Feast of Ravenmoor | Dead Man's Debt
Please post your PFS details here:
This is a tier 2-4 module granting 3XP and 4PP upon successful completion. If you're still deciding which character to bring I recommend favouring a lvl 3 over a lvl 2.
Boomy here is my PFS leshy shootist.
But I can't decide what class and archetype to use to give him Gunsmithing, necessary for the purchase of guns in PFS. The Savage Technologist barbarian archetype does not give access. Here are my options.
1. gunslinger (no archetype); advantages are Quick Clear deed, and WIS based grit so better Will save (I can rebuild to adjust CHA and WIS)
I only need one level of any Gunsmithing class - I'll take 5 levels of Savage Technologist barbarian for DEX to damage with guns.
If I go with vanilla gunslinger, there is an option of taking the techslinger archetype later if I play the right module. If I choose one of the CHA based options, techslinger would be less effective.
The chief mechanical goal here is getting into the enemy's space with Mouser underfoot assault and unloading firearms point blank. Any of these 3 options will achieve the goal. The comparison is between different grit/panache configurations, Quick Clear vs Focused Aim, and higher CHA or WIS.
Recruiting for 9-01 The Cost of Enlightenment, to start as soon as we have a party ready to go.
Please post with basic character details and your availability.
This scenario is probably better at low tier (1-2), but I am happy to run it high tier (4-5).
The scenario is quirky - it contains philosophy (sort of) and is heavy on social encounters. If your favourite thing about Pathfinder is grid-based tactical combat then this is not likely to make your top 10 scenarios. But I think the quirks make it ideal for the play-by-post medium.
I'll select by lottery if necessary, but will prioritise characters who are available, who have up-to-date character sheets / profiles, and who will make a party in the same tier.
The Decoy familiar archetype has a funky ability at level 11, called Master's Guise. It says
Master's Guise wrote:
Master’s Guise (Sp): At 11th level, a decoy can transform into a perfect likeness of its master, as the alter self spell. It can hold this form for up to 1 minute per caster level; upon changing back, the decoy must remain in its natural form for an equal amount of time before transforming again. This ability replaces spell resistance.
How does this work?
Alter Self would transform a non-humanoid into a small or medium humanoid, and any gear that the non-humanoid is equipped with would remain equipped in accordance with the standard polymorph rules. So the decoy could be armoured - but then it wouldn't be a 'perfect likeness' if it was clad in say, studded leather, whilst its master was wearing full-plate.
What happens if the familiar's master is polymorphed or under another transmutation effect, at the time that the decoy uses Master's Guise to 'copy' him?
Duplicating magic items seems much too powerful, and then on the other hand the ability is nearly useless if the familiar just polymorphs into a naked humanoid, or a humanoid in totally different gear than the master.
I was editing one of my other aliases (Claw, Spawn of Achaekek) and when I hit "save changes" the changes have been applied to this alias (Sleeping Sword).
Is it possible to recover the previously saved details for Sleeping Sword please?
This is my PFS character sheet for a live Play-by-Post game.
This has just come up in a pbp I am running.
I've had a think about whether or not Broken Wing Gambit can work against a mindless opponent, and I think at present that it cannot, for several reasons.
First, the feat describes the user 'feigning weakness', and one cannot feign against a mindless opponent (feint explicitly does not work for example).
Second, the feat rules text says "if that opponent attacks you with this bonus, it provokes attacks of opportunity", which implies a choice to use the bonus on the part of the attacker; the text would otherwise just say "if that opponent attacks you, it provokes". However, some other threads in the Rules forum argue that the bonus granted to an attacker is not a matter of choice at all, but simply applies until the next turn. An intelligent attacker could choose to attack another target once it becomes aware of the trick - but a non-intelligent creature would never be aware. I think that I am persuaded that where the feat applies the bonus is mandatory.
A golem is mindless and incapable of making decisions beyond following its orders/programming. So It can't, therefore, decide to forego the +2 bonus from Broken Wing Gambit if the feat can work at all.
But I don't think that a feat that represents feigning vulnerability (and that needs 5 ranks of Bluff to qualify for) can work against a mindless creature that can't be feinted. A mindless creature can't be taken in by the deceit.
I want to be sure I am being fair to the player, and this is a PFS game so I have to apply all of the rules.
Feast of Ravenmoor | Dead Man's Debt
On the Plane of Water, familiar sights grow on impossible scales, from monumental swaths of kelp to utterly titanic sea creatures. The Society has traced a powerful relic to a tremendous shell adrift within a miles-wide swarm of giant jellyfish, and with the help of new allies, the PCs might recover it. They had best beware, though, for the Plane of Water is home to sahuagin and worse that are not eager to welcome intruders.
Feast of Ravenmoor | Dead Man's Debt
You have been summoned to the Twisting Garden Lodge in the Thuvian city of Merab.
Whilst you wait for the Venture Captain and your fellow pathfinders, porters bring you cool water, iced lemon tea and thick, grainy Thuvian coffee.
You may dot and delete. Or feel free to post your in-character introductions and physical descriptions.
Feast of Ravenmoor | Dead Man's Debt
Discussion thread for all things out-of-character.
Please post the following details:
There's also a bunch of background prep work in this scenario, and I'll be asking you additional questions about your previous adventures and other fun facts.
Recruiting for a low tier run of Salvation of the Sages.
This is an awesome scenario, especially well-suited to pbp, but it is more dangerous than most. Therefore I will not be recruiting via lottery. Party balance is too important to be left to chance.
I will hand pick from characters submitted here. I will favour Scarab Sage characters, and players who have GM'd for me previously.
I run a fast-moving game - at least one post per day, and often two or three. Please ensure that you can manage at least one post per day.
I aim to get started by next weekend (12 May), sooner if we have a party ready to go before that.
One spot is currently reserved (for Kramac).
I'm auditing one of my characters who has recently levelled up, and it looks like I might have found an error on the chronicle sheet for scenario #02, The Hydra's Fang Incident.
Specifically, the max gold reward to Tier 4-5 says 1038gp. This is way under the norm for the tier (generally a Tier 4-5 awards around 1900gp.) This is what is printed on the chronicle sheet as the max gold, it's not a case of the party missing some of the treasure in the playthrough.
I expect that the chronicle sheet is in error, but I did not find any mention of this anywhere on the forums. It's such an old scenario that I did not want to necro the original GM thread.
Is it an error? Was there ever an official correction?
Feast of Ravenmoor | Dead Man's Debt
Please list the usual stuff here:
Please also let me know if your character has had any dealings with the Blakros Family (including Nigel Aldain), or if you have played scenario 2:11, The Penumbral Accords, with this character.
Feast of Ravenmoor | Dead Man's Debt
The eldest daughter of the prominent Blakros family is set to wed an influential Hellknight, and the Pathfinder Society is invited to the festivities. Dressed for a wedding befitting royalty, a team of Pathfinders attend the ceremony on behalf of the Decemvirate, but will their presence ultimately strengthen the Society's relationship with the influential Blakroses, or will events at the wedding bring the already tenuous alliance to a breaking point?
What actions can a tumour familiar take when it is "attached"?
The question arises from this discussion which itself is the result of a nerf to tumour-protector familiars in Ultimate Wilderness.
tumour familiar rules:
ultimate magic wrote:
Tumor Familiar (ex): The alchemist creates a Diminutive or Tiny tumor on his body, usually on his back or stomach. As a standard action, the alchemist can have the tumor detach itself from his body as a separate creature vaguely resembling a kind of animal suitable for a familiar (bat, cat, and so on) and move about as if it were an independent creature. The tumor can reattach itself to the alchemist as a standard action. The tumor has all the abilities of the animal it resembles (for example, a batlike tumor can fly) and familiar abilities based on the alchemist’s caster level (though some familiar abilities may be useless to an alchemist). The tumor acts as the alchemist’s familiar whether attached or separated (providing a skill bonus, the Alertness feat, and so on). When attached to the alchemist, the tumor has fast healing 5. An alchemist’s extracts and mutagens are considered spells for the purposes of familiar abilities like share spells and deliver touch spells. If a tumor familiar is lost or dies, it can be replaced 1 week later through a specialized procedure that costs 200 gp per alchemist level. The ritual takes 8 hours to complete.
Ultimate Wilderness bars the Tumour Familiar from taking the Protector archetype. This book is not yet in additional resources or campaign clarifications. Before Ultimate Wilderness is ruled on for the PFS campaign, I would like to ask whether the ban hammer is needed, or whether there is a better fix.
The discussion thread I linked to shows, in my view, where the problem lies with the tumour-protector familiar. It seems to be a common reading of the rules that the tumour-protector can use the Shield Master ability whilst attached (ie merged with its master). This makes it, effectively, a hp battery. It is also argued that the tumour familiar can take a range of actions whilst it is attached, in part because of the wording of the Die for Your Master feat.
But I've always played my tumour-protector familiar as being unable to take any actions except when it is detached; nor can it use Shield Master whilst attached. Attached means merged, as I see it, and therefore not an "independent" entity.
I think that the way I've played it is strong, but not broken in the way that a fast healing, invulnerable (because it's inside you and therefore can't be targeted) hp battery would be.
So here's my proposal: don't ban the tumour familiar from taking the protector archetype, instead clarify what actions a tumour familiar can take whilst it is attached. In my view, that should be no actions: the tumour familiar provides its familiar "bonus" to its master, provides Alertness to its master if not traded away by an archetype, and has fast healing 5. It can only use other abilities whilst attached if the specific ability requires this, such as Die for Your Master.
Wouldn't that be a better fix than a ban?
I'm running into a bit of a problem.
Barbarians don't have to care too much about armour class. They have Damage Reduction and d12 hit dice. They hit hard enough that they can focus on killing before they get killed.
But I'm multiclassed with Hunter. So, no DR to speak of and significantly fewer hp than a Barbarian. I'm a Ferocious Beast pet build. I will have comparable damage output to a single-classed barbarian (maybe even more, once the pet is up to scratch). Hunter gives a lot of cool stuff, but I'm not seeing much in the way of defences. Early access Resist Energy; Barkskin; a few other decent defensive spells.
How can I protect myself from incoming attacks?
My Dex is a bit rubbish (13 at level 4). All my feats choices are set. I have perhaps one Rage Power free after taking Ferocious Beast. I only have medium armour proficiency. I don't see any solutions on the Hunter spell list, and I'll only have level 1 and 2 spells really, the level 3 spells known are accounted for. (Resinous Skin is quite nice, but I need Strong Jaw and Share Shape more).
I think I'm reliant on items. I'm tempted by Ring of Blinking but it's prohibitively expensive and carries a 20% miss chance on my own attacks. I might go for +1 invulnerable breastplate maybe, but this leaves me rocking an armour class of 18 (16 when raging) through the mid levels. Say I can get to 21 with Barkskin, 22 if I buy a ring of protection +1.
Are there any solutions I'm not seeing? Or am I stuck with the "kill it before it kills you" school of defence?
Would Campaign Leadership please agree to grandfathering of the original Lore Warden fighter archetype?
Many of the arguments for doing so have been hashed out in earlier threads, but I will try to summarise succinctly.
1. the archetype does not have any similar equivalent: whilst some mechanical elements can be replicated with other classes, these alternatives have very different role-play connotations (eg Untamed Rager is not a scholarly fighter).
Others may wish to present additional arguments.
Thanks for your consideration.
A new hardbound book is out (Adventurer's Guide), and it reprints some old material. But some of the old material is greatly changed. The Lore Warden fighter archetype, and the clear spindle ioun stone resonant power are two examples.
Before this book is dealt with in Additional Resources, I want to make this plea to Campaign Leadership: Please, no more nerfs.
About two years ago I made a thread because two hardbound books were heavily errata'd, applying many nerfs to many characters. Campaign Leadership said then that they'd heard players' concerns and would try to communicate better.
If the revisions in Adventurer's Guide become the rule for PFS, then we will again have longstanding player options radically altered by a new publication. I don't have the Adventurer's Guide, but I've followed other threads on the forum and the two examples I've given are certainly much changed for the worse. There may well be other examples.
Changes of this sort - nerfs - are not needed for longstanding options. They are not good for the game or the PFS campaign in particular. Players, like me, design characters with the published options to achieve various objectives. When it comes to options that have been in print for a long time, surely we ought to feel confident that such well-established options are "safe" choices?
So please, please, leave the nerf bat in the locker. It isn't needed, it isn't wanted. Please don't invalidate players' choices (and purchases).
Is there any PFS clarification or ruling on application of the Aquatic subtype and the Amphibious special quality to animals?
As it stands, the bestiaries are inconsistent. Frogs and Toads are not Amphibious, even though they are amphibians. Electric Eels are not Aquatic, but Moray Eels are. A good number of animals that live in the water are neither Aquatic nor Amphibious.
For most purposes, this doesn't matter very much. But one instance where it is problematic is the Kraken Caller Druid archetype. The Kraken Caller's wild shape ability, apart from the tentacles variation, is limited to "animals with the aquatic or water subtype or that have the amphibious special quality."
There are zero animals with the Water subtype. There are zero animals with the amphibious special quality. There are a total of 15 animals with the Aquatic subtype. (I'm going off Bestiaries 1-4).
Can this be fixed? Has it been fixed and I haven't seen it? Kraken Callers across Golarion want to know.
Which feat is better for a stealth-melee inquisitor?
My concept is "green faith assassin". I have room for either Fey Foundling or Toughness, but not both. Fey Foundling actually works with the character backstory and wouldn't be contrived. But maybe Toughness is of more benefit? Starting CON will only be 12. I can spend favoured class bonus on hp, but I'll be human and will be very tempted to get more spells known (especially from level 4 onwards).
I don't intend to tank in any way. The character is essentially a rogue-like sneak attacker.
This will be a PFS character.
Additional resources, The Wormwood Mutiny (Skull & Shackles 1) wrote:
Would campaign leadership please consider updating this text to give similar options to Besmaran druids? Druids can already get familiars via certain of the animal/terrain domains, but of those only one fits Besmara, the Monkey domain. The familiars available to clerics and rangers from Skull & Shackles include much more thematic choices, including Besmara's sacred animal the parrot.
At the moment, a Besmaran druid (such as the Kraken Caller archetype from Dirty Tactics Toolbox) can legally choose the Crocodile domain and get a croc familiar, or the Vermin domain and have a scorpion familiar, but cannot get a parrot familiar without multiclassing or using Eldritch Heritage.
(Yes, I would like my soon-to-be Kraken Caller to have a parrot familiar ;) )
Is there any PFS-legal way to get a familiar on a Lawful Neutral Inquisitor?
I know I can use Eldritch Heritage (arcane). I'm wondering if there is a more feat-efficient way though. AFAIK the animal/terrain domains are not allowed.
I have a pile of Lawful Neutral stuff that I would like to synergise, including an arbiter inevitable familiar and an intelligent heavy flail, on a divine caster chassis. At present an Oracle with Eldritch Heritage looks feasible. Druid doesn't get the right spells (no Shield Other), or have the right feel. I'd like the character to be a follower of Abadar.
Knight's pennon wrote:
Say I have a Knight's pennon flying from my longspear, and I activate its magic.
Does the heroism effect end:
The item description says it has "no effect if not mounted appropriately". Does it have to remain mounted after its magic has been activated? What happens if the bearer shapeshifts into a non-humanoid form?
Having recently made myself a verminous divine hunter of Achaekek I'm bemused and a little disappointed to find that the Additional Resources entry for Inner Sea Gods only authorises variant spellcasting for the Core 20 deities (except Lamashtu; poor, poor Lamashtu).
Please would campaign leadership consider authorising variant spellcasting for the "lesser" inner sea deities, pages 175 to 181?
I am already assuming that Hunters get to use any spells added to the Druid or Ranger list by variant spellcasting.
Although I am chiefly interested in Achaekek's variant spellcasting being authorised, I'm requesting the same for all of the "lesser deities." If campaign leadership takes the view that any given deity's entry is inappropriate or too powerful it could of course be left out in the same manner as Lamashtu has been (poor, poor Lamashtu).
I don't understand why the additional resources entry only authorised this for the Core deities.
Thanks for your consideration.
I've just hit 8th level and get to pick a new Mystery Spell. I'm an Ancient Lorekeeper Oracle so I am picking a 4th level spell, which must come from the 3rd level Wiz/Sorc spell list.
My original plan was to take Displacement, to support my melee in Many Forms. (Dark Tapestry Mystery).
I have now mostly lost my favoured class bonus benefit to the recent ARG nerf. I do not expect I shall be doing any dragon shapes, or large magical beasts or the like. I may get to tigers and small magical beasts at level 10. I've found in the last few games I have played more of a support caster role.
So, I am considering choosing Heroism instead of Displacement. Heroism is a long lasting buff that I can cast on myself or others. This would definitely help with my action economy; I have several other combat buff spells. I think that Heroism is probably worth a 4th level spell slot.
But I will then be more vulnerable when I do melee. I can get a decent armour class, but I still think miss chance is important.
Are there any other ways to get Displacement or Heroism, through items for example?
Potions are a bit expensive for repeated use and I don't have the UMD for wands. If there is an item route available to get one or the other then my problem is solved. I know there's a Cloak of Displacement but I want the saving throw bonuses from Cloak of Resistance.
Which spell would you choose and why?
We've seen a lot of nerfs applied in the ACG errata just released. Some of them I think were necessary, but many were not expected or asked for.
Today Advanced Race Guide errata have been published. There are many more unexpected nerfs (e.g. favoured class bonuses being downgraded from +1/2 levels to +1/6 levels in many cases such as elven oracles' revelation booster).
So how did this happen?
Why so many nerfs to so many characters, all at once?
Why is it nerf season?
I just don't think the playing community asked for or expected or wanted this.
I would like to hear your recommendations for a first PFS scenario please.
I have a couple of criteria. I am looking for a tier 1 - 5 scenario because I want to run for some friends who haven't played PFS but are experienced gamers, and I want to apply the GM credit to my level 5 character. It will likely be a party of four level 1s.
The following scenarios are already out because either my level 5 or one of my wife's characters have played them :
I have discovered the above item in the Jade Regent AP. It has two powerful effects. My question pertains to the restrictive clause on the second effect.
Seishinru, Spirit Elixir wrote:
If the character drinking the elixir is a scion of one of Minkai’s five imperial families (including anyone invested as such by an Imperial Seal) and is reduced to fewer than 0 hit points during the duration of the elixir’s effects, the elixir also immediately cures the drinker of 5d8+10 points of damage, which can bring a recently slain character back to life. This healing immediately ends any of the elixir’s other effects.
How does a PFS character meet the requirement for being a scion of one of Minkai's five imperial families? Is it hand waved, the same as RP requirements for prestige classes?
My PFS oracle is reaching the point where I will want him to get a Belt of Physical Might. I want a DEX boost from the belt, but cannot decide whether I should also boost STR or CON.
Quenly is an elven Dark Tapestry oracle using the Many Forms revelation. Base physical stats are STR 14 DEX 18 CON 12 at level 5.
I have Bulls Strength as a spell known and tend to cast it often. I tend to fight in Troglodyte form.
I am not very comfortable with having such a low CON in mid and upper levels, given that I expect to be engaged in melee some of the time. Some available forms from Many Forms do give CON bonuses but aside from the Water Elemental form they are small bonuses.
On the other hand, I do not want to need to buff with Bulls Strength at the start of every combat and the spell duration isn't long enough to last multiple fights in most circumstances.
Ideally, of course, I would want a Belt of Physical Perfection. But I don't think that is affordable until Seeker levels. I am therefore choosing between
How exactly does the Feather subdomain alter the base animal domain?
"Each subdomain replaces a granted power and a number of spells in the domain's granted spell list."
BUT: the Animal domain also grants Knowledge: Nature as a class skill. The Feather subdomain gives Fly as a class skill as well as increasing your manoeuvrability class when you cast a spell that gives a fly speed. The rules text on subdomains quoted above only says that subdomains replace granted powers and spells, and granted powers are listed after these additional class skills.
If a cleric has the Feather subdomain, does he get both Knowledge: Nature and Fly added to his class skills?
I'm not entirely clear on how some of the ways there are for an alchemist to learn new formulae work. Here's what I know:
I gain 1 new formula each time I gain a level of alchemists (beyond those I get at level 1).
I can copy formulae from other alchemists' formulae books and from wizards' spell books (where their spells also appear on the alchemists' extract list).
I can write formulae into my formulae book using a formula alembic to derive a formula from a potion (again, as long as the potion is from a spell that is on the alchemists' extract list).
CRB says wrote:
An alchemist can also add formulae to his book just like a wizard adds spells to his spellbook, using the same costs and time requirements. An alchemist can study a wizard's spellbook to learn any formula that is equivalent to a spell the spellbook contains.
This is what raises some questions for me that I hope you can help answer.
1. Do I need to make spellcraft check to successfully learn a formula by any of the methods above?