Brevoy doesn't own the Stolen Lands, and thus can't actually grant them to anyone. What the charter really does is affirm that Brevoy will recognize the claim. It's much easier to establish a territory when your closest neighbor agrees to recognize your legitimacy.
By sending neutral claimants, Pitax and Mivon can't accuse Brevoy of invading contested land. The new barony provides a buffer between Rostland and any potential enemies to the south, allowing them to focus on the possible conflict with Issia. The Stolen Lands are very rich with farmland, timber, and other resources. With a small investment, Restov gains a wealthy trade partner, giving them even more leverage against the north.
And if it doesn't work? (And it probably won't. They've tried to tame this area several times) They've lost a handful of vagrants and rabble-rousers that would otherwise be stirring up trouble in Brevoy proper.
The charter isn't a deed. It's more of a conditional treaty and trade agreement.
I hope not. One of the things I was hoping for going into pf2 is not having to worry about boons and such. I live in a smaller town and there's no way I'll ever actually play pfs but I like to limit myself and people I play with to pfs limitations, as I find it more balanced.
If you don't actually play PFS why would boons matter? If you set your games to only allow what PFS allows, then they wouldn't be able to play them, would they?
And boons seem to work differently now. You don't have to find a way to go to a convention just to get a special race. Playing and GMing PFS seems to be enough.
Oh and another point: is a good goblin still goblin enough or just a gnome with body issues?
According to Goblins of Golarion "Goblins enjoy inflicting misery and causing pain, and a goblin who doesn’t isn’t truly a goblin—he’s some sort of freak’s freak." So, no.
Seriously, you can't spend 10 years telling us that goblins are the next best thing to demons at being chaotic evil, and then expect us to willingly accept them being made into a core race. I don't have a problem with goblin PCs who are willing to roleplay being an exception to the rule. What I have a problem with is expecting goblins as a whole to somehow suddenly become as accepted as even half-orcs.
Add Wait wrote:
I don't think one will be objectively better.
Well Paizo certainly hopes 2e will be objectively better. That's why they're using the experience gained over 19 years of the d20 system, as well as providing an evolving playtest ruleset, to make a brand new system. It wouldn't make much sense for them to do that, and then release an equal or worse system, would it?
5e does this because that is how they chose to balance the game. Each supplement has to be balanced against the PHB, but they don't have to worry as much about the way things interact between supplements. It helps protect against unintended power creep. Also, since each "season" of AL is tied into a main line product, it gives players incentive to purchase the necessary rules supplements to make characters that fit the adventures they will be playing.
There is simply too much material for PF1e for this to be viable in organized play. There are plenty of home groups which stick to Core+APG without specific approval. I wish the PFS Core campaign would adopt the APG as well, but that's another topic altogether.
If PF2eS wants to adopt a similar rule, then they should make that clear sooner rather than after supplements start coming out. It really depends on how closely organized play will tie into the AP and rulebook release schedule.
Unless there is a change from PFS, equipment that provides a permanent bonus applies to Downtime rolls. If the equipment is limited use, it doesn't.
In PFS there are ways to acquire a shop that provides a bonus on their version of Downtime rolls, and you got the bonus even if the adventure wasn't in set in the city where you owned the shop. Things that happen in downtime generally happen when and where you need them to.
If you're wondering about the one week penalty, that will only apply if you change marks during the scenario. Downtime between scenarios is as long as it needs to be. You always start new scenarios fresh.
If you're wondering something else, you'll need to be more specific. I don't see anything in the theme that wouldn't work in an organized play environment.
I also imagine once the Starfinder Reference Document goes up this may shift a little. A Core Rulebook is definitely necessary for everyone prior to a public, open source core rules reference point.
I don't. As I pointed out, this is the same rule that is in place for Pathfinder Society, a campaign entering it's 10th year. If you are still expected to own the CRB for the PFRPG after this long, I don't see it changing once the SF SRD goes live.
Hardware the Tech wrote:
Question for Campaign Leadership - out of curiosity, why was this quest set explicitly designed to not include Boon slots? That would mean that no Race boons would be available in it. Should this restriction be removed to allow for future race boon users to use their race boon in this Quest?
If they don't give an official answer, just "retrain" into the race boon after the quest.
Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide, page 5 wrote:
The Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild requires all members to have the Starfinder Core Rulebook and the Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide (this document).
You're also expected to be familiar with the FAQ and the Campaign Clarifications, although you aren't required to bring them to game.
Edit: Before anyone jumps on me, of course this requirement is going to be relaxed for new players, which is all of us at this point. It's still the requirement, same as with Pathfinder Society, and you should look at getting the CRB as soon as possible if you decide this is a game you enjoy.
Had a near TPK against Heqet. Granted, the group wasn't the most balanced or optimized, but it caught them by surprise as they'd had a fairly decent time of it until that point. They cast silence on the rage prophet and had him run in next to her after she cast destruction and since she couldn't follow her tactics anymore I had her alternate melee attacks and channels. It was the channeling that finally did in two of the characters.
The new party got to face her with the addition of a mummy-lord ex-PC, but they were ready and made pretty quick work of her and her minions. Fun times on both sides of the screen.
Michael Eshleman wrote:
Maybe where you're from. I've heard it both ways in Alabama. Maybe Cooter Brown would know...
Seems possible, as long as you spend the minimum amount of your "real" character's wealth first. The problem is the guide says "During play, you may need to resolve various conditions that aﬀect your character." Your could be read strictly to not allow you to contribute to other character's conditions.
There was some back and forth during the battle, but ultimately my group killed Khelru, subdued Idorii and Azaz, and forced Velirana to surrender. They brought them back and turned them over to the guards. The Schorched Hand were put on trial for (unsanctioned) grave robbing and attempted murder. As the leader, Velriana was hanged while Idorii and Azaz were merely banished from Wati.
Velriana will make her return in book two, while I'm saving Azaz, and possibly Idorii, for book three. :)
That's a good point that I never thought of. As long as there is no time constraint, and you start at the Grand Lodge, you can spend 1d4 hours to make the check even untrained (and not be limited to DC 10). I would imagine the Lodge would also provide at least a +2 bonus (It's got the Pathfinder Chronicles, right?)
Well, that escalated quickly.
No, scenarios are to be run as written, including locations and maps for where encounters take place. The only exception is for players, through in character actions, invalidating what is written in the scenario. You are not going to get anyone to directly contradict that statement.
Now does that mean scenarios are always run as written? No. Not hardly. Does that matter? Yeah, I guess. It sucks when you find out the GM made a mistake. It sucks more when you find out it wasn't a mistake and the GM changed things on a whim. But short of proof that something was changed on a whim, no one is going to throw someone under the bus for what was likely an honest mistake or a reasonable attempt to deal with a curveball that the scenario didn't account for.
You're not going to get an absolute answer, even in a vacuum, because that answer is already given in the guide. Expecting an absolute, one size fits all answer is unrealistic, and your being sensitive about people poking fun at that makes it less likely anyone else will try to engage you in conversation. BNWs answer was a valid response. He was comparing one rule with no listed exceptions that people routinely break with another rule with a listed exception that people tend not to (in my experience) break. Sorry you weren't able to see the merit in his comparison.
It's already been established that there is disagreement, and that both sides are lacking clear proof. Why do you have such a bone to pick with this one? Why is everyone who doesn't agree with you so clearly wrong in your eyes? You aren't going to play or run it with a level 2 unless you get clarification to the contrary (and, I suspect, not even then). Stellar. The issue seems to be resolved on your end.
Michael Brock wrote:
Master of the Fallen Fortress still rewards 1 XP and 0 PP. It isn't going to change.
I'm going to miss Mike's absolutism.
As for the topic at hand, "All other rules for sanctioned module play, found in Chapter 6 of the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play, should be followed." is pretty clear. He didn't say "All other rules, except the one about playing once as a level 2."
Why is it so hard for people to apply the rules that already exist instead of inventing "corner cases" and demanding specific rulings? Specific rulings get things banned, and this one was almost lost to the banhammer when the issue of "It doesn't give any Prestige" was brought up.
Why is no one complaining about the "1 XP" that is filled in, when slow track is an option at level 1? Why is no one complaining about the lack of a day job box when day jobs are allowed for modules? Because it doesn't matter. We know the rules, they're in the Guide. We overlook mistakes on the chronicles and use the rules as they exist now.
It doesn't matter that it says "Tier 1" because we know, looking at the Guide to Organized play, that it is a replayable 1-2 that offers 1xp and 1 Fame/Prestige.
If you encounter a group of enemies, and the party leader/strategist tells you to take care of them, do you assume that means draw them a warm bath, or do you kill them? Playing word games because you are dominated when your character would normally just stomp face is a bad as cheating, IMO.
We didn't get along, that much is obvious. Despite that, I'm not happy to see you go, and I'm very much unhappy to hear the reason. My thoughts are with you and your family. I do not envy your successor, they will have a lot to live up to.
If you find yourself in Birmingham, the first round's on me.
I'd have to disagree. Never, that I can remember, did they ever guarantee they would sanction all future APS (or past ones, for that matter). They are doing this as the schedule permits in order to give us more playable content for PFS. They should not be putting them on the schedule at the expense of accrual PFS content and other Paizo events.
As for using volunteers, they've said in the past that even volunteer work has to be edited up to Paizo standards, and that takes in-house talent that they really can't spare right now. You're asking then to devote real money resources to something that flat out won't be profitable.
I'm pretty sure your barbarian will be doing just fine without massive bonus increases.
What massive increases? A +4 courageous weapon (or a+2 furious courageous weapon) gave a "massive" +2 to Strength and Constitution while raging. Hardly overpowered at the levels where a +4/+5 weapon are the norm.
What poor wizard felt threatened that y'all had to make sure to nerf martials just that much harder?
Benefit: Choose one Craft or Profession skill in which you possess at least 5 ranks. You receive a +2 bonus on your chosen Craft or Profession skill. Ranks in your chosen skill count as your caster level for the purposes of qualifying for the Craft Magic Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item feats. You can create magic items using these feats, substituting your ranks in the chosen skill for your total caster level. You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item. The DC to create the item still increases for any necessary spell requirements (see the magic item creation rules in Magic Items). You cannot use this feat to create any spell-trigger or spell-activation item.
"You can create magic items using these feats," Those feats are already banned. There is no problem or confusion in the rules, or in the feat description.