Pharoah4187's page

I'm inclined to say that they don't stack. My reasoning is as follows:

As MurphysParadox points out, you cannot take an archetype if it alters or removes the same class feature. Adding feats is an alteration.

Crossblooded modifies various aspects of your bloodline class feature, including the Bloodline Feats (by adding them both together).

Blood Conduit alters the Bloodline Feats by adding another subset of feats.

Since both archetypes alter Bloodline Feats, they are mutually exclusive. It would be enormously helpful in a ruling if Crossblooded was updated to include phrasing like "This alters your Bloodline class feature" or "This alters your Bloodline feats", but alas... it is totally devoid of any such language. I think the overall feeling of including them would be "It's against the RAW, but a DM would not be wrong for allowing the combination in his home games" (similar to the Tattooed/Crossblooded Sorcerer which are disallowed because both modify the 1st Bloodline power).

You're not being a weak GM. Having fun is priority number 1. As long as everybody is on board with the changes and/or is having a blast a result, you're doing it right.

That being said: I'm generally a fan of setting expectations and sticking to them. If, for example, I say "This campaign is going to be relatively difficult. I recommend you make sure that you have ways to deal with ability damage, traps, and some sort of access to healing." and then let the players make their own bed with no punches pulled. Did the party decide that healing can best be done by wands? Great. Hopefully the party recognizes the need to actually BUY those wands, because they aren't just going to be laying around in the middle of a dungeon for the sake of party convenience. To do otherwise would be a disservice to the other players at the table who (presumably) expect those more difficult elements to be in the game.

On the other hand, if I say something along the lines of "I want this to be a story focused game with minimal character deaths, so make sure you make an INTERESTING character rather than one that is heavily optimized. I'm not going to have any SoD effects and the chances of you actually dying due to bad rolls is going to be minimal." and then run the Tomb of Horrors, I'd be doing a similar disservice.

If you're somewhere in the middle, and it sounds like you are with an unwritten "I'm not going to throw anything at you that you aren't equipped to deal with, but I'm not going to alter the content a lot if you sell that Scroll of Remove Curse rather than keep it around for an emergency that'll happen later in the module", just make sure it falls within the expectations that you set for the party and that they're consistent. In this case, I think you're doing it well enough and that actually makes you a pretty strong DM. You have a 3 person party with no full casters, and are making sure that the content isn't "unfairly" (that's a relative term) above their heads. That's not necessarily an easy thing to do.

tl;dr: Keep up the strong work.

You'd be surprised how quickly "mediocre writer" can turn into "decent writer" and then go even further to "good writer". Just keep writing, and you'll get better. The more you write, the better you'll get.

With that in mind: set an update schedule that works for you. It should be often enough that you get a lot of practice writing, but not so often that you can't keep up with it. I used to have a blog that updated Mon-Fri. It was hard to stay on top of the posts, and I wouldn't recommend that unless you were unemployed and/or found yourself with nothing but freetime. I kept it up for a few years, but I ultimately stopped writing because I was burnt out and had no desire to do it anymore. Quality was suffering, and I found that I *had* to make myself update, rather than I *wanted* to update. Obviously you don't want that.

My advice here? Sit down and think about each actual part you want to write. Playable content? Fiction? Advice? Anecdotes? House rules? Split it into a few separate categories that make sense. That's probably going to be your posting schedule. If it's more than you think you can handle (say you have 6 different categories worth of content), break it down even further. An example:

Monday - Fiction
Thursday - Recap of your last gaming session, with thoughts
Saturday - Gaming Advice
Every other Friday - Mail Call/Answer Questions
Last day of each month - Free Adventure Module!

Try to keep it simple, and make sure you update at least once a week. The example schedule is 3.75 times per week (I think... math is hard and it's not the point). The more you update, the more often people will remember to come back. The less you update, the more time you have to deal with life issues and the longer your backlog will stretch in case of emergency. That might go without saying, but you'd be surprised how easy it is to forget.

And the final bit of advice regarding blogging: all of this is pointless and a waste of time unless you're actually writing. If you haven't started writing yet... do that. Throw a bunch of stuff in Word, and get an idea for the kind of content that you'll actually be creating. Write 12 blog entries. That might sound like a lot... but depending on your schedule, it could be less than a month's worth of content. Once you have 12 posts, write another 12 posts whilst turning your attention to the details of the blog. Once you have 24 posts (total) and an idea for the platform and update schedule, write another 12 posts and start the process of getting the whole thing online. By that point, you'll have 36 posts ready and waiting when the blog goes live. You'll also have 36 posts that you can shop around if you decide to join a team of bloggers to cut down on maintenance costs (if any) and help maintain a site full of awesome content, rather than trying to create a bunch of content on your own. In other words: your options'll open up because you have a bunch of unpublished content already. The world is full of "writers" that have "a novel in their head already" but haven't written anything because "they can't find anybody interested in publishing" or "don't have the time, you know?" or "just aren't sure how to start". Don't be one of them. In the words of the great Nike:

Just Do It.

The best possible thing you can do (that hasn't already been mentioned) is to have a back log. Start writing in your favorite word processor, and save them as individual blog entries. Once you've got a number of well-written posts (shoot for at LEAST two weeks of content, but it's better if you can generate a month or more), start posting them online using the blog platform of your choice. The backlog will do a couple of things for you:

1) You'll have time to polish the posts (remember the maxim: Everybody Needs An Editor), rather than risk posting late or putting up something poorly done just so that you can maintain your blog schedule. The schedule consistency will make or break your blog in your reader's eyes. The last thing you want is somebody to say, "the post isn't up yet... I'll check back later". They never check back later.

2) If your life circumstances take a turn for the "I don't have time to update", you'll have a safety net equal to your backlog. Many blogging venues even allow automated posting, so all you have to do is set it up and keep the queue full. Then if you're hit by a bus or something, the blog keeps rolling like nothing ever happened and you're free to refill the backlog once you're feeling better. Or even if you just decide to take a vacation. Backlogs remove the pressure of constantly needing to meet deadlines.

Other than having a backlog... just have fun. Nobody is going to read it (I Googled "gaming blog" and got "About 225,000,000 results (0.68 seconds)", so you'd have to be something special to stand out), so don't feel like there's a lot of risk in putting yourself out there. I had a blog for awhile where I just made up random facts about "What Happened On This Day In History". It was awful, but it was fun.

If you *do* want to stand out:

Get a unique domain name. They're cheap and make you look like a professional (rather than just some guy with a Tumblr).

Along the same lines, pay for web hosting. It doesn't have to be fancy, but a dedicated website goes a long way towards that same professional look.

You'll see some folks talk about "Search Engine Optimization" or "SEO". Don't worry about that. Worry about quality content.

Give people something. Have a weekly feature that's essentially an adventure module (or an encounter). Maybe just publish whatever custom content you use for your group (after they've played it, of course). Have an advice column, asking readers to email you their questions (they won't at first... just make stuff up until they do, or have a "I was asked by somebody I know" type of thing until you actually start getting reader questions). Share how you handled common table issues, or what mistakes you made in the past that you learned from. Whatever. Make your readers feel like they're getting something of value by reading your blog. Since you're also posting fiction, you'll want to keep the two separate (just have a schedule with tags, at the bare minimum). Post the fiction on Monday, the advice on Wednesday, the "free" content on Friday (or whatever you end up doing) and keep it consistent. There will be overlap, but I imagine most of your readers will be there for one thing and will only check out the other stuff on a whim. You'll find that one area will be your "strong" suit (i.e. You'll have more hits on the day when the content that people care about is posted).

Use just enough words to say what needs to be said. If you're read this far, you're probably wondering when I'm going to shut up. Don't put your readers in the same position.

And finally: don't be discouraged when you do all these things and still end up with a website that doesn't pay the bills (or even pay to keep itself afloat). It doesn't sound like you're doing it for a shot at the big time, so that shouldn't be a problem.

Alright. That's a hefty shipping charge, but it looks like I'd pay about the same for the game ANYWAY... so what the hell. I tried finding a way to confirm the orders from the Pending Screen, but either I can't or I'm just not seeing it. So with that in mind:

Go ahead and process the order, Sharaya. And Thank You once again!

Thanks, Sharaya! I appreciate your help on this issue.

Hi! I know y'all have a lot going on, so I'll make this quick:

I'm trying to place an order for a variety of items during The Great Golem Sale, and I can't seem to finalize the order. Every time I place the order, I just get bounced right back to the shopping cart without a message. Some of the items have limited availability, so I don't want to lose the opportunity to get them (especially at this price). Any help would be appreciated!

Pharoah4187 wrote:

"Rule 0, biyotch. Learn it, love it, get me a soda."

Hallmark of a terrible GM.

A good GM's first priority is creating a fun shared experience, which is mutually-exclusive with attempts to establish dominance.

I was clearly being facetious. Everybody knows that GMs may only command soda as the result of a critical fumble. Although it could also be argued that a good DM's bread and butter is establishing dominance during a fun shared experience! See what I did there? I made an off-color double entendre using the title owned (and popularized) by Wizards of the Coast, "Dungeon Master", to mean something entirely different. And now I'm explaining it, because I'm a paragon of wit full of jokes that are literally older than I am and I'm worried that people won't get them and instead take me seriously because I forgot a sideways winky-face on the internet. By all means, let's stop talking about the issue at hand and instead talk about how I'm the Hallmark Of A Terrible GM.

I had a much longer post, but I don't think I need to explain Rule 0 to you or it's place in the game. That would be offensive to you, as you're clearly not new to the table and your credentials speak for themselves. You've already commented on this particular player on the OP's other thread, and we both seem to fall on the side of "Official Interpretation (in light of this being a PFS game)/GM Interpretation trumps Player Interpretation".

The item is poorly worded, but it means that you can go all the way from "stapped on" to "ready to throw" as a single free action. That is, if it only said "unclasping is a free action", we'd have GMs who didn't like it trying to say "Sure, but just because it's unclasped doesn't mean it's ready to throw, so you need to spend more actions once it's unclasped." The text is just preempting that.

I disagree on the interpretation (as I don't feel that a single free attack is all that game breaking until you start getting into obvious cheese territory, which is where I would start getting into the limits for the sake of balance as per my previous post... plus the wording explicitly states "and throw"), but that just means that I'd rule it one way in my game and you're welcome to rule it your way in your game until somebody issues an official clarification.

And finally to clarify for anybody else that is going to go home and demand their players get them a soda because they read my statement and thought that it made good sense: Don't call your players b!~$~es, don't insult them, and don't demand they get you soda. Keep it respectful.

OP: You're the GM. Your ruling is official, even if the item gets errata that contradicts how you want the item to work. All complaints should be responded with, "Rule 0, biyotch. Learn it, love it, get me a soda." If the players don't like it, let them make a case and change your rule (or don't) accordingly.

That being said, I think the obvious intent here is a free attack at the expense of an AC bonus granted by the shield. If you add a Quickdraw Shield(which you COULD claim that the strap systems are incompatible with one another), it doesn't really alter the game balance in any meaningful way. If the player adds "Returning", no worries since he/she can't move from the square and still catch the shield (in addition to it arguably no longer being hooked up properly to function as a "Quickdraw Shield") and it won't come back until the end of the turn. It would effectively result in one free attack per round (and, I would rule, would require a move action to re-clasp the shield in such a manner to allow the Free Action).

Another alternative to this problem is to enforce an Attacks Per Round limit. The player gets one Free Attack, period. More than that, and they've effectively taken a Standard (or Full Round) Action. The wording on Free Actions is enough justification for that. If something feels like cheese, it probably is.

If the player tries Blinkbelt shenanigans, point out that a belt is a belt and the Quickdraw Shield is it's own specialized series of straps that explicitly allow storage on the back.

If the player then insists that "flavor text doesn't matter", see above about Rule 0 and then start enforcing all the little things that you're already letting the player get away with that he/she is either misunderstanding or thinks that you don't notice, because at that point they can either accept it or whine on somebody else's time (and, traditionally, they accept it and bring it up whenever they need ammunition on how GM's are stupid and make stupid rulings).

I would interpret the enchantment as follows:

Heartseeker ignores the miss-chance on Concealment, but not Total Concealment (i.e. If it's a 20% mischance, it'll work). These are treated differently elsewhere in the rules (See Blind-Fight Feat Tree and Shadow Strike), so it makes sense that they would be treated as different here as well.

Additionally, I would rule that Heartseeker does NOT allow a Sneak Attack against a target benefiting from Concealment, as the immunity is tied to the Concealment itself and not a result of simply having a mischance. Heartseeker ignores the mischance, but the opponent is still concealed and still gets any other applicable benefits of concealment (in this case: immunity to SA). This is consistent with my interpretation of the Blind-Fight tree as well(otherwise, Shadow Strike would be pretty pointless since the player would be able to take Blind-Fight and I. Blind-Fight for the exact same effect and then some). That is, admittedly, an interpretation since I don't think there's a clarification anywhere.

Finally, being drawn to the heart is arguably not a "vital spot". It's an extremely well protected area (with some exceptions), so if you're attempting to maximize damage... you probably would not be targeting an organ that is going to be under the thickest plating of armor and extremely deep in the chest from other angles. If it was "Kidneyseeker", "Liverseeker", "Groinseeker"... maybe.

So there's a bit of a difference between the way poison is pitched here and how it was originally pitched to me, and I'm a bit confused.

Taking scenario one, Valeros is hit with a poisoned arrow and fails a dc 13 fortitude save. According to the example he immediately takes 1 point of constitution damage and then, failing another save on his own turn, takes 1 more point of constitution damage.

This differs from the way I was taught. I was told that the DC 13 fortitude save made upon being hit with the arrow decides whether or not you've been afflicted by the poison for x number of rounds, but no damage is immediately done. Assuming you fail this roll and are now poisoned, on your turn you roll the DC 13 fortitude save again, and if you fail once more you take 1 point of constitution damage.

The second example makes sense to me because it limits the damage a poison can cause in 1 round or 6 seconds. Otherwise you're effectively getting hit twice with the effects of the poison in what is defined as 1 of y rounds according to the duration of the poison.

Was the guy wrong in this case? Or is there something I'm missing that makes both explanations essentially the same?

The difference is whether or not the poison has an onset. For example:

Black Lotus Extract
Type poison (contact); Save Fortitude DC 20
Onset 1 minute; Frequency 1/round for 6 rounds
Effect 1d6 Con damage; Cure 2 consecutive saves

If Valeros touches a doorknob covered in Black Lotus Extract, he must make a DC 20 Fort save. If he fails, nothing happens for 1 min (10 rounds). After 1 min, the poor sot makes another DC 20 save. If he passes, he takes no damage. We check the Cure condition and note that 2 Consecutive Saves are required, so Valeros is still under the effects of the poison. On his next round, he must make another DC 20 Fort save. This time he fails, so he takes 1d6 Con damage and the Cure condition resets back to 2. On his next round, he has to make another DC 20 save. This time he makes the save, and takes no further damage. Next round: Another DC 20 save. This time he makes the save, and is cured of the poison 2 rounds early.

Compare this to something with no onset:

Burnt Othur Fumes
Type poison (inhaled); Save Fortitude DC 18
Frequency 1/round for 6 rounds
Initial Effect 1 Con drain; Secondary Effect 1d3 Con damage; Cure 2 consecutive saves

Valeros is following too closely behind Baleros after Taco Tuesday and is hit full in the face with a dose of Burnt Othur Fumes. Valeros must make a DC 18 Fort save. He rolls poorly, and is thusly poisoned. Because of this, he immediately takes 1 Con drain (the initial effect, since the onset time is non-existant). On Valeros' turn, he rolls against another DC 18 Fort save and makes it this time. He takes no additional Con damage. Checking the Cure Condition, we note that it takes 2 consecutive saves, so Valeros is still poisoned. On his next turn, he makes the DC 18 Fort save a second time. This effectively cures the poison and avoids the Secondary Effect of the poison altogether.

To sum up: The way you were taught effectively adds an onset time of a few seconds to every poison. By strictest definitions, he was wrong... but he had half the story.