Psychic_Robot's page

Sounds good. Avoids the "stuff that activates on crits doesn't here" and evens the field - since higher multipliers are rewarded, but higher ranges aren't.

That's what I was thinking (and presumably that's what Velderan was thinking).

Either way, I really like this feat because it gives characters the option to move and attack without sucking.

Sounds good, though I might increase it to quadruple damage at +16 BAB.

Ranks in Perception are like hit points. Everybody of every class wants them, and everybody of every class takes them whenever they can. In my experience, "2+Int skill points per level" now really means "1+Int skill points per level, plus a rank in Perception."

Back when Perception was several skills, there were some adventurers who were perceptive and others who weren't. These days, all adventurers are perceptive; a few don't get a class bonus to Perception, but Perception is otherwise maxed out for every character.

This, as I see it, is a problem. When a skill becomes so important that everyone want to take it, it isn't a skill anymore, it's just a skill point tax for something that everyone assumes an adventurer should be able to do anyway.

So things were better off when characters couldn't see or hear anything. Similarly, by that reasoning, rogues technically have 5 + Int mod skills ranks per level, since they're (probably) automatically putting points into Stealth, Perception, and Disable Device.

The change to Power Attack was a quite intentional choice to scale back on certain abuses. The team here has found that Power Attack in particular shifts combat into an unbalanced arena. Allow me to explain.

With the Power Attack feat as it was in 3.5, Power Attack was the crutch that allowed the fighter to compete. By collecting every to hit bonus they could find, they could shift more and more into PA and still be effective. This lead to one of two situations, either too much got shifted, in which case the fighter rarely hit and felt useless, or too little got shifted, in which case the fighter dealt too little damage and felt useless. You could sometimes get it juuusssst right, but that required some knowledge of the monsters AC and a math degree (or a lot of trial and error). In either case, this was unacceptable and as we are trying to fix fighters from other directions, leaving this feat as it was just seemed like a poor idea. We wanted evaluation without PA's interference.

So... here are some thoughts. We are considering changing PA to a set scale, where you subtract X and add 2X to damage, regardless of your weapon or other factors (following KISS). X might slide up as you gain levels, but it would not be a variable, which causes too many issues. Here is my question... what should X be. My current thought is to start it out at 2 and have it increase by 1 for every 5 of your BAB. Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

To be honest, I'd actually implement it more like 4e's model: you take a -2 penalty and do +X damage. My personal suggestion would be that you would do an extra 2 damage, +1 damage for every two points of BAB that you have. While this would be significantly less damage on a single attack, I would hope that the greater increase in to-hit chances on iterative attacks would compensate for this.

No. Just no.

Monks can buy magic monk weapons or Amulets of Mighty Fists if they need those bonuses.

If they need them so badly that they can't afford to pay money for them, then the solution is to give them a fighter's BaB, not dupicate the effects of stronger and more attacks via weapon properties.

(Also, your argument that Monks can't use armor is silly: They can use Bracers of Armor, which cost the same per bonus as magic armor.)

No. You don't kmow what you're talking about. Amulets of Mighty Fists are ridiculously expensive.

A fighter spending 40-50% of his expected WBL on his main weapon can't buy a magic weapon before 4th-level and cannot afford a +1 keen weapon until 7th, let alone the +1 speed weapon until 11th-level. I'm all for monks having magical attacks, but let's not have them outclass the fighter.

Yes, but monks still need multiple high stats to do anything. The fighter can dump them.

Again, why not just make it a set amount so that characters with short swords don't get screwed?

Your example is an extremely specific example that is wholly contrived. Mine involves, you know, dragons and sh*t.

Bump.

Why would making a feat give multiple different abilities be any different than making several feats give one ability each? If characters got about ten more feats, I'd say that most things were peachy as-is. However, the majority of characters AREN'T getting bonus feats, so they might as well be merged.

Improved Combat Maneuvers: You can execute combat maneuvers without provoking attacks of opportunity, and you get a +2 bonus to your CMB.

That's a lot for one feat, I agree. However, what you must consider is that a) it's roughly 10% of a character's feats to take this, and b) why on Earth does it take a special feat to perform combat maneuvers without sucking? Personally, I think that the AoO should be removed entirely, but that's just me.

Quandary: It would be worth a feat for casters who don't want to lose a caster level.

PR, it seems that your criteria for what makes a feat good are much, much higher than what feats are currently designed towards. Are there any 3.5 PH feats or PRPG Beta feats that you think are good as is? I read this and get the sense that you think all feats are too weak.

I fully admit that some feats are not equal to others, but think that a) there are many standard feats that are at a good power level as is, and b) that the gap between good feats and poor feats is relatively small. In fact, there is only one feat that I would never take (Combat Casting.)

Quicken Spell is awesome.

Yeah, broken. And the guy with Combat Expertise still deals out a respectable amount of damage.

No. You don't know what you're talking about. At all. If it would be so broken to put all armor/weapon proficiencies in a single feat, then why can I gain all of that and get a bonus feat with a single dip into another class?

Furthermore, I must reiterate:

Monsters will ignore unhittable targets. They will move on to squishier things, greener pastures, all that jazz.

In addition, the guy who takes a -5 penalty on his attack rolls with Combat Expertise fails because he could be using that -5 to get +10 damage. A swing. And +20-30 damage on a crit.

Vital Strike/Improved Vital Strike are good ideas. Unfortunately, there are two problems.

1. They require two feats to use them. This is bad. They should be merged so that characters who don't have a million feats aren't boned.

2. They use base weapon damage instead of a flat value. Now, why is this so bad (and why is it the more important issue)? The feat's benefits are too lopsided: players with a large amount of base weapon damage are like, "Yay, Vital Strike" while players using short swords or daggers are like, "Wow, what a junk feat." For instance, suppose that one were to use a greatsword (2d6) and then get larger via enlarge person (improving damage to 3d6). Well, with Improved Vital Strike, you just got a bonus +18d6 damage, assuming that both your attacks hit. Unfortunately, the poor fellow stuck using a short sword (1d6) gets a whopping +6d6 if both his attacks hit.

Now, for monks, this gets into ridiculous territory. Let's take a monk with a base unarmed damage of 2d8. Since he probably has Improved Natural Attack (since that's kind of assumed for monks), his attacks do a base of 3d8 damage. At that level, he can use Vital Strike (assuming he hasn't multiclassed to get better BAB). Each attack that he does is going to do +6d8 damage. For the sake of argument, let's assume that his three attacks at +11 damage hit. Well, he just did +18d8 damage. That's okay, considering the power of the greatsword fighter. However, if the monk decides to get a +16 BAB by level 20--advisable--or do the TWF thing, his damage is going to skyrocket. If he gets Improved Vital Strike, his attacks are going to do +9d8 damage each. If he uses TWF, he's going to be getting a lot of attacks, each that does +6d8 damage each.

Oh, and at level 20 (assuming all monk levels)? +8d8 damage per attack.

We clearly have a problem. Very much so. This is what is known as a "bad thing."

Personally, I think that the effects of Vital Strike/Improved Vital Strike should be a median between the two extremes: dagger users don't get boned and big characters don't do infinite damage. I'd say something like a flat +2d8 to +3d8 damage per attack would work better.

Thoughts?

Uh...no. People becoming proficient with weapons and armor is hardly broken. They're wasting a feat to become proficient in these things. For many classes, that's 10% of their feats.

The player who makes himself impossible to hit with Combat Expertise is going to be ignored by the monsters. The monsters will move on to squishier targets. The character with Combat Expertise can't keep up with the damage output of someone using Power Attack, especially not with the Pathfinder versions.

I'm surprised that no developers have been like, "My, my, what a great idea! This would surely shave several pages off the finished product!"

"Abusive to damage amounts"? That's the only way that melee characters could function. The problem came with things that multiplied this damage (such as Leap Attack).

They shouldn't. Having gimped feats in the game forces game mastery. By forcing game mastery, one is left with two possible outcomes:

1. Only "hardcore" players can function against level-appropriate challenges.

2. Players who know the system very well can tear through encounters with ease.

And that's the sad fact. Players who know 3e inside and out are going to dominate the game while players who are new to D&D are going to get pooped on (unless the former make characters for the latter). The end result? Lameness. One shouldn't have to be a veteran fatbeard to play D&D.

Unfortunately, one of the big problems with Pathfinder is that these sub-par choices still remain in the game. For instance, Weapon Focus/Weapon Specialization: they're junk. When I was first introduced to D&D, I thought they were awesome because, well, they were fighter-only, which meant that they were obviously special and thus awesome for the fighter class.

/facepalm

Another example of this is the Lightning Reflexes feat. It's a +2 bonus to your Reflex save. Wow. See the barbarian who just picked up Power Attack? He can function. The guy who picked up Lightning Reflexes is crying himself to sleep because he just failed so hard that quantum physics imploded. (That doesn't even make any sense, but I don't care.)

There are a few options to making these sub-par feats up to par. (Please note that I'm not saying that they all have to be equal--they just shouldn't be crap.)

1. Merge feats. For instance, let's take Quick Draw. It's handy, yes, but is it worth a feat slot? Maybe. However, if we took Quick Draw, Lightning Reflexes, and Dodge, and we put them all in a nicely-packaged feat called "Lightning Reflexes," it would definitely be worth a feat slot.

Similarly, let's look at the various combat maneuvers. There are like four hundred different feats, meaning that only the fighter can adequately make use of them. Would it break the game if there was a feat called "Improved Combat Maneuvers" that let you use combat maneuvers without provoking an AoO? No. No, it wouldn't break the game at all.

As a final example, suppose we merged the martial and simple weapon proficiency feats with all the armor proficiency feats and all the shield proficiency feats. Would D&D thoroughly break if one feat gave you access to all of those? No. Not at all. People might actually consider spending a feat on that, then.

2. Make numbers bigger. This is viable, but I hate it when D&D heads deeper into CrazyTown. For instance, suppose we were to take Great Fortitude. Holy sh*t, a weaksauce +2 bonus on Fortitude saves. Well, suppose we made it scale to level: you get a +2 bonus to Fort saves, +1 for every five levels you have. Well, that's something that the wizard might consider taking now. Unfortunately, if the fighter takes it, it's only going to exacerbate a problem with high-level D&D: the "don't roll a 1" syndrome. As in, the only way you can fail your Fort save is by rolling a 1. That's lame. The feat works for the wizard. It doesn't work for the fighter.

3. Make feats scale to level. This is probably the best solution out of the three, combining feat-merging with a slight power boost.

Let's say you've got Weapon Finesse. That's great and all, but why not give that feat a little more "oomph"? When you have a +5 or +10 BAB, you can apply your Dexterity modifier to damage with finessable weapons instead of your Strength modifier. Maybe you can make an attack as a standard action that causes the target to bleed for a few rounds.

Or let's take Combat Expertise. It's a stinker. It serves as a prerequisite for decent feats. Now, what if we gave the user of Combat Expertise the ability to negate extra damage from Power Attack against him? Or what if we gave him the ability to improve his attacks with his Intelligence bonus somehow? Now players have both options and good choices available.

To summarize: bad feats are bad. Turn the crappy feats into shiny, new feats.

1. Untyped.
2. Yes.

Never! Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization are clearly overpowered choices! Surely they are worth at least seven feats, not a paltry four!

Basically, they all need to be combined. Why? It's retarded to force people to take seven hundred different feats so they can not suck in combat.

My apologies. I didn't realize that purposely creating sub-par choices was a design goal of the Pathfinder developers. I also didn't realize that we were using Weapon Specialization as a baseline--but if that's the case, I think we can agree that Skill Focus is overpowered and deserves a nerf.

It just ain't right-+5 damage at level 20? Monsters laugh that off. At the very least, it needs to be +1 damage per two caster levels. I'd go so far as to change each +1 to +1d6 (for a total of +5d6 damage).

There's no need for separate feats like Persuasive, Stealthy, etc. They can all be replaced by a single feat that gives two +2 bonuses to two skills.

Yes.

And they need them as part of their class features. Why? Because it's ridiculous to expect monks to give up magic weapons in exchange for a little extra base damage. Here's what monks need to help them stay competitive (learn from the soulknife's mistakes).

1. Enhancement bonus on attacks: +1 at level 2 and every four levels thereafter.

2. Automatic keen property. Around level 4.

3. Automatic speed property. Around level 8.

Why is this? Because monks can't wear magical armor (so they need to do offense). And they could be getting a lot more benefits by using special monk weapons, but monks are supposed to use their fists.

Where are the rules for starting hit points? I thought they were the same as in 3.5.

It would also help shield-wearers with touch attacks without taking a feat.

I'm surprised this feat didn't catch any special comments yet. In effect, this feat seems to allow a medium-sized character to attack adjacent squares and squares ten feet away (or 10 and 15 for reach weapons). My questions are these:

A. Is this intentional? My feeling is that the reach should only apply to a full-round attack or single standard action on that PC's turn, but perhaps the penalty to AC is a balancing factor with more weight than I attribute to it.
B. Would you threaten all of the squares that you can attack with this feat until the start of your next turn? This is could have balance issues in the style of the spiked chain.

A. I should hope so. Fighters need reach to live.

B. It's not the feat that's the problem, it's the spiked chain. That thing should die in a fire.

Two differing definitions. One is standard per the 3.5 rules. The other says:

Exception: Extra damage over and above a weapon’s normal damage is not multiplied when you score a critical hit.

I'm guessing they forgot the word "dice."

Psychic_Robot wrote:

Master Craftsman: However, why not allow for a Spellcraft check to replace the required spells?

While I don't know for certain, I think the intention is to allow item creation by those who are not casters. Only casters normally have Spellcraft.

Yes, Aubrey. And, normally, only spellcasters have spells. That's quite the conundrum, isn't it?

Regarding "Shall Not Pass":

Clearly, this needs to be renamed, "YOU SHALL NOT PASS."

Anyway, I think that these expanded feats are a good idea, but there are too many of them. To be of any use--even to a fighter, who gets a billion feats--they need to be combined. For instance, why not give the benefits of all the "Greater [Combat Maneuver]" feats as an automatic bonus to characters with a high BAB (or for being fighters)?

Specific feats:

Fleet: This is very weak. It should be an automatic +10 foot bonus to your speed that applies at all times (no stacking). Why? +5 feet is rather useless for a feat expenditure.

Improved Greater Fortitude/Iron Will/Lightning Reflexes: Again, too spread out. This needs to be an automatic, "Three times per day, you can reroll a saving throw" thing for anyone to consider taking it.

Lunge: Why the -4 to AC? Seems too weak. Why not just make it automatic? There's no reason that characters trained in combat shouldn't be able to lunge without taking a penalty to AC. Even so, if you feel like keeping the AC penalty, drop it to -2. Less painful that way.

Master Craftsman: Awesome. However, why not allow for a Spellcraft check to replace the required spells?

As far as the rest goes, this is the kind of stuff that Pathfinder needs. It's a good start.

Shadowdancer is still ridiculously weak. That's a shame, really.

Clearly, the issue is not blade barrier but solid fog.

No, Velderan! That's completely overpowered! There's no possible way that the BBEG would have energy resistance, spell resistance, or a ridiculously high Reflex save! Noooo, you can't expect evokers to do damage! That would be BROKEN. I DEMAND THAT ALL CLASSES BE BALANCED AROUND 2[W]+STR DAMAGE OMG OMG

Of course, this ignores mounted/charging builds that can easily do more damage than the evoker. OMG EVOKERS BROKENED Or the fact that a second level spell grants energy resistance 30. OMG HOW DARE YOU WANT TO DO DAMGE ENEMIES Or the fact that a third level spell grants virtual immunity to an energy type. BORKENED HOLY SH*T HOOGE DAMAGES

One must remember that Paizo has changed the way that the CR system works.

Aside from homebrew monsters/dragons, I would like to see a list of monsters that can easily hit (>50%) a character with an AC of 40. (Not saying that anyone is wrong; just interested in seeing the numbers.)

I'm thinking that turning the spells into swift actions is pushing the game even farther into the "rocket tag" direction, which is something that is not good.

I'm in favor of Velderan's suggestions.

+1 to every damage die seems more like it.

Psionics already tried that. It's not working out so well.

No. Evokers must be punished for wanting to do damage.

I was going to make a thread like this. Then you already did. Well done.

+5 damage at level 20? Come on, folks. That's nothing. Monsters feel that as a tickle in their ribs before they pummel the evoker to death for taking a loser school. Not only do evocations need to be ramped up in general, but the evoker needs some "oomph."

Here's my suggestion:

1. Evokers get a ray that does 1d6 damage of fire, electricity, acid, or cold. It does an additional +1 points of damage per caster level--and then it gets a +1d6 boost at fifth level and every five levels thereafter. Yes, you're then looking at the evoker doing 5d6+20 points of damage at level 20. At-will. And this sure seems like a lot, but then you realize that people thought the warlock was overpowered at first, too. And then you realize that the evoker could be beating the game by casting spells that do more damage, and then you realize that it's not overpowered.

2. Evokers do an additional +2 damage per die when casting evocation spells that do damage. This is grand because it makes evocations less bad.

Technically, this isn't the time, but...

The Eldritch Knight has Spell Critical, where he can cast a spell as a swift action when he confirms a critical hit. Devastating Blow (the name, I think) allows you to take a standard action to auto-crit an opponent. Do these abilities work in conjunction with one another as I think they do?

Good news: Overall, this looks to be very promising.

Bad news: There are still some weak spots.

Guarded Stance/Rolling Dodge: Yay on being toned down, boo on them being separate. Mash ‘em together and you’ve got a rage power worth taking.

Increased DR: Too weak. DR 3/-- just ain’t cutting it. Make it increase the barbarian’s damage reduction by DR 1/--, and have it improve by DR 1/-- for every four barbarian levels the character has.

Elemental Rage: Still too weak. Converting half of the barbarian’s damage to energy damage would be better. At the very least, it needs to scale beyond +1d6. Twelfth level is too late for this ability—it needs to be selectable at around sixth level. Then you could have it improve by +1d6 for every additional four levels the barbarian has. (+4d6 damage per attack isn’t going to break the barbarian, especially if he’s smart and he trades out his other attacks for Vital Strike.

Low-Light Vision/Night Vision: Weak. Combine them into one ability, and then spice it up by giving the barbarian the ability to see through magical darkness at around eighth level.

Swift Foot: Very “meh.” It’d be better as a single ability that automatically improved.

Renewed Vigor: Scaling good, but still weak. If you’re going to leave it at a 1/day, it needs to be something with more “oomph”—like 1d8 + Con bonus + 2 HP/level. If you’re going to leave it weakened, it needs to be usable multiple times per day—perhaps 1/day at 4th level and then +1 time/day for every four levels thereafter.

Other than that, the barbarian’s abilities seem to be heading in the right direction.

Quoting because.

Well i think there should be one basic Class wich should fit into any roleplaying role you can think of.

Since Dnd 3.0 the bard has a unique Class Feature - his music. Its the sadest thing about that Class, becuase its negating roleplaying possibilities. I'll explain why:

There are lots of extremly specialized Classes & Prestigeclasses in Dnd, well most of them unplayable because they are too specific.

For me, roleplaying is about this: i think of my character, what is he supposed to be what i want to play in the next campain, and then i go and create my character.

As the ultimate versatile character, you should be able to build this character using the Bard class, cause there is no versatile class with some spellcasting at all. For me thats what the Bard is supposed to be.

We have the opposite of that: You play a Bard, then you are supposed to act like this.... play music during battle...

What the hell is that for? I dont want to be a Troubadix "#!?~@" I want to play exactly the role i want to play, and because the Bard(Jack of all Trades, master of none) should do that job. And no more.

Maybe there are some people who think it was a good idea to give something unique to the Bard, i'm not. For me it makes the Class nonsense.

I think there are lots of people who want a class where they can build whatever character they want, sure there will be specialist who can do things better, but maybe there is that specific Prestige Class missing for the role i think of. (Try to play a group healer in a stealthy Rogue Campain)

Uh...I'm pretty sure that you can use any Perform skill for bardic abilities. Use a weapon drill (introduced in CWar) if you want.

Otherwise, play a factotum or chameleon. The bard performs. Jason has already said that he's not going to give in to the whiners who are squalling about the 2e (crap) bard. I've already demonstrated how a "Jack of All Trades" is just an arcane trickster, so, really, you need to get over it.

Because it's completely unnecessary to do so.

Oh, I thought we were talking about the rules to the game, now you want my gaming resume? What exactly qualifies you as a gaming expert?

Incidentally the whole idea of internet credentials is so ridiculous it's laughable. "I've had 35 years of gaming experience, I helped Gary write the game...". Whatever.

From your posting habits, I surmised that you have had little practical experience with familiars. Since you continue to avoid the question, I will go with this assumption.

Please... explain how much of a liability they are. I don't see it.

Well, Dennis, you see... According to the rules, familiars have 1/2 their master's HP. This means that the familiar's hit point total is much less than the master's--50% less, in fact. Any sort of area attack is going to leave the familiar in a significant amount of pain, unless it happens to make its saving throw.

As I've said several times, if I have to explain how a +2 bonus to every skill in the book that stacks with nearly every other bonus available is powerful then it's a lost cause.

It's not really that powerful. Consider the skill check bonuses from spells and items--the huge bonuses available make a +2 bonus negligible. While a +2 bonus is decent at low-levels, at higher-levels, your stat bonuses and skill ranks go into crazytown, so it doesn't matter.

Good to hear. Then you wouldn't mind a familiar that had skills that advanced in the same way the animal companions skills advance I assume?

No, actually, I wouldn't mind. I don't see the need for a nerf, mind you, but I wouldn't throw a huge hissy fit about it.

Dennis, I'm heading to bed right now, so I won't answer your questions in detail just yet. However, allow me to note that there are enchantments for armor that give a +15 bonus to skills in 3.5. This throws the entire d20 mechanic so far out of whack that a +2 bonus wouldn't matter.

Again, I'll add more tomorrow.

For the nay-sayers to the idea that the idea of a dilettante isn't an arcane trickster-ish character:

Rogue 3/wizard 6/arcane trickster 4/fighter 1/eldritch knight 6.

So you end up with a +15 BAB, 8th-level spells, +4d6 sneak attack, and decent saves all around. The only thing you're not doing so well with is skill points, but a high Int and the Pathfinder skills system helps solve that problem.

And while I agree that this could certainly be done more gracefully, it still works.

(If you go outside of Core, things get even better--unseen seer, spellsword, and abjurant champion to help round out the levels, turning you into a true "dilettante.")

What I think people are looking for is a class that can do a little bit of everything. I would suggest the following:

1. Factotum.
2. Fochlucan lyrist (hate that class so much).
3. Chameleon.

I suppose I'm not really seeing what, exactly, about the bard class isn't "dilettante" enough. It gets 3/4 BAB, a d8 HD, moderate spellcasting abilities, and a strong skill selection.

Perhaps someone could elaborate on this a little?

Oh, I agree that the bard's purpose isn't to "slug it out" with the enemy. However, bonus damage is not going to make that particularly possible--it will just enhance the bard's ability to function in combat. The rogue is still getting +10d6 (+35, on average) damage per attack. The bard would be getting +10 extra damage per attack. While this would be strong, it would not be particularly powerful when one considers that the bard has 3/4 BAB, a poor Fortitude save, low AC, and a very limited supply of feats.

I am avoiding conversations where people attack me personally. You seem more interested in me than in actually discussing the topic.

Actually, Dennis, I have posted several times to this topic, and I haven't attacked you at all. I was merely commenting that you keep avoiding questioning. If you would mind answering Velderan's questions...?

To restate them:

1. How often do you use familiars?
2. Do you understand how familiars can be a combat liability?
3. How is a +2 bonus overpowered?

Then a feat for example that gives a rogue +2 to all skill checks would be balanced? Why bother with a monkey, just a single feat. This would save a ton on the page count of the final game. Skill Focus (All)

Actually, Dennis, there two things you aren't considering.

1. Some of us enjoy having familiars because we like them. Not because of any power brought to the character, but because they're an RP thing.

2. Skill Focus has been revamped to be more powerful, eventually giving a +6 bonus on checks (so your statement is inaccurate).

Dennis, I'm noticing that you keep avoiding questions. Please stop this behavior, as it derails the thread and is counter-productive to discussion.

Would demonstrate how having a familiar is overpowered? A blanket "+2" on skill checks? That doesn't even matter. At low-levels, it gives the rogue an edge. At higher levels, it doesn't matter. 3e is all about things getting such huge check modifiers that a +1 or +2 isn't noticeable.

There have been several posts talking about making the bard more effective in combat. In particularly somebody suggested allowing the bard access to sneak attack--giving the bard additional bonuses to damage rolls would do something akin to this.

While one can go for the "specialized" route, it is [insert ego-friendly synonymous phrase for "patently ridiculous"] that the bard can be made unable to use his own class features because he hasn't put the skill points into two different Perform skills. It would be akin to the rogue being unable to use sneak attack because he hadn't put enough points into Stealth.

Also, I hardly consider "patently ridiculous" to be "snark."

Fact: The 3.0 bard was altered in 3.5 to give the bard class more skill points.

Fact: Forcing the bard to spend skill points on two different Perform skills effectively reverts the bard.

Fact: Downgrading in an attempt to upgrade is counter-intuitive and counter-productive.

Fact: Counter-productivity in an attempt to be more productive is ridiculous. Patently ridiculous, even.

I would appreciate knowing what constitutes "snark" to the Pathfinder moderators, similarly to how another poster wanted to know what the inappropriate phrase was in his post. Unlike that poster, I only hope that you'll provide me with an answer.

Hey all -- if there are people interested in making their own maps, they should look at this Humble Bundle for Map Making Software -- Some pretty cool stuff in there!

Hmm

Dargoth876 wrote:

Reactive Strike : since I see Rage of the Elements in this guide, is it currently usable under PathfinderInfinite?

Also, would you want to point experienced players and GMs toward Pathfinder Infinite resources at the end of the guide?

I think a guide to Pathfinder Infinite would be a good future addition, thought it would likely appear on the community blog instead of the store blog as we don't sell those products on the Paizo Store.

I suspect the reason you don't see Rage of Elements available on Pathfinder Infinite is that it used the Open Gaming License, which doesn't allow it to be added to the Infinite license.

-Jim

Jim, is there a plan to remaster Rage of Elements? We all love that book so very much.

Hmm

Am I the only one who misread vaultline as valentine when reading it the first time? I was trying to figure out the significance of the valentine while escaping: perhaps a secret admirer about to reveal themselves, complete with a secret door to the PC's heart?

❤

Yeah, that was probably only me. Next time, Hmm, wear your glasses when reading the Paizo blog.

Hmm

Michael Beck beat me to it and managed to get the first one published...

Are there any infinite scenarios up on Drivethru RPG yet? I didn't see any in quick search. I am really wanting there to be a section for them on Drivethru RPG so that we can find them quickly.

I also would like to see a sub-forum on here devoted to Pathfinder & Starfinder Infinite Scenarios.

Hmm

Oh, I always hated Nanowrimo in the past because I could never finish. But... I love the idea of turning it into an adventure writing challenge, especially since the list of adventures that I want to write is so very long.

I'm in, though my word count is likely going to be much lower than this.

But I would suggest following it up with playtests. Playtesting is my secret weapon as a writer. Alsmost all of my adventures have changed significantly after the first initial playtest.

Hmm

PS You were up either very late or very early, Nathan!

I am quite fortunate that I signed up for the Studio subscription back when it was inexpensive. I used it for my turnovers for maps whenever I got to make a custom map (like the one I did for Historia's Holdout) for an adventure. So... I still have that studio subscription grandfathered at the old rate, which is great because I have been using it heavily. I just wish it was available at that rate for other folks, because it's an amazing map tool. It can be frustrating to learn, but once you figure out how to remove / edit your stamps, it becomes one that you can learn as you use.

I will admit that whenever my brain gets stuck, I will go and create one of the maps that I need, and then my brain gets unstuck and I go back to writing. BTW -- I have discovered that one can create page borders in Inkarnate using custom map sizes, and I have been using for graphics as well. It's been incredibly rewarding.

Hmm

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

That is what I am doing. I plan to list (and if I figure out how to do it, link to) the actual flip-mats so that GMs can buy them, but I am 'reproducing' other flip-mats in my adventure. They'll have the same footprint as the actual map, but with some key differences. I will call out the actual flip-mat that GMs can purchase from Paizo in a sidebar.

I want Paizo to make money, and calling out specific flip-mats is something that I hope will help them.

So basically you'll have a custom map drawn by yourself or someone else that is similar to the official maps? (If so, also curious if you yourself are doing them or someone else)

Seems like a great idea but a bit of artistic work haha.

I draw them myself in Inkarnate. It's a pretty nifty map tool, though a bit pricier for the studio subscription than I would like. I can't argue with the results though.

Hmm

Is there a formal Canon that any Starfinder Society adventure has to meet?

For example: just Paizo 2nd edition rules, setting and adventures; or does any adventure also have to be compatible with setting information in the first edition books (Like Pact Worlds or Ports of Call)

If you're worried about lore, you might want to consider setting your story in an unexplored world in the Vast.

For Lore, I would read the Galaxy Guide first, and then use Pact Worlds and Ports of Call for stuff that the Galaxy Guide doesn't cover. The world changed enormously with the birth of the Newborn, so I would prioritize the newer lore if given a conflict between the two.

Hmm

Mark Moreland wrote:

OstinatoAvocado wrote:

Downloaded the flip-mat pack for Pathfinder. Are those the only Pathfinder flip-mats authors are allowed to use? Relatively speaking there weren't very many in the pack.

Yes, those maps are the only ones authorized for reproduction in Society Infinite scenarios. We may add other maps to these packs at a later date, but there's nowhere beyond that asset pack where you'll find the ones we've okayed for inclusion in other publishers' titles.

To be clear, can we reccomend the use of other flip mats if we limit their graphical reproduction/representation in our product to a sketch or a facsimile we did ourselves in a map making program?

That is what I am doing. I plan to list (and if I figure out how to do it, link to) the actual flip-mats so that GMs can buy them, but I am 'reproducing' other flip-mats in my adventure. They'll have the same footprint as the actual map, but with some key differences. I will call out the actual flip-mat that GMs can purchase from Paizo in a sidebar.

I want Paizo to make money, and calling out specific flip-mats is something that I hope will help them.

Lysle wrote:

thistledown wrote:

Disappointing that we can't use maps from previous scenarios unless they're flip maps. What if I want something back in the Arniselle lodge?

I did not see this among the limitations. Could someone point me to where this was mentioned?

Prior to the Society guidelines being released today, I understood Infinite products to be permitted to include redrawn maps as the guidelines stated:

"Duplicated maps, including maps recreated in different art styles, can only be published on Pathfinder Infinite if they directly support another adventure or supplement within the same product. They cannot be the primary product. If you write an adventure that takes places in a location from an existing Pathfinder adventure, you can include redrawn maps of that location."

I hadn't looked into redrawing the maps, which I suppose could be done. I was just speaking to copying a scenario's custom map from the pdf to use in a new scenario - which was not a listed option in the Maps guideline. First edition (both programs) had a LOT of custom maps.

There's a lot of maps that can be redrawn in Inkarnate. I may be redrawing the Aniselle Lodge map myself. Do you want me to contact you if I do so?

Hmm

Josh and Shay, we miss you so much!

Love you lots,
Hmm

Thank you all for your feedback here! Please understand that we are literally doing the best we can given our bandwidth and circumstances, but we'll keep trying!

To Maya (and other Paizo Employees reading this):

Deep breath. Exhale. Repeat.

It's okay. We know that Paizo Staff is scrambling post-layoffs, and there is an inevitible adjustment as you all figure out which hats you are wearing when.

That said, Madhippy3 is correct that the solution is to extend blog editing privileges to Jessica Catalan and Alex Speidel so that they can update blogs more swiftly during this challenging period. All the changes that are happening right now are super confusing for all of us, and having information more up to date would take a lot of stress off the community.

To the Organized Play Community

Deep breath. Exhale. Repeat.

I think that all of us have been a little stressed during this transition period. For me, Organized Play is more than just a hobby. It's my community, my art (because I freelance a lot) and my sanity valve. So when I say that I had more than one freakout moment over this, I think that everyone can relate.

Change can be stressful, but it also can bring growth and good things.

Jessica has told us that we have adventures for PFS coming, whether via the newly expanded printables line or via the upcoming Infinite Scenarios. I know that I and other members of this community (many of them established organized play freelancers) are writing stuff for Infinite right now.

The stories and community will continue. Let's just hang in there until the next blog - which I am hoping will clarify things for all of us.

Respectfully yours,
Hmm

For those of us trying to figure out a layout for infinite scenarios, what configuration would be printer-friendly?

SFS1 4-05 A Waltz Through a Myriad of Worlds. The premise was so built for unlimited sequels

I so agree!

Since Paizo Infinite is coming, are there any scenarios published for which you are looking for a sequel? If so, which ones?

Dipping my toes in and planning some characters. During both the mummys mask translation and runs of the abomination vaults, I was often stymied by " you can t attempt that check your mastery level isn t high enough" mechanic. Does it show up that often in published SFS adventures?

Welcome back, BNW! We have missed you so much around here.

Most of the SFS adventures are pretty low-level, but I expect as we get into higher level material we will have some mastery blocks as well. In PFS, I see it most often with trap and hazard disabling, so I recommend that spell casters keep their magical skill maxxed and anyone with thievery needs to max the thievery.

Hmm

Anyway, I vastly prefer entirely original ancestries over stuff that just gets yoinked from mythology. Golarion's way more interesting as its own thing rather than a mere funhouse mirror of Earth, and I wish Paizo leaned into that and focused more on their original content. Not that I regret the real-world inspired stuff at all--the Mwangi, Tian Xia, and Impossible Lands expansions were all awesome, and I'm frustrated we're getting so much Avistani nonsense for the forseeable future because there are entire continents being completely ignored--but I love being able to get things here that I can't get anywhere else. Somebody called out the goloma as being extraneous, but they're my literal favorite (although they could use a tuneup now that Starfinder's madrosarai have been given a more generous form of all-around vision).

I do love some of the unique ancestries that Paizo has created. On the Pathfinder side, I adore the Kashrishi. They're simply delightful. In Starfinder, I love the weirder ancestries like Izalguun, Astrazoan, and my favorite of all time Bantrid. Who doesn't love a constantly rolling nose on a ball as an ancestry?

I do think that one of the things that Paizo tries to do is leave blank spaces (or city dots with no information beyond a name) on maps where GMs can create their own stories. I am glad that the Pathfinder Society has started to take us to non-Avistani continents, but I agree that we spend a ton of time in Avistan in our stories!

Hmm

I for one haven't moved on from Wayfinder. You were my first adventure writing credit, Tim!

I read this forum nearly every day. I can understand the appeal of discord for some things. It's great for private, project-related undertakings so every major Paizo book has a discord where developers and freelancers can communicate.

Discord is terrible as a place of record however. I much prefer the forums (and even Reddit) as a place where announcements, discussions and OP rulings take place.

Hmm

I am the people who handles that, yes!

Ah, this is the confirmation that I have been looking for that Alex is actually multiple people. That must be how he gets all his work done for us.

Alex - tell us. Are you a series of clones linked by a hive mind? Or did you have an accident with a teleporter that duplicated you? An endless series of Alexes from the 'Into the Speidelverse' multiverse? We must know.

Hmm

Unfortunately the guide just updated to 8.0 and the text for Starting Gold reads:

"All characters in Pathfinder Society begin with the standard 15 gold pieces (150 silver pieces) that can be spent on starting gear."

No additional text to allow higher level PFS characters to receive additional gold beyond 15 GP. Its rather disappointing.

I am certain that is an error that will be corrected quickly by the Lorespire staff.

Hmm

Next Paizo live, Maya, what games have you been playing lately?

Response "Artfinder"

Want to play Artfinder at home?

Here's some protips:

1) Use the search site:paizo.com + name of the thing you are searching for!

2) Don't forget to do the search multiple times, using synonyms, because art can be tagged in multiple ways.

3) Search author blogs for various products, because they can contain a wealth of art.

4) Always check back to make certain that the art you have found actually appeared on a Paizo blog.

★ --- ★ --- ★ --- ★

Happy hunting!

Hmm

SkålCon 2026!

Come join me for an author table of Handmaiden's Gaze! We would love to see all of you!

Hmm

While I imagine it was frustrating and stressful to be the sole recipient of all those emails, it was not customers who spontaneously decided to make your life more difficult, so Owen and Alex blaming Paizo's customers for bad behavior makes things worse, not better.

Hello Drake --

Maya has no jurisdiction over Alex and Owen.

Alex and Owen are members of the greater Paizo Community, and not Paizo Staff. They are third party publishers and freelancers and involved with the Know Direction network that publishes news in the Paizoverse. In addition, Owen is a former Paizo Staffer. They, like every other member of this community, were expressing their own opinions and sharing their expertise -- just like other folks on these forums were.

I also watched the BAMF podcast video that discussed the AON situation. I didn't see Alex's and Owen's commentary as blaming Paizo's customers. They were just being frank about the dire situation currently facing Paizo, and tried to be even-handed in discussing all sides of this matter. I for one appreciated their perspective.

Times have been scary, especially for all of us very passionate members of the Paizo community. Tensions have been running high. I am trying to give grace to everyone in this hard time, realizing that we all have been more likely to snap.

I'm just grateful that Paizo and AON have now reached a consensus, and that Maya has been here to help us weather the storm.

Thank you all!

Hmm

Hey Jim --

All I can say is that dropping the AON Partnership was a disastrous decision on Paizo's part. Paizo has two assets that are absolutely essential for weathering this budget storm: Passionate Volunteers and Goodwill. This decision threatens to burn both these precious, precious assets.

I'll have more to say later, but I really hope you rethink this before it is too late.

Yours sincerely from another passionate volunteer,
Hmm

It really is kind of weird. I see very little want to play Starfinder classes in Pathfinder in my games. But I see a lot of want to play Pathfinder classes in Starfinder. I guess it's due to familiarity.

It's also due to the limited number of Starfinder classes. We need more SF classes.

I will miss Shay SO much. I loved reading this blog, but it made me emotional also ㅠㅠ

Me as well!

When I was at Midwest Gamefair earlier this year, I was lucky enough to play a custom multi-table special called the Wheel of Monsters Special that allowed players to play 5th Level Pathfinder and Starfinder 2e characters together in the same adventure. It was super fun, and PCs from both systems were effective - though sometimes the PF2 characters had an issue with a computers check! It made me wonder what sort of experiences you have had in mixing the streams in your home games.

Are you allowing Pathfinder ancestries and classes into your [edited]Starfinder[edited] games? How about Pathfinder monsters? And if so, are you doing a time travel / planar incursion story, or just staying in the Starfinder / Pact Worlds Universe?

Tell me about them!

Hmm

(Cross-posted to Pathfinder Forum.)

---

THIS WAS MARKED AS IN THE WRONG FORUM, BUT I THINK HMM IS ASKING ABOUT HOW PEOPLE ARE INCORPORATING PATHFINDER ELEMENTS INTO THEIR STARFINDER GAMES, IN WHICH CASE IT WAS IN THE RIGHT FORUM, BUT THE WRONG GAME WAS PUT IN THE SENTENCE I EDITED! I EDITED IT SO THE INTENTIONS ARE MORE CLEAR! ONLY THE WORD WAS CHANGED AND NOTHING ELSE! - MEC 10/13/2026

When I was at Midwest Gamefair, I was lucky enough to play a custom multi-table special called the Wheel of Monsters Special that allowed players to play 5th Level Pathfinder and Starfinder characters together in the same adventure. It was super fun, It was super fun, and PCs from both systems were effective - though sometimes the PF2 characters had an issue with a computers check! It made me wonder what sort of experiences you have had in mixing the streams in your home games.

Are you allowing Starfinder ancestries and classes into your Pathfinder games? How about Starfinder monsters? And if so, are you doing a time travel / planar incursion story, or just a regular fantasy adventure?

Tell me about them!

Hmm

(Cross-posted to the Starfinder Forum.)

Aras, we haven't communicated before, but I love the luminary and the work that you and the rest of the Paizo Team put into it. I am so sorry to read that you are on the list of those paizo employees that were let go. Please know that your work is appreciated, and that you will be missed.

Hmm

Hey loves, Bret is right. I have a Paizo gig right now, but the news about the layoffs has also pushed me to start outlining a personal project for Paizo Infinite. I want to have something ready to go when they start the Infinite Scenarios program. Being early and ready is going to be important here, and so I am dropping out of Longroads for the moment.

Love you all!

Hmm

Maya, can you please sticky this thread too? It’s super important to all of us.

Thank you!

Hmm

I am devastated by this news - and filled with ire at Diamond for disputing Paizo’s right to find distribution when they are no longer fulfilling that service. You all know how I am usually the calm and measured voice of reason on these boards? Well, this detail makes me want to scream, rant, and cry all at once.

To all my beloved friends at Paizo who are losing their jobs in July, I am going to miss you all horribly. I have laughed with you at conventions, hugged you in person, and written for your products. You are each a shining light, and Paizo will not be the same without you.

I love you all so much.

With tears in my eyes,
Hmm

I used this ball image for a bantrid character. I think it evokes the rolling energy of the ancestry.

Actually, the last blast of Avatar pictures was when Starfinder 1e came out, and they were all pictures from the Core Rulebook and the Dead Suns AP. Then they added a couple weeks later a few pictures from a different Pathfinder Rulebook and AP, and then they stopped. So... We last got pictures in 2017-2018.

I am constantly experimenting with different avatars that evoke the feel of a character without looking exactly like that character. If I truly care, I put an additional link to the characters image in their PBP profile and header, like I did with Jinglemane. You can see how I added the link to his image by checking out the first link listed above.

I'm putting some more avatar images down below for character inspiration! You'll go crazy if you try to be too literal. Just go for vibes, and you'll find something that works.

Hmm

Wow, I can't believe you got HMM in our game. I'm a huge fan of her work.

GM Tiger knows that I always introduce Pip as the legal counsel from the Envoy's Alliance Legal Defense Fund. Pip is a crusader who loves representing Pathfinders! So of course I said yes when he told me that his team needed a public defender.

I am glad that you have enjoyed my scenarios! It makes me so happy that people love them.

Hmm

Pip listens intently Itka, taking notes. "Thank you for telling me."

Pip takes careful notes as she listens to everyone's comments. She keeps taking notes until she gets the full story of the assault and, being a professional, manages to cover up an incipient giggle with a polite cough.

Lore (Legal) M: 1d20 + 21 ⇒ (12) + 21 = 33

"Sir Jorsal, I understand that the moment where the Pathfinders grabbed you and extracted your tears was surprising, inconvenient, and possibly a bit scary. I'm sorry about the misunderstanding that occurred - it must have felt frustrating at the time. But... this alleged assault won't stand legal ground, and let me explain why. First, you were not physically hurt. There was no need for you to even get first aid. Second, you were inconvenienced for a grand total of less than five minutes."

Pip turns to him. "You know and I know that there is a precedent for Pathfinders to take shortcuts when the world is in danger. You know that if I take this to the Decemvirate, they will weigh the evidence, and they will follow the precedents that they always follow in such situations. They will find in favor of the group that saved the world... a group that was carrying out a project directly in service to that goal and that were carrying out orders for Zarta Dralneen."

She lowers her voice gently. "This will not be seen as an unprovoked assault, but a desperate act of good people who are trying to save the world, and then succeeded."

Diplomacy M: 1d20 + 23 ⇒ (18) + 23 = 41

Pip pauses, and makes a Shameless Request.

"I am going to ask you to drop these charges, Sir Jorsal. Pursuing this further will make you look out-of-touch, and unconcerned with the demons you have been fighting your entire life. Let the heroes be heroes, and let this one go."

AWWWWW YESSSSSSS! GUESS WHO'S BACK! BACK AGAIN!

I have been waiting for MONTHS to tell people about this!

Yay, it feels good to be announced, doesn't it? Congratulations, Katie!

Hmm

Congrats to JC Sanchez for their 5th Glyph, and Bret, congratulations on reaching the trifecta! You made 5th rank in all three systems!

Hmm

Hey, these are boons that were suggested in the 'Levels Seem Wrong' thread by Tick--Tick, and I thought them worth collecting here:

I present these possible workaround options, that don't exist yet in SF2S

AcP boons

* The Bequeathal Boons that exist in PF2S don't yet exist in SF2S. So opening that option could be easy.

* (new boon) Digitized Memory Chronicles: Through magitech, you have downloaded into your memories one of the Starfinder mission chronicles. Pick one scenario that your character has not played, that character can trigger effects as if they had the selected scenario among their chronicles.

These two options do not just serve the purpose of remedying this frustration. They can also easily serve other rp purposes as well. This also could free up the writers to write the stories without feeling overly compelled to write in a specific level range.

One of the ways to handle this is to create a fight with no back line. Have magic mirrors that the enemies can leap into and out of, teleporting them around the room. Have a bunch of ropes and have enemies swinging everywhere around the battlefield (I did that in my adventure PFS2 7-02 Shipyard Sabotage, just to spice things up.) Have flying or burrowing enemies that come in from everywhere.

Don't do this everytime, but once in a while it can shake things up.

Hmm

"We will, we will rock you!"

◈ Jackpot strides towards the center of the map, gliding down the last remaining distance.

Jackpot throws a rain of rocks down on Brazier B.

◈◈ Telekinetic Projectile + CA: 1d20 + 13 + 1 ⇒ (15) + 13 + 1 = 29
Bludgeoning, Piercing or Slashing: 3d6 + 1 ⇒ (1, 6, 3) + 1 = 11

♫ Slow down, you move too fast
You got to make metaplot last
Just delvin' the First One Sites
Lookin' for fun and goin' slowly (goin' slowly, goin' slowly)

Ba-da-da, da, da, da
Goin' slowly
Ba-da-da, da, da, da
Goin' slowly ♫

Source: Simon & Garfunkel's 59th Street Bridge Song (aka "Feelin' Groovy)

Deception to Impersonate (via Acting Perform): 1d20 + 16 ⇒ (8) + 16 = 24

"This calls for exceptional acting ability." Jackpot whispers to his teammates. He activates the wayfinder in his head so that his eyes glow and then staggers towards the imps like a disjointed rag doll.

"Oooooooooo-ooooooooo! Ilza sent me to find you, and you're late. If you don't rush to see her, you'll be in trouble!"

Medicine: 1d20 + 11 ⇒ (16) + 11 = 27
Healing to Bella: 4d8 ⇒ (8, 7, 7, 1) = 23

"Let me bandage up some of those wounds, Bella," Jackpot says.

That's ten minutes, and if Bella also has the spindle she should be up 33 hit points.

Jackpot finds a prisoner to intimidate.
Intimidate to Demoralize (via Perform): 1d20 + 16 ⇒ (14) + 16 = 30

"Where's Ilza's lab, Hecknight? If you don't tell me... I will sing jaunty show tunes at you." Then Jackpot pauses. "Actually, maybe I should just start singing show tunes now."

♫ We've got Ilza's lab to find
You know it's quite the grind
And there's undead rituals to unwind
Can do, it's true, Pathfinders will break on through...
Can do, and can sing 'til your ears turn blue ♫

Jackpot looks hopefully at the Heckknight. "Unless you want to give me information so that I will stop?"

Source: Fugue for Tin Horns from Guys and Dolls

I have not seen anything in the announced adventures that looks like a Lajok sequel (and how I would love to write it - or even just run it and play it!)

Sometimes they plan the sequels in short order, especially with metaplot. Other times the plots get picked up whenever. I would love to see a sequel to Myriad Worlds, and I would also love to see us pick up the plotline from Historia's Holdout where we find the missing protoge's of Historia Prime.

Hmm

Jackpot renews his courageous anthem, and casts soothe on Bella.

Soothe: 3d10 + 12 ⇒ (8, 5, 2) + 12 = 27

"See this? This is what cooperation looks like." Jackpot informs the Hellknights in case they missed it. "You Hellknights pride yourself on being orderly like the legions of Hell, but you're really hella inefficient. Where's your teamwork and care for each other? It makes you look weak that you don't do this. You're not Hellknights. Maybe Heck Knights or even 'Meh' Knights."

Yay! Yay! YAY!

This season you’ll also see a few new additions to the campaign, including new boons in our boon store and a generic adventure sanctioning document, which will allow players to gain XP for their Starfinder Society characters while playing longer Starfinder adventures.

Wooooooo-hoooooooo!

Thank you, thank you, thank you! I am beyond thrilled! Thanks to everyone on the Leadership Team who made this happen.

Hmm