Millefune's page

Organized Play Member. 119 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 15 Organized Play characters.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Please tell me the Knight of Ozem pictured on this blog post will be released in a future Pathfinder Pawns set, pretty please?!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If 4712 = 1917, that changes the 4700 = 2000 I was told while I was the local organizer for PSOP/PFS back in 2014. I was told that 4708 = 2008, when Paizo made the Pathfinder in response to D&D 4E., and that's why the "current year" in the Inner Sea World Guide's timeline, which was released in 2011, is 4711.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is there supposed to be a map pack or something that has the interiors of the "roofed" hamlet's buildings?

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is the Archivist able to make separate Knowledge checks against different types of opponents, and then allow his or her Naturalist ability work for the party against all the creatures the Knowledge checks pass against?

I saw someone say you could on this thread:

However, I'm not sure it's right. Most people I ask seem to think that it's "one type only," but some say that since a Knowledge check is a free action, it can work on multiple things if the Bard knows what they are.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
dulac50 wrote:
We had a group play this module at a local convention in Sacramento this weekend. Four players attempted the module. One was only 4th level. All players were very experienced. All four survived because the GM took pity on us. We had two fifth level characters (Cleric, mixed fighter type with a level or two of paladin), 1 sixth level, and a 4th level rogue. I can't imagine that this module would be a good introduction to Pathfinder Society Play or to Pathfinder in general. Our heaviest hitter was dominated and my cleric only escaped by running from the dungeon after the fighter character failed several attempts to resist the domination including rerolls.

Hiya, I'm the GM that ran the module. I apologize for its toughness. I really didn't see it going that way. When I played it, the GM that ran it did it wrong and didn't know what it was doing... so my group pretty much walked the module.

There were five players at the table. Three died, two came back via prestige and gold.

Session Details:
Barbarian: Dominated, and died to boss.
Gunslinger: Died, came back with prestige.
Monk-ish guy: Ran away.
Oracle: Died, came back by selling gear to pay for raising.
Ssssnake Guy: Suggested to run away.

Yes, it could have been a wipe, but I'm really not into that kind of thing. I'm not an adversarial GM, and I get no joy out of player death. So I had her suggest one of the remaining living people to run away, and gave the other living person the chance to run away as well. I was actually disturbed when I overheard other people bragging about killing players, and some people congratulating and fist-bumping me for causing three deaths.

I hope the session was enjoyable for you, at least before sh*t hit the fan.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thank you so much for bringing back the Waterfront Tavern. Now I can use a more accurate map for the PSOP scenarios that call for it!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yup, Lady Ophelia, I made sure to stick an extra dollar in my pocket to bring to tonight's session at the store. ;-)

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Are you still able to flank if you can't see? The example I was put up against was that while in the area of a Darkness spell, two animal companions with the Scent ability were on "flanking sides" of the opponent. They couldn't see the opponent, so it still had total concealment from the darkness. Would they still have gotten the flanking bonus, because they knew what square the opponent is in, or not?

We spent a bit of time looking up concealment and blindness, and there really wasn't anything I could find in the Pathfinder SRD that mentioned threatening squares or not.