphasis mine. Since Wizards and Witches have to pay gold to learn spells beyond what they start with, this still leaves Clerics and Druids better-off, since they automatically know all common spells from the CRB, but to get access to the ones in other books, they're now a bit closer to the rest of the prepared casters in the game, financially.

I take a slightly different view. Bolded for emphasis. You'd have access to the spells in the APG because their rarity is Common. Nothing changes in this regard, though the sentence can certainly be read in a more restrictive way.

*

Josh Klingerman wrote:

Mike Bramnik wrote:

KingTreyIII wrote:

Wait, so to learn a non-Core common spell you still need to pay gold? I feel like I’m missing some of the nuance of that whole thing, but isn’t the common trait supposed to mean that it’s available to anyone? So a 1st level Occult witch could get summon instrument for free (because 10 free cantrips at level 1), but a cleric would have to pay 2 gp AND make a check to be able to prepare it?

It's a subtle few words added to Clerics and Druids in the Core Rulebook. I missed it myself when I first started playing 2nd edition.

Divine Spellcasting wrote:

At 1st level, you can prepare two 1st-level spells and five cantrips each morning from the common spells on the divine spell list in this book (page 309) or from other divine spells to which you gain access.

Emphasis mine. Since Wizards and Witches have to pay gold to learn spells beyond what they start with, this still leaves Clerics and Druids better-off, since they automatically know all common spells from the CRB, but to get access to the ones in other books, they're now a bit closer to the rest of the prepared casters in the game, financially.

I take a slightly different view. Bolded for emphasis. You'd have access to the spells in the APG because their rarity is Common. Nothing changes in this regard, though the sentence can certainly be read in a more restrictive way.

In that circumstance, what was the need of the clarification in the blog. If it's common, then you have access to it, but the Learn a Spell clarification seems to disagree with that.

EDIT: Okay, the clarification actually helps witches and wizards because they can get new spells for relatively cheap, but my whole thing still stand with regard to clerics/druids.

*

Any chance this change to learning spells can apply to Uncommon ones you accessed through Esoteric Spellcaster?

*

If the intent of the wording for Cleric/Druid spellcasting was that they only could prepare spells from the CRB without using Learn a Spell, this needs to be explicitly stated.

The word "access" has a specific rules meaning tied to it, so it's easy to read that sentence as referring specifically to the meaning of access everywhere else (that it's an available option for the campaign via rarity or otherwise).

It does appear that Learn a Spell uses it too - I can certainly see where your intent was on this... but it is not remotely clear without someone pointing it out and then poring over the rulebook to connect passages.

I strongly suggest errata for the CRB to use "learn from other sources" instead and explicit clarification in the blog. I would put money that north of 3/4 of players were reading that as Clerics not needing Learn a Spell, since we've had non CRB divine spells sanctioned for ages.

*

So if a cleric has to use Learn a Spell for common Divine (or whatever) spells that happen to appear in other books, does that mean a fighter has to take Weapon Proficiency if they want to use a common weapon from a new book? When a sorcerer gains new spells for increasing level, can they select a common spell from an alternate source even if it’s the same tradition as the cleric? If so, why is one class “punished” and the other not? Doesn’t make sense. Why would the access rules apply differently depending on your class?

*

Because clerics and druids can change spells every day. Fighters and sorcerers can't change their options at no cost.

*

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

Because clerics and druids can change spells every day. Fighters and sorcerers can't change their options at no cost.

It should be noted that Wizards have the same "or gain access to from other books" clause in the wording for their initial spellbook entries. It makes zero sense if they have to Learn a Spell during character creation.

Sorcerers have the same clause for their repertoire, as do Bards. Are they also required to Learn a Spell?

Oracles do NOT have that clause, do they not have to pay when Bards and Sorcerers do?

Edit: And for extra fun? Wizard Dedication does not have that clause. This interpretation would mean that RAW, a level 1 wizard cannot start play with APG cantrips, but that a Fighter who multiclasses Wizard can start with them for free.

*

Quote:

So if a cleric has to use Learn a Spell for common Divine (or whatever) spells that happen to appear in other books, does that mean a fighter has to take Weapon Proficiency if they want to use a common weapon from a new book? When a sorcerer gains new spells for increasing level, can they select a common spell from an alternate source even if it’s the same tradition as the cleric? If so, why is one class “punished” and the other not? Doesn’t make sense. Why would the access rules apply differently depending on your class?

The fighter still has to buy the weapon...

*

Dubious Scholar wrote:

It should be noted that Wizards have the same "or gain access to from other books" clause in the wording for their initial spellbook entries. It makes zero sense if they have to Learn a Spell during character creation.

But again, they have to spend a limited resource to have the spell available to prepare. Clerics and Druids do not.

*

TwilightKnight wrote:

So if a cleric has to use Learn a Spell for common Divine (or whatever) spells that happen to appear in other books, does that mean a fighter has to take Weapon Proficiency if they want to use a common weapon from a new book? When a sorcerer gains new spells for increasing level, can they select a common spell from an alternate source even if it’s the same tradition as the cleric? If so, why is one class “punished” and the other not? Doesn’t make sense. Why would the access rules apply differently depending on your class?

It goes further than this. The same text that would prevent druids and clerics from preparing APG spells also exists in Bards, Wizards, and Sorcerers.

This means that Wizards cannot take APG spells at creation, OR upon level up. The only way to add them is to Learn A Spell.

Similarly, Bards and Sorcerers CANNOT add any APG spells to their repertoires without first using Learn a Spell for those spells.

*

There's a bunch of related unanswered issues/questions to the spell learning...

1: How does this effect spontaneous casters?

2: APG casters do not have text limiting them to CRB spells

3: Wizard/sorcerer/bard dedications do not contain CRB limiting text while cleric/druid do.

4: Basic/expert/master multiclass archetype feats do not appear to contain the CRB limiting text either.

This really feels like an issue that needs some errata or at least clarification rather than a weird bit of PFS ruling that appears to be built on some other bit of rules we don't know about.

*

So wait, if my cleric wants to pick any spell from the APG I have to use the Learn A Spell activity?

*

Micheal Smith wrote:

So wait, if my cleric wants to pick any spell from the APG I have to use the Learn A Spell activity?

Under the current understanding of "access" to spells, all CRB classes must use Learn A Spell to be able to use APG spells at all, since they all have the same text as the clerics.

*

I'm also having some difficulty with this sudden new requirement to learn spells. We already have rarity/access rules, standard/limited/restricted rules, but now there's also a stealth difference between common spells from one book and common spells from other books?

Looking back at PF1, in the CRB it actually has similar language:

PF1 CRB p. 39 wrote:

Spells: A cleric casts divine spells which are drawn

from the cleric spell list presented in Chapter 10.

Sometimes someone would ask if that meant clerics could only cast spells from the CRB, to which the response would usually range from

- "that's because the CRB was the first book, they couldn't really point to other books"
- "it's not meant to be exclusive, it's just a helpful pointer to where in the book you can find them"
- "you're reading too much into that"
- "you're out of your mind"
- "playing by the rules doesn't mean trying to find the most out there RAW interpretation that results in an unplayable game"

*

The concept of a divine cast having to learn a spell is foreign to me. Divine spells are granted by a "higher" entity as a reward for praying to them. Why does the entity suddenly tell their followers the they have to go to a class to learn a spell?

Please reconsider this. It Flys in the face of decades of game play.

*

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

I'm also having some difficulty with this sudden new requirement to learn spells. We already have rarity/access rules, standard/limited/restricted rules, but now there's also a stealth difference between common spells from one book and common spells from other books?

Looking back at PF1, in the CRB it actually has similar language:

PF1 CRB p. 39 wrote:

Spells: A cleric casts divine spells which are drawn

from the cleric spell list presented in Chapter 10.

Sometimes someone would ask if that meant clerics could only cast spells from the CRB, to which the response would usually range from

- "that's because the CRB was the first book, they couldn't really point to other books"
- "it's not meant to be exclusive, it's just a helpful pointer to where in the book you can find them"
- "you're reading too much into that"
- "you're out of your mind"
- "playing by the rules doesn't mean trying to find the most out there RAW interpretation that results in an unplayable game"

I gotta second this, we already have 2 systems to restrict access to things, why do we need a third?

*

TL; DR:

From what I’ve gathered, it seems the crux of the matter is centered around the wording of “spell within this book [the Core], or any spell to which you gain access.” The Organized Play team’s decision was created with clerics and druids in mind, but the implication of the ruling (that one doesn’t inherently have access to non-Core common spells) affects all spellcasters since the vast majority of them have similar wording in their spellcasting class feature. So it begs the question: do you have “access” to non-Core common spells? Because if so, then that last bit (“or any spell to which you gain access”) would apply to those spells.

*

Also, just to add on to the already-mentioned stuff: Learning a Spell also includes a skill check (and an associated critical failure chance), so with the implication as it stands, a 1st level cleric of Shelyn could feasibly waste 2 gp (from a critical failure) trying to learn the common cantrip summon instrument.

EDIT: A quick look-through of AoN shows that the wording people are hung up over (“any common spell from this book [Core]”) is only present in the Wizard, Cleric, and Druid Spellcasting class features, all other spellcasting classes have different wording (more specifically “You choose these from the common spells from the [tradition] list”). Granted, I don’t own a PDF of the Core itself, so I can’t corroborate that AoN’s wording is also true for how it’s written in the Core itself.

I played this not too long ago and I am absolutely hooked on it and desperately want to run it!

This scenario is fairly combat-heavy, but also has a good number of investigative stuff going for it.

I expect players to post at least once per day (with some leeway on weekends), but I have been known to not adhere to this due to the occasional mental health stuff, but in an ideal world I’d get once per day. I’m a pretty fast-paced GM, so if you can’t handle that then please leave.

I am saving a spot for a friend of mine who is bringing a level 7 primal sorcerer. That said, I am very, VERY much hoping to aim for high tier just to see how those levels play out in PF2!

I’m very bad at writing recruitment posts, so let’s get on to it!

.

Can you spend a hero point after the GM has told you if you've failed a check? Or do you have to choose to spend it before the degree of success is determined?

So, heightening phantasmal killer seems to do absolutely nothing on a successful save. You cast a 10th-level phantasmal killer and on a successful save the target takes 4d6 mental damage.

Is that a mistake? I feel like that's a mistake.

I’m really intrigued with what Paizo did to both archons and azatas to make them feel more like epitomes of mortal manifestations, with the representation of virtues and freedoms to coincide with the daemons’ and demons’ representation of death and sin, respectively. This got me interesting in how to try and make 2e stats out of 1e creatures but to not lose out on that flavor part. I’m curious how the other azatas’ freedoms will be shown, but those could literally be anything (since freedom of love, athletic competition, and life to be reborn are some of the most widespreading things I’ve seen), which makes sense for a chaotic group. So to that end, I’m asking about archons.

I’m mostly trying to recreate exscinder archons in 2e, ‘cuz they’re cool, but it got me thinking more about the other archons’ virtues. I compiled a list below of the established types of archons and their (potentially) respective virtues. If you’ve got better thematic suggestions for the not-already-established virtues, then by all means go ahead and mention it (especially for the exscinder).

Ran into this interesting predicament a while back that I suddenly remembered for some reason:

In a PFS scenario, a bunch of jinkins try to swarm around a single PC for sneak attack. A player argued that they couldn’t flank since they were Tiny and thus had a reach of 0 feet (must be in the same square to attack), using this as a reference. I tried arguing that there wasn’t a “reach 0 ft” listed in their Strike, but for the sake of keeping things moving I chalked it up to the author not fully understanding the rules when writing tactics.

Kept digging and found that anything (excluding Tiny for a bit) explicitly states its reach if greater than 5 ft—this is most apparent with bone devils*, which have three separate melee Strikes with different reaches. So I’m like “Okay, so if no reach trait is given then it’s 5 ft, unless the creature’s Tiny, then it’s 0 ft. Weird flex, but alright.” But then the freaking demilich comes in with its jaws Strike explicitly having a reach of 0 ft that throws everything out the window!

So what am I to assume at this point? What’s the melee reach of a Tiny creature if it’s not given? If it’s 0 ft then why does a Jinkin have sneak attack if it can’t flank, and how are they going to present tooth fairies in that case, since they normally have a 5 ft reach with their pliers? If it’s 5 ft, then it brings up weirder implications for that size table and for things like bloodseekers. I’m just...I’m so confused.

*By the way, LOVE the new art for bone devils!

Not necessarily a rules question, more pointing something out and seeing if I have this correct (and leaving it for some random person looking for this specific thing in the forums). Using a lion as a convenient example, but the same could be said about anything that has Grab/Push/Pull plus some other unique action/activity.

So let’s say a lion Pounces and hits with its jaws at the end of the Pounce. By the laws of subordinate actions, the lion could not follow up the Pounce with a Grab since the previous action was not a Strike like Grab requires, but an action that included Strike as a part of it.

Do I have that right? I feel like I have that right.

Pseudo-revival/continuation of this thread because I like the concept, and it gave us the running gag of dinosaur fort.

I’ll just start off with a legitimate misreading when I was delving through the APG for the first time:

Chameleon Goat.

I've been looking around the forums and finding a general feel of "Daze is underpowered and never worth it," and I was sitting there thinking "Well...yeah...But it's not a bad cantrip..." That is, until one of my friends pointed this out:

Heightened (+2) The damage increases by 1d6.

Emphasis: mine. I NEVER noticed that! So the way it is written is that a 3rd-level cleric does exactly the same amount of damage with daze as a 1st-level wizard does with telekinetic projectile. Yeah, there's stunned 1 on a crit fail and it's one of relatively few spells that deals mental damage (especially so early on), but at the highest levels, you're comparing a (assuming level 20 and +7 spellcasting modifier) 4d6+7 daze (average 21) with a 10d4+7 (average 32) divine lance, and while the latter is heavily alignment-dependent, the weakness-triggering to stuff like Fiends counterbalance that dependency. And that's only for the divine list's "blasting" cantrips, when you're comparing it to the wizard's (or weird human cantrip shenanigans) 10d6+7 telekinetic projectile, the average is literally twice that of daze at 42! I know 2e is a game of both debuffing AND DpR, but that just seems like a drastic difference that doesn't seem justified from being stunned 1 on a crit fail that will only come up against the mooks that are better left to a single swing of the fighter's sword, or the fringe cases where the BBEG happens to roll a nat 1. So...is this a typo?

I'm mostly asking for someone on the Dev team to clarify, even if it's something as simple as "We're discussing it for the next set of errata and I can't give a definitive answer," because most of the complaints I've heard from fellow players playing divine casters is that the divine list doesn't have any decent blasting spells, which I understand is not what the divine list is for, but still.

Dispel magic no longer has the "dispel randomly" clause, so it makes dispelling a lot weirder, because it says that the target is "1 spell effect."

Say the enemy wizard has mirror image going and someone wants to try and dispel it without knowing what exactly the spell is (couldn't Recognize Spell, for instance), would they still be able to dispel it without knowing what it is?

Conversely, let's say that a spell is cast without an immediate obvious effect (to the opponent of the caster), like haste. Would one be able to target the spell effect with dispel magic without knowing exactly what it is or what it's doing? Or would they have to take the Recall Knowledge action to identify it prior, despite knowing that the enemy wizard definitely cast a spell on himself that does something?

Alright, I figured I should start prepping this stuff (since I tend to prep APs a year in advance).

Anyways, hey PF Hivemind! I’m planning on introducing 2e to my home group, so I thought I would convert the Ruins of Azlant AP to 2e, because it seems like a pretty decent one to introduce to players relatively new to the system.

I’m going to use this thread as a document for all of my conversions so that it’s all somewhere accessible and I don’t have my PDFs completely full of notes (and as a backup in case the notes in my phone become FUBAR for some reason). Now, there are a few universal things with this AP specifically that I had to change to make it work with the story. Most significantly:

Because clear spindle aeon stones don’t provide protection against the alghollthus’ mental stuff in 2e, I had to change the name of the main background organization (Spindle Solution) into something that made more sense story-wise. The aeon stone that gave the benefit against mental effects in 2e (and that actually makes sense with the region) is the black pearl aeon stone, so to accommodate for this, the Spindle Solution in my game has been renamed to the Pearl Prerogative (kudos to Adam Daigle for giving me that name randomly in the chat of one of Paizo’s Twitch streams).

From there, it’ll be a lot of figuring things out on a case-by-case basis. I’m hoping to start this AP after the APG comes out so that my players will have more options at their disposal.

Nevertheless, I’m still in school amid this COVID stuff, so stress and business is at a high. Because of that, my posts in this thread will very much be inconsistent and “when I get around to it.” Anyway, I hope that this helps some people out, and I hope that some people will give me assistance when I hit a roadbump.

Happy gaming, all!

I know this is likely just me being pedantic with the release of the GMG, but I found something super contradictory with previously established lore:

Created and sustained by the collective dreams of sleeping mortals, the Dreamlands (also called the Dimension of Dreams)...

Compare that with what's previously been said about the dimension (most explicitly in Planar Adventures [pg. 213]) where it states that the Dreamlands is a stable section of the Dimension of Dreams that arose from the dreamscapes of primordial dreamers.

So which is it?

So something really big that a gaming buddy of mine brought up was that the way 2e is set up is that it heavily enforces the need for a party to have a cleric that is the healer. Basically nothing else in the game matches the power of the heal spell, and clerics of specific deities getting it additional spell slots for free means that they’re just…better at it. Like, the difference between a cleric and a divine sorcerer is vast, because a sorcerer has to use one of their three spell slots to heal someone, while the cleric doesn’t even need to tap into them.

This kind of reinforcement for healing makes it very obvious that in order for a party to survive, they need a cleric with a healing font. How is a party supposed to keep up with the encounters without one? An evil campaign (which can be lots of fun) is basically screwed in 2e unless someone wants to be a cleric of Lamashtu (or of a morally neutral deity), and a group of players where no one wants to be “the healer” (which is quite a few of them) is completely screwed over.

I honestly want an answer to this question, because while yes, you can just burn through consumables or Treat Wounds, that doesn’t help against a boss fight where the opponent is dishing out a ton of damage every round and PCs are dropping like flies (depending on the rolls). I understand enforcing that certain classes have certain roles, and that the design team was trying to emphasize playing that role for each class, but the party roles are still very fluid—your frontliner could be a rogue, or your trapfinder/skill-monkey could be the alchemist (like how the Merisiel and Fumbus pregens are built), but in emphasizing this role of “the healer,” 2e has essentially required having a cleric in the party who has to cast a 2-action heal basically every other round (depending on the combat) or else every boss fight will end in a near TPK, which just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

So my current home group is in the final stretch of our Hell’s Rebels campaign, and since I saw Tyrant’s Grasp during the 2018 PaizoCon banquet I immediately decided that that was what I would run after Hell’s Rebels. So, I’m choosing to do a campaign log—both for documentation and to get some assistance from the Pathfinder hivemind while I run it. Haven’t done one of these before, but we’ll give it a shot.

Our current setup is that we all meet once per week at the apartment of one of the players, who hooks up one of his laptops to this TV so that the Roll20 maps are up on a big screen while the players lounge on the couch while I sit at a small table to the side with my laptop.

One of my players, due to work situations, moved to Finland, so he wakes up at 4:00 am (Finland time) and Skypes in while using Roll20 on his end. This started to affect his health, so the group compromised that we would move our weekly sessions from Thursdays from 7 to 11 pm (not-Finland time) to Saturdays from 12 to 4 pm (not-Finland time), so that our Finnish player isn’t playing at the buttcrack of dawn.

Unfortunately, I’m also going to be moving away for college this coming semester, so I’ve got two options: tank the gas price of making a weekly ~182 mile (round trip) drive through a canyon, or accept that the GM has to Skype in as well. Let’s just say that my car doesn’t get the best mileage (~24 miles per gallon, so not bad, but not great), so I’ll be Skyping in, which will be interesting.

Anyway, enough about the real-world stuff (and probably a bit too much personal information); let’s talk about the gaming stuff.

I have long come to find that Paizo’s APs can be lacking in many cases and fail to challenge players who have even a moderate mastery of the game, and my group tend towards power-gaming (not munchkin levels of shenanigans, but enough that they curbstomp most as-written AP encounters at the higher levels). Because of this (and apparently because I hate myself), I go through every encounter in an AP and re-optimize it to be able to keep up with how my players play without taking away from the flavor of the encounter. My players have expressed that they like that I do this, so I’m not just working them to the bone because I’m mean. However, for this AP I had to tone it down in quite a few instances because of just how brutal the AP can be.

The following is the character creation guidelines I gave my players (verbatim from the Facebook post I made in our private Facebook group):

I haven’t gotten much in the way of character sheets, etc., but I do have the basic gist. I’ll be referring to my players as simply A, B, C, and D.

I’m expecting us to start the campaign on February 29th, and the Wednesday before I’ll try to run Reaver’s Roar for my weekly PFS group (which B and C are a part of) as a segue to the campaign.

I think that’s everything for now, but if folks with Syrinscape could help me figure out appropriate sound combinations for the various parts of this AP I’d be much appreciative.

As a grammar nut, I’m always annoyed when I come across a certain phrase with respect to stuff in Golarion and I’m unsure of how to phrase it without taking some grammatical acrobatics (most often when I try to say “worshiper of Achaekek” I have to say “worshiper of Achaekek”). I decided to make this comprehensive list of adjectival forms of many things in Golarion—most notably gods and nations (both old and new)—both to help with the nomenclature as well as to open the thread up to possibly get responses from the creative team for answers on certain adjectival forms that have mostly gone unsaid. I’m going to start with the nations of the Inner Sea, then to the Core deities, then to the other notable deities listed in Lost Omens Gods and Magic. Hope this helps some random GM looking for the specific word.

This is of course not a complete list, so I’m hoping for help from the Pathfinder hivemind to fill in a lot of the holes in my knowledge. Anything with a question mark is that I either don’t know or am not confident in it.

So this came up during a game of mine: a roguish person critically failed a check to Pick a Lock and breaks his tools. I, as the GM, said that they needed to get replacement picks to continue Picking the Lock (that was the impression that the item entry gave). The player responded that they could just get the PC with a high Crafting bonus to Repair the tools because the critical failure entry says that.

So if you can just give your thieves’ tools to the wizard to Repair for no cost, then what’s even the point of having replacement picks in the first place?

Okay, so example:

A group of PCs find themselves in the middle of an area completely filled with difficult terrain due to poor life choices. There's a door labeled "Exit from Difficult Terrain" on one end of the room. They're in encounter mode because...I don't know, they're fighting something as well, I don't know. Anyway, one of the PCs decides to go straight for the exit and Strides three times for his turn. Here's the question: How many feet closer do they make it to the door?

I ask this because it's really deceptive. For every square you want to move it takes 10 feet of your Speed. So for your first Stride you move forward two squares (20 feet of movement) then (assuming a Speed of 25) stop because you don't have another 10 feet of movement. You then Stride again, doing the exact same thing, meaning you've moved only 20 feet rather than the 25 that you would expect.

I don't know about you guys, but I find this very awkward because it would mean that a dwarf in difficult terrain and a human in difficult terrain move at the exact same speed. I feel like there should be a caveat about Striding in succession allowing you to move 50 feet once rather than "25" feet twice.

So, I was looking over some feats and found a weird inconsistency with Unmistakable Lore when compared to other feats; more specifically singular skill feats that could apply to a number of other skills:

All of these feats require a certain proficiency prerequisite (Trained, expert, etc.) and gives a benefit to the skills in which you are that proficiency (Quick Recognition only works for the skill you’re master in, etc.). Unmistakable Lore is a noticeable exception: it requires you to be expert in a Lore skill, but gives a benefit to all Lores that you’re trained in, rather than all Lores that you’re expert in. (Another exception being Trick Magic Item, but that’s its own thing.) Meaning that by 2nd level, a character can never critically fail on ANY Lore skill that they are at least trained in.

Now, why am I making a big ruckus out of this? A single Lore is a really narrow area of knowledge, so never critically failing seems decent, but not overpowered. To that, I have two words: Bardic Lore.

The major downside of Bardic Lore is that it quickly falls behind in bonuses compared to other skills, but you still have a decent enough chance of making a Recall Knowledge on something obscure that the party might not have, but you also risk the chance of misremembering (a critical failure). But with how Unmistakable Lore is written, by 3rd level a bard is able to never misremember anything about literally anything—couple that with Dubious Knowledge and that means that they can always remember something about anything. I don’t know about you, but that sounds like serious overkill for only being 3rd level—I’d believe something like that for a legendary-level character, but not for a 3rd level character.

I feel like Unmistakable Lore was supposed to only give its benefit to Lores in which you are at least expert in, but ended up being a weird typo. This may just be me fishing for an FAQ or future errata, but whatever.

All of this has been pre-written so that I can just copy-paste it from my GM profile and not have to write all of this out because I'm lazy. If some of the information below doesn't apply (wrong edition, wrong system, etc.) then that is why; just ignore it and move on.

First off, *Inhales!* For some of the NPCs there is sometimes no image given so I have to improvise using Google and my own lackluster editing skills. If there is a discrepancy between the image and what I write as a description then that is why. All credit to the original artists, etc. etc. etc.

Okay, important stuff:

Player Name:
Character Name:
Character Number:
Faction:
Day Job:
Slow Track?:
Notable Shenanigans:
Email (see below):
Continuity Check (see following post):

(Because this is technically for the Online Support Program I need people's emails in order to properly fill that out. Some are not comfortable with having their emails out in the open on the forums, so by all means feel free to PM me your email if that would make you feel more comfortable).

Once again, I expect posts as frequently as possible, but bare minimum of once per day (with some leeway for weekends).

I frequently use spoilers to keep things organized and not too crowded, so for future reference, any spoilers in any of my posts contain public information that can be viewed by everyone with three significant exceptions: Any spoiler labeled with a specific check along with the DC (i.e. "Perception 30"), any spoiler specifically directed toward a particular player, or any spoiler labeled "GM Screen." Additionally, I sometimes put spoilers inside of spoilers, but I have to get creative with the labels for spoilers inside of spoilers (you can't label it normally or else the coding breaks), so I put such labels in bold and ooc; if there isn't such a label directly above such a spoiler then don't open it unless prompted to do so. Example using PF1 skills in the example:

I understand that I must run the scenario/module/whatever as written, but I consider a clear mathematical error in an enemy's stat block (i.e. an attack bonus of +25 when it's written as +23 or a Con-based DC being written as 15 when it's actually 19) to be a typo of the scenario/module/whatever and I subsequently change it to be mathematically correct, whether it's to the players' benefit or detriment; if you feel that's overstepping my bounds as a PFS GM, then by all means report me to a VC and I will happily make my case.

Finally, I believe that Pathfinder is a game of remembering, so if you forget an ability, a bonus, or anything of the like and don't correct yourself of said mistake soon thereafter and I as the GM don't call you out on it, then we continue onward; I'm not going to do a fleshed-out retcon to satisfy a single mistake and if you expect that of me, then I'll shrug and say "Sorry! Remember next time." Likewise, if I make a mistake and am not called out on it in time, then I will say "Welp, the players reap the rewards of my lack of remembering" and move on. There are exceptions to this, such as when a retcon would be simple ("Just heal X damage since you didn't take it because the attack missed.") or if PC death is on the line.

With all that said, good luck and happy adventuring!

All of this has been pre-written so that I can just copy-paste it from my GM profile and not have to write all of this out because I'm lazy. If some of the information below doesn't apply (wrong edition, wrong system, etc.) then that is why; just ignore it and move on.

First off, *Inhales!* For some of the NPCs there is sometimes no image given so I have to improvise using Google and my own lackluster editing skills. If there is a discrepancy between the image and what I write as a description then that is why. All credit to the original artists, etc. etc. etc.

Okay, important stuff:

Player Name:
Character Name:
Character Number:
Faction:
Day Job:
Slow Track?:
Notable Shenanigans:
Email (see below):
Continuity Check (see following post):

(Because this is technically for the Online Support Program I need people's emails in order to properly fill that out. Some are not comfortable with having their emails out in the open on the forums, so by all means feel free to PM me your email if that would make you feel more comfortable).

Once again, I expect posts as frequently as possible, but bare minimum of once per day (with some leeway for weekends).

I frequently use spoilers to keep things organized and not too crowded, so for future reference, any spoilers in any of my posts contain public information that can be viewed by everyone with three significant exceptions: Any spoiler labeled with a specific check along with the DC (i.e. "Perception 30"), any spoiler specifically directed toward a particular player, or any spoiler labeled "GM Screen." Additionally, I sometimes put spoilers inside of spoilers, but I have to get creative with the labels for spoilers inside of spoilers (you can't label it normally or else the coding breaks), so I put such labels in bold and ooc; if there isn't such a label directly above such a spoiler then don't open it unless prompted to do so. Example using PF1 skills in the example:

I understand that I must run the scenario/module/whatever as written, but I consider a clear mathematical error in an enemy's stat block (i.e. an attack bonus of +25 when it's written as +23 or a Con-based DC being written as 15 when it's actually 19) to be a typo of the scenario/module/whatever and I subsequently change it to be mathematically correct, whether it's to the players' benefit or detriment; if you feel that's overstepping my bounds as a PFS GM, then by all means report me to a VC and I will happily make my case.

Finally, I believe that Pathfinder is a game of remembering, so if you forget an ability, a bonus, or anything of the like and don't correct yourself of said mistake soon thereafter and I as the GM don't call you out on it, then we continue onward; I'm not going to do a fleshed-out retcon to satisfy a single mistake and if you expect that of me, then I'll shrug and say "Sorry! Remember next time." Likewise, if I make a mistake and am not called out on it in time, then I will say "Welp, the players reap the rewards of my lack of remembering" and move on. There are exceptions to this, such as when a retcon would be simple ("Just heal X damage since you didn't take it because the attack missed.") or if PC death is on the line.

With all that said, good luck and happy adventuring!