Search Posts
creatures provide soft cover, which does not prevent attacks of opportunity. this used to be worded more concretely in the rules, but it looks like the wording may have been updated in a more recent printing of the CRB. however, even the current wording points out that soft cover only applies against ranged attacks (emphasis mine): Soft Cover: Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC. However, such soft cover provides no bonus on Reflex saves, nor does soft cover allow you to make a Stealth check.
Gaming Hoopla is coming up at the end of this month, September 26-28, in Janesville, WI. In addition to the first five scenarios from Season Six, we'll also be offering the first three levels of the Emerald Spire superdungeon, the most recent Free RPG Day module, Risen From the Sands, and the multi-table special from Season Two, Year of the Shadow Lodge. It's very important that we have enough players to fill the four tables for the Special, so if you're in the area and haven't had a chance to play in that one yet, this is your chance! As always, there will be raffles for Pathfinder products, convention boons, and more, including the great raffles and tons of other games that the Hoopla offers. So head on over to their site to register, and come on out, roll some dice, and have some fun!
Indeed, only the first six or so. So for the first couple months his statement is true.I dislike the feat because if I want top particpate ina good chunk of the skills for season 6 I have to buy that book.I suppose it's a good thing, then, that the majority of Season Six scenarios won't involve technology heavily or at all and you won't need to worry about it. the first three. john did say that there would be three or four more scenarios throughout the season that would feature tech. he didn't make any statement or even implication that they would be the next three or four scenarios. i would be highly surprised if that turned out to be the case.
The first text you quoted is in regards to retiring factions. There are no retiring factions in Season Six, so that text does not in any way apply. Below is a point by point list of how the Season Six faction change works, to the best of my understanding of the wording in the updated Guide. I posted this in another thread, but I will repost it here, for reference. - No factions are being retired during Season Six. While there are changes to many, and a merger of two of them, none are actually being retired. This is not a matter of semantics, as faction retirement in the campaign is a very specific thing, and none of those things pertain to any of the affected factions. Thus, none of the information about faction retirement included in the Guide to Organized Play pertains in any way to the Season Six faction changes. - All characters receive one free faction change that they can utilize at any point during Season Six (from 08/14/14 until the day before the beginning of next year's GenCon). If you are happy with your faction, you are not required to utilize the free change. If you want to change your faction more than once during Season Six, you will need to follow the rules outlined in the Guide to Organized Play for doing so. - If you are in one of the factions affected by the Season Six changes, you are automatically considered to be a member of the new version of that faction, until and unless you use the available free faction change. For reference, the affected factions and their new version are: Andoran changes to Liberty's Edge
- Any faction traits that your character possesses remain unaffected by the new directions of the old factions or by changing your faction entirely. If you are able to choose additional traits and do not already have a faction trait, you can only choose faction traits from the updated list included in Version 6 of the Guide to Organized Play. - Any generic Prestige Awards or Vanities that you have previously purchased are not affected by the new factions or by changing your faction. - Any faction-specific Prestige Awards or Vanities that you have previously purchased are retained as long as you remain in the new version of the faction. For example, if you had purchased the Trade Prince/ss Vanity available to the Qadira faction, you may retain the use of that Vanity for as long as you remain a member of The Exchange. If you change to a different faction, you lose access to all previously purchased faction-specific Prestige Awards and Vanities, and do not receive any recompense for their cost. - When playing Season Five scenarios, you qualify to receive faction-specific boons (providing you complete the faction mission) for the equivalent of your current faction. Dark Archive characters can earn Cheliax boons, Exchange characters can earn Qadira boons, etc. The only exception to this are Sczarni faction boons, which are not currently available to be earned, unless you possess a boon that specifically allows you to do so. (Incidentally, there may be a boon that allows you to qualify for Sczarni faction boons for Season Five scenarios. ) For GMs who choose to include faction missions for scenarios from Seasons Zero through Four, the equivalencies stay the same for the updated factions, and still work out as laid out in previous seasons, adjusted for the updated factions (Dark Archive = Cheliax, Exchange = Qadira, Grand Lodge = Osirion or Grand Lodge, Liberty's Edge = Andoran, Scarab Sages = Osirion, Silver Crusade = Andoran or Silver Crusade, Sovereign Court = Taldor). - Any faction boons previously earned from Season Five scenarios are retained, unless they would fall under the category of Prestige Awards or Vanities, as noted above.
Please let's not go into hyperbole by using the word "punish." you are not being punished by not being given an advantage that other characters switching factions have never had. And, actually, yes, the Sczarni did have some very strong national/regional ties to Varisia. While it may not have been as strong as the original 5, they were still there. Also, the Sczarni faction has been getting rather low reporting numbers, so they have been "falling behind" in the faction race, as it were. Instead of just outright retiring the faction, they've folded it into a new faction and given it the opportunity to redeem itself, numbers-wise. So, if anything, you're being rewarded. If you want to see The Exchange become a more Sczarni-like operation, then stay in The Exchange and make sure that you take the opportunities (that John has mentioned will be there) to steer The Exchange in a more Sczarni-like direction.
Clearly the big question is whether the nation-based factions are considered 'retired' or not. While I was initially thinking they would (with "The Paths We Choose" being their retirement scenario), I'm convinced they won't. You are correct. Retirement of a faction is a very specific thing in the campaign, and this is not it.
The faction rewards from Season Five are boons, not Prestige Awards. Prestige Awards are things that are specific to your faction that you receive for spending Prestige (that you theoretically earned while working for that faction). Unless the boon in question is worded such that it is a vanity or a Prestige Award (which I do not believe any of the Season Five faction boons are, though I may be mistaken on that), then you still retain access to those boons. The Year of the Risen Rune boon would also fall under the same blanket.
- Any faction-specific Prestige Awards or Vanities that you have previously purchased are retained as long as you remain in the new version of the faction. For example, if you had purchased the Trade Prince/ss Vanity available to the Qadira faction, you may retain the use of that Vanity for as long as you remain a member of The Exchange. If you change to a different faction, you lose access to all previously purchased faction-specific Prestige Awards and Vanities, and do not receive any recompense for their cost. That has always been the case for changing factions, as far as I am aware. Even in Season, say 3, if you changed from Qadira to Cheliax you lost access to those vanities.
Sorry, Brian, that isn't quite accurate. Per the wording in the Guide, the free faction change can be taken at any point during Season Six. It does not have to be taken the first time a character is played during Season Six. If a character is a member of one of the factions affected by the changes, they remain in the updated version of that faction until and unless they decide to use the free faction change.
Here is a run-down of my understanding of how the faction change for Season Six works. Apologies that it doesn't answer the questions the OP asked on a point by point basis. I put this together for my local players to reference. - No factions are being retired during Season Six. While there are changes to many, and a merger of two of them, none are actually being retired. This is not a matter of semantics, as faction retirement in the campaign is a very specific thing, and none of those things pertain to any of the affected factions. Thus, none of the information about faction retirement included in the Guide to Organized Play pertains in any way to the Season Six faction changes. - All characters receive one free faction change that they can utilize at any point during Season Six (from 08/14/14 until the day before the beginning of next year's GenCon). If you are happy with your faction, you are not required to utilize the free change. If you want to change your faction more than once during Season Six, you will need to follow the rules outlined in the Guide to Organized Play for doing so. - If you are in one of the factions affected by the Season Six changes, you are automatically considered to be a member of the new version of that faction, until and unless you use the available free faction change. For reference, the affected factions and their new version are: Andoran changes to Liberty's Edge
- Any faction traits that your character possesses remain unaffected by the new directions of the old factions or by changing your faction entirely. If you are able to choose additional traits and do not already have a faction trait, you can only choose faction traits from the updated list included in Version 6 of the Guide to Organized Play. - Any generic Prestige Awards or Vanities that you have previously purchased are not affected by the new factions or by changing your faction. - Any faction-specific Prestige Awards or Vanities that you have previously purchased are retained as long as you remain in the new version of the faction. For example, if you had purchased the Trade Prince/ss Vanity available to the Qadira faction, you may retain the use of that Vanity for as long as you remain a member of The Exchange. If you change to a different faction, you lose access to all previously purchased faction-specific Prestige Awards and Vanities, and do not receive any recompense for their cost. - When playing Season Five scenarios, you qualify to receive faction-specific boons (providing you complete the faction mission) for the equivalent of your current faction. Dark Archive characters can earn Cheliax boons, Exchange characters can earn Qadira boons, etc. The only exception to this are Sczarni faction boons, which are not currently available to be earned, unless you possess a boon that specifically allows you to do so. (Incidentally, there may be a boon that allows you to qualify for Sczarni faction boons for Season Five scenarios. ) For GMs who choose to include faction missions for scenarios from Seasons Zero through Four, the equivalencies stay the same for the updated factions, and still work out as laid out in previous seasons, adjusted for the updated factions (Dark Archive = Cheliax, Exchange = Qadira, Grand Lodge = Osirion or Grand Lodge, Liberty's Edge = Andoran, Scarab Sages = Osirion, Silver Crusade = Andoran or Silver Crusade, Sovereign Court = Taldor). - Any faction boons previously earned from Season Five scenarios are retained, unless they would fall under the category of Prestige Awards or Vanities, as noted above.
What was there other than the FAQ about early entry? Because the Blood of Angels and Blood of Fiends books were released at and before GenCon 2012, respectively.Two years of them being allowed openly. And, yes, it can take that long to really see how they affect the campaign, especially with the additional rules elements that have been added since they were allowed into the campaign openly. All in all, it's a very timely solution given that the many of the issues that have really made them more and more unbalanced have occurred in the last year or so.Its simple. Aasimar and Tieflings are overpowered compared to other races . That is the reason they are being booted. Why not just say, we made a mistake and shouldn't had released them for general play.Generally I'd say that a mistake doesn't take 3 years to fix. But then I remember how long it took for Ultimate Combat to get errata... the FAQ ruling was a big part that added even more imbalance. also options from Advanced Race Guide that took some time to show up as unbalancing. regardless, two seasons is certainly a reasonable amount of time to realize the problems created by adding access to a rules element in a campaign of this time. [edit] and act on it.
Its simple. Aasimar and Tieflings are overpowered compared to other races . That is the reason they are being booted. Why not just say, we made a mistake and shouldn't had released them for general play.Generally I'd say that a mistake doesn't take 3 years to fix. But then I remember how long it took for Ultimate Combat to get errata... Two years of them being allowed openly. And, yes, it can take that long to really see how they affect the campaign, especially with the additional rules elements that have been added since they were allowed into the campaign openly. All in all, it's a very timely solution given that the many of the issues that have really made them more and more unbalanced have occurred in the last year or so.
interesting. so, how did this character come to petition the Pathfinder Society for three years of training and a chance at becoming an agent? not baiting, btw, actually interested, as it doesn't seem that the tenets of "explore, report, cooperate" would appeal too terribly much to the character.
Technically, running levels of Emerald Spire before they are "sanctioned" doesn't count as playing them though, does it? (i.e. players won't lose their chance to play for credit, if that's what they really want out of Emerald Spire)Well, here we are. I will be running Emerald Spire, levels 1 and 2, at a convention tomorrow. Are there Chronicle sheets, or should I tell the players that I hope they had a good time?Tell the players that you hope they had a good time. If they play it without getting a chronicle sheet because one isn't available, then they could still play it for credit after the chronicle is available. The same applies to APs that were played before they were ever sanctioned.
It sounds like you are referring to the jackal or the asp in this case, which do not have any stats for being an animal companion or familiar. The only one of the animals that has any use is the ostrich, which has statistics to use one as an animal companion. The AR is just a bit confusingly worded with the inclusion of 54-55. there isn't a purchase price for the jackal or the asp, so there isn't really an option to purchase one, even as a pet.
it's just for the weapons blessed if the PCs take that action in that encounter. it's essentially a three step "if (not)/then" statement dependent on what weapon a PC is wielding.
It sounds like you are referring to the jackal or the asp in this case, which do not have any stats for being an animal companion or familiar. The only one of the animals that has any use is the ostrich, which has statistics to use one as an animal companion. The AR is just a bit confusingly worded with the inclusion of 54-55.
My guess is that if the PCs really agree to put on the manacles, be disarmed (I don't have the scenario in front of me, but I think that was part of the request as well), and be taken to the demon king of Jormurdun as requested by the lesser demon, then their fate is pretty clear. At least they probably won't need to pay the PP for a recovery team to get their bodies back. I'd certainly ask them a number of times if that's really what they wanted to do.
If you have a knack for noting details, you'll notice that there isn't any art in 5-23 aside from the maps. If I had to guess, they are going tweak all of them and you should see some differences between the "beta" copies that were released last Friday, and the final releases on the 4th. Really, guys. Nowhere has there been any indication that the last batch of Season Five scenarios were undergoing any additional development and are getting an updated release, so I wouldn't plan on seeing any updated versions of 5-22 to 5-25.
I think the first line of the Realistic Likeness feat answers your question, whether it's considered "flavor" text or not. Humans only. If that's not enough, the feat specifically mentions when you are using your racial ability, which states that you can only take on a human form. There shouldn't be any table variation on this, unless the GM is not familiar with the racial ability or the feat. The abilities are cut and dry.
This may or may not have been the reason for all of the mysterious elephant tracks throughout the temperate Vesve Forest in the Living Greyhawk campaign. I can neither confirm nor deny that fact nor my participation or lack thereof in such shenanigans.
Please note that I have very carefully not stated my personal opinion on the way trample is intended to work, as I do see equal validity in the various interpretations on how it could be intended. I don't have a horse in this race one way or the other, except to see it clarified. Thanks, though. :)
I know that John has said that is indeed the case for 6-00 Legacy of the Stonelords for PaizoCon, but to my knowledge, such a situation does not exist for the last four scenarios of Season Five. There may have been a post from John or Mike to the contrary that I haven't run across, but barring a specific citation from Mike or John, I wouldn't expect to see any edits in the last four scenarios when they are released. I started reading 5-23, but then realized that I may be playing it at a convention next weekend, and I stopped before I got very far in, so I don't have any advice for the OP.
Actual time may vary depending on any number of factors, including but not limited to the specific scenario (some of them do tend to run longer than others, and earlier season scenarios, in general, tend toward being a bit shorter), how well your party handles the mechanical encounters, how well you as players stay on target and move things along. While there is no "usual," the hope for most cons that schedule back to back slots is that you have about half an hour between the end of one scenario and the beginning of the next.
Welcome to the monkeyhouse. :) Thanks for clicking the FAQ link, also.
I should also point out here, that the issue at hand was always the amount of movement a trampling creature can take. The whole charge + trample concept arose, I believe, because of the mention of charging in the overrun section, and the particular setup of the encounter in the module (straight corridor, no obstacles, no creatures other than the PCs). Because of the particulars and that the debate was couched largely in the context of that particular encounter, I don't think that a lot of the larger implications came immediately to mind. That being said, while I think it is the least likely of the options, I can still see the possible intent being that a trampling creature can do what might be thought of as a charging trample, essentially giving it double movement in a straight line (and all other qualifiers), but only getting the actual trample attacks on targets in its path (no target of an actual melee attack at the end).
I honestly think that the intent of the design team was to keep trample working the same way that it did in 3.5, but that with the combat maneuver system, they thought it would be easiest to work one of those maneuvers into the ability. Just that all the fiddly bits didn't end up working very well together. It's possible that the intent was to only allow a trampling creature a single move, though. Hopefully we'll get clarification on the matter. Also, David, from reading your last post, I think maybe you have the impression that the trample + charge argument might involve a creature charging a target and making that charge attack as normal, and then trampling everything in its path as well (if not, I apologize for reading too much into it). As far as I'm aware, no one has been advocating that as a possibility - the argument really all comes down to the movement allowance while trampling and nothing else. The peripheral issues that do come up aren't present in the scenario in question (it's a straight hallway with no obstacles and no creatures other than the PCs), and all of those attendant issues were likely overlooked in the larger sense because of that.
Also of note are peripheral concerns that come up if a trampling creature can move as if charging (straight line, no going through obstacles, difficult terrain, etc.). Charging as part of the trample was initially brought up due to the clause in the overrun maneuver. So, I suppose that there are three possible outcomes of the debate (can only move up to its speed while trampling, can charge as part of the trample, can move up to twice its speed [without the charging restrictions] as part of the trample).
David, it does not have the exact same language at all. The 3.5 version of trample, which is what I posted, clearly states that a trampling creature can move up to twice its speed when using the trample ability. That, in essence, is what the debate about "can a trampling creature charge?" question comes down to - the movement - not any other aspect of charging (as trample does not require a to hit roll). The straight line, obstacle, etc. issues that come up as part of the charge are peripheral to the original argument (though no less important, once there is an actual clarification made). The entire reason why this became a debate was because of the amount of movement allowed as part of the trample. If there is an actual developer reply about the intention, the rest of the issues will fall into place.
No, the movement is not the important part. Did you read my posts? Trample , as written, may not be used as part of a charge since it is its own distinct full-round action. If you trample and charge, you are performing two full-round actions in a single round. There is a clause in regular overrun that does not exist in trample that allows regular overrun plus charge. There is no such language in trample. In fact, trample explicitly says, "As a full-round action....". Yes, I did read your posts, as well as the dozen of other posts by others with the same interpretation of the interaction of the rules. From your post, I'm not sure if you understand the WHY of the debate, though. Hint: it's the movement aspect of the charge. Nothing else. It's not that anyone is misunderstanding your interpretation, just that others do not agree with the way that the particular rules in question interact. Thus why there is an ongoing debate, and thus why I created the post in the Rules forum. Restating your interpretation, valid as it may be, doesn't do anything to resolve the debate, as the opposing view is just as valid, since the intention of the ability is at question. If you'd like to try and help resolve the debate, please head over the post that I linked earlier and hit the FAQ link.
also, to try and reach some sort of official resolution on the trample/charge debate, I've started a thread in the Rules Forum. Please hit the FAQ button to help get an official answer from the dev team. http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2r7x0?The-Great-Risen-From-the-Sands-Trample-De bate
David, it does not have the exact same language at all. The 3.5 version of trample, which is what I posted, clearly states that a trampling creature can move up to twice its speed when using the trample ability. That, in essence, is what the debate about "can a trampling creature charge?" question comes down to - the movement - not any other aspect of charging (as trample does not require a to hit roll).
Among many of the heated conversations to come out of the recent Free RPG Day module "Risen From the Sands" was a debate on how far a creature using the trample ability can move as part of its full round action - only its speed, or double its speed as if it were charging as part of a trample. The wording of the ability in 3.5 was very clear on the subject, but there is just enough vagueness in the Pathfinder wording of the ability, and the way that rules elements interact that there isn't a clear consensus. I know the way that I feel the rules should work, but I can see the validity in both sides of the argument. That, to me, is a clear indication that some official guidance is warranted. Not looking for a user debate on the subject, as both sides have been very succinctly debated (to death, arguably) in other threads. I'm hoping for an official word from the design team on the intent of the ability. If you'd like to help that happen, please hit the FAQ button.
At this point, it is irrelevant to debate the issue without some official clarification/FAQ from the design team about the intention of the Pathfinder version of trample. Generally, the Pathfinder versions of things work "more or less" like the 3.5 version, and the difference in the wording of the abilities is what's causing disagreement here. For reference, the wording of the 3.5 ability is:
The debate stems from the clarity in the amount of movement a creature can take as written in the 3.5 version, and whether the somewhat vague wording and rules interactions in the Pathfinder version was done intentionally to limit the amount of movement a trampling creature can take, or whether it was presumed that GMs would realize that because you can charge as part of a normal overrun, you can move up to twice your speed when trampling. The only thing any of us can really do is guess at the intention behind the wording change, and until there is an official post about it, arguing any particular interpretation isn't really productive.
Trying to do this with as few spoilers as possible. Still spoilering the information. Spoiler: The scenario in question is one of the current Season Five scenarios. There are a number of different ways that you might receive Mythic Tiers in the scenario, depending on what other scenarios you have played.
Welcome to the Society. Unfortunately, I don't have any direct advice for making a healer, but wanted to point out a couple of things in your post as they relate to Society play. First off, the synthesist archetype for summoners is not allowed in Society play. Also, while you can make a character of any age from adult or older in Society play, the statistic modifiers are not used (neither bonuses nor penalties), so the age of your character won't actually matter other than role-playing.
I think the current system actually makes using those old faction missions a lot more interesting, even though there aren't any actual rewards for completing them (other than the story). When faction missions were still being used normally, I noticed that on a lot of those faction missions, once other players realized that a player was trying to complete a faction mission without being seen, they'd sort of start whistling and looking the other way, hoping for the same in return if it ever came up. At least this seemed to be the case with players who played together a lot. Without there being any rewards and no drawbacks to failing, I think that kind of mindset gets changed, and people are more free to try and interfere with other factions when they're given out in the older scenarios. I'm starting up a home PFS game of my own, with most of the scenarios centering around Absalom and the Isle of Kortos. I plan on giving out all of the faction missions that exist for any given player's faction (without using the season three/four faction equivalents, so some players may end up with many fewer faction missions than others). The players have mostly only played during Season Five, and they're pretty excited about getting missions from their faction heads. While the individual missions were indeed fun, I think the current system is much more interesting, although (actually, imo, BECAUSE) you really have to be a lot more invested in your faction's ongoing storyline to know what to do and when.
Also, GMs that are running this at Gen Con please take notice. This is only 2/3 of the final special that will debut at Gen Con. We will likely be adding another 15-20 pages to add yet another act after the point where this one concludes. So, if you prep this for PaizoCon, you will need to make sure to download the update several weeks later so you can prep the awesome twist and ending we have in store. my predictions for the big twist ending: Spoiler: Drandle Dreng is really an android. Drandle Dreng is really Grandmaster Torch. Drandle Dreng is really Aroden. Drandle Dreng is really the tarrasque. Drandle Dreng is really Drendle Drang. Drandle Dreng dies. The PCs are confronted with undeniable evidence that they are all imaginary constructs in the minds of other beings and therefor do not suffer any real consequences for their own actions. Chaos ensues. Drandle Dreng is really a catfolk. Jormurdun is really a spaceship and the Pathfinder Society boldly goes on a five year mission. Drandle Dreng is really Ralzeros the Overwatched. Drandle Dreng is a demon lord. Jormurdun is really a spaceship and Drandle Dreng decides to use it to send parties of Pathfinder Agents on delivery missions with little to no regard for their personal safety. The Aspis Consortium purchases the Pathfinder Society. Drandle Dreng is blamed. All of the above.
I doubt that we're going to see any world-changing things with happens with Taldor, at least nothing canon-changing like Stavian passing or a political upheaval putting a new power on the throne. Setting-changing things like that are largely outside of the scope of PFS, so until something like that happens in the larger canon of the setting, I wouldn't count on seeing it happen in PFS. It would be great if that was the case, but I don't see any major canonical changes occurring the setting until the inevitable day we see Pathfinder 2nd Edition.
I've generally found (also from firsthand experience) that Master of the Fallen Fortress can be a tight squeeze for a regular slot. It's certainly shorter than most of the other Free RPG Day Modules, but still, in my experience, longer than a normal PFS scenario. Same goes for We Be Goblins (and more so for Too) unless you cut back on a lot of the gobliny RP, which seems to always be what players enjoy the most. I've almost always blocked out a six hour time slot for these, and when I haven't they've been very rushed - "okay, you finish killing the monsters, you search the room, you find three potions, you identify them, moving onto the next room..." - which, for me, isn't the point of a RPG. Personal preferences, I guess.
|
