The Plagued One

Ragoz's page

RPG Superstar 8 Season Star Voter. Organized Play Member. 1,393 posts. 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 17 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 202 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fire-forged sounds super thematic and awesome.

My signifier of the Gate has a +5 Spell-storing Mental Focus Mithral Hellknight Plate. Pretty good caster armor.

The Hellknight Obedience for Gate removing spell failure chance is fantastic.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The spell does what it says it does. It becomes the large animated construct statblock.

The Exchange 3/5

10 people marked this as a favorite.

The witch hunt to nerf content continues.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

As on theme as Seducer is it isn't legal in PFS.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

From my experience and what is described above it isn't so much that everyone needs skills so much as.. make the combats better to bring them up to par and give everyone a chance to shine in the same scenario. The stories being told have gotten pretty good in recent seasons. The supporting combats in general aren't so challenging. Why limit it to one style of play or the other?

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

To me it breaks my immersion in the game more when I have to pretend my character must have just stood around in a room for several minutes when I'm told how long something took. I can understand the other side though.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can't you just count the rounds the combat lasted? Any fight over 1 min is rare..

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My samsaran added lesser planar ally to my druid list and took domains instead of an animal companion to make use of the imp companion. This character makes for a very interesting LN druid. I might even embrace it further by going hellknight signifier and wear dragon-fullplate (the wild enchantment change makes me unsure). This character gets a lot of odd looks when you mention being a druid with an imp.

Even with the clarification there are still spells such as Holy Sword (Paladin 4) which don't appear on Wiz/Cleric/Druid. It is possible to use these.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I know it is slightly offtopic but it is something Pirate Rob briefly touched on but the other side. Playing as a level 3 multiple times in a tier 4-5 as 4 person and barely in tier multiple times last convention was brutal. There is no reward. I think it just make more sense to get the tier gold.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Schedule is up.

https://warhorn.net/events/pax-unplugged-pathfinder/schedule/2017/11/17

The Exchange 3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Are the campaign service awards not enough to encourage and recognize anyone who goes above and beyond on behalf of the campaign?

The Exchange 3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just record the retraining on the chronicle before the modules. The retraining rules reference being completed during downtime between adventurers and therefore chronicle sheets.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nobody expects anyone to know everything.

There are currently 251 legal additional resource books.

Paizo makes money by producing more content.

There will always be new content and removing a few things is inconsequential from a system mastery perspective.

To be honest it makes it all the more confusing when things you once previously knew and understood, because they were legal for over half a decade, are removed from play or errataed.

The errata part can be especially confusing sometimes because they don't even print the entire feature being changed in the document. You have to Frankenstein the pieces that say "replace this part with this new text" and also "add this limitation".

The Exchange 3/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There wouldn't need to be a higher level of trust. The campaign doesn't track what feat you take, how you distributed skill points, what class you are playing, what archetypes, what race (unless you have a chronicle) etc. They are at the mercy of every player that they will be honest and not change these things already.

When they make you do a restricted rebuild they still have to have complete faith you will follow those rules.

If they let you do a free rebuild it requires less trust because this lowers that baseline down to what a person breaking the rules could do at any time they wanted.

Free rebuilds are the most sensible option for not punishing honest players as well as making the process reasonable.

The Exchange 3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel it is more common the people who don't bring a certain level of optimization get frustrated when their own character's comparative shortcomings rather than other people looking down or excluding them.

It's the people who reread their character sheet a few times for a couple minutes when it got to their turn before giving up and saying "I can't do anything" that get frustrated with the situation. The person casting combat winning spells or doing 100+ dpr full-attacks isn't going to be concerned about your character but might be concerned about the player themselves.

It feels bad when everyone isn't having fun but the middle of combat isn't where other people can always help that person beyond making sure they don't die and turning it into an even worse night.

Relating it all back to the topic.. I don't know. Core rulebook is OP. Static modifiers to numeric scores are OP. This content we are replacing is not OP. The old versions which have existed for years could even easily be legal along with the new versions. But then again I've always been an advocate for letting people use as much content as feasibly possible in this campaign because most people here are mature enough adults to decide for themselves who they would like to play games with or without.

Replacing this content is unnecessary and there is a long list of reasons growing from several years of changes that I suspect is impacting Paizo's business.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It didn't originate with the design team. It started because I asked to not make Evangelist an exception to the SLA rule in PFS after it had been legal for some time. You can still see this rule in Additional Resources.

The person who designed Evangelist hated the SLA rule and wouldn't budge on the issue. Paizo staff aren't going to argue with their own coworker over the topic if they don't even feel particularly passionate about the topic anyway.

The hammer came down on SLA directly from a PFS discussion and then the issue was deflected to the design team.

I would say that was the beginning of the design philosophy shift that we have seen the past few years now.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Audits are a messy process when you have mechanically intricate characters. People don't understand certain rules and are normally pretty adamant about being right even if they contradict what a rule says.

It can also be used as a screening process to reject people from tables. Experienced this. This thread even gave an example of when it would happen:

Quote:
GM: *eyeballs Player 4's character sheet* - you've got a buffed AC of 30 and you do 3d6+10 damage on a hit. You could solo this scenario and that wouldn't be fun for the rest of the table. Please use a different PC with a more appropriate power level, or a pregen, otherwise my responsibility to provide a fun experience for everyone means I can't let you use that character.

So like many things it can be abused. It just happens to be handing an amount of power and responsibility to literally anyone who decided to GM.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Guys the FAQ already says how it works.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
FAQ wrote:

Intelligence: If my Intelligence modifier increases, can I select another bonus language?

Yes. For example, if your Int is 13 and you reach level 4 and apply your ability score increase to Int, this increases your Int bonus from +1 to +2, which grants you another bonus language.
Technically, Int-enhancing items such as a headband of vast intelligence should grant a specific language (in the same way they do for skill ranks).

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Several of my characters are walking errata abominations. I don't play many of them now because it too much a headache to deal with.

I liked the old guide errata rules.

The Exchange 3/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Couldn't agree more. It's nice to see how quickly this decision was reached.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
edmondlebeau wrote:
How are you qualifying for Eldritch Knight? You don't have Martial Weapons Proficiency as a Wizard

The character was a magus who went into eldritch knight, was terrible until they became an arcane archer, and then retrained the magus to wizard.

The Exchange

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Breakdown from above:

The character is a garuda blooded aasimar.

He took charged by nature: battle mystery gaining warsight and weapon mastery.

His feats are: point blank, precise, rapid, teamwork feat allied spellcaster, deadly aim, weapon focus, improved critical, ranger style manyshot, and demon hunter.

Traits: deadeye bowman and reactionary

His cunning initiative gives him 6 dex + 5 wis + 2 reactionary + 1 ioun stone to init.

He uses a rod to extend heroism and has boots of speed to haste as needed.

He tries to study the enemy before breaking invisibility if possible. With study bane and sneak attack he does: 1d8 longbow + 4 Deadly + 2 enhancement + 2 bane + 2 study + 1 point blank + 2d6 bane + 2d6 sneak attack per attack.

Bab + Many + Rapid + Haste + (bab-5) attacks per round.

Total is: 5d8+55+20d6

My actual favorite archer can't be built anymore and used early entry rules. He's my highest level pfs character at 16.. I want a chance to play him again so bad.

He is currently wizard 2 / eldritch knight 10 / Arcane archer 4.

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ravener Hunter Sanctified Slayer Inquisitor. I think Arsenal Chaplin was the best before this new inquisitor archetype.

My level 8 ravener rolls 2x for init at +14 and attacks for +18(+manyshot)/+18/+18/+13 for 1d8+11+2d6. If they are flat-footed he adds an additional 10d6 sneak attack. Crit on 19-20.

He also has enough magic and skills to help both in and out of combat.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It is confusing because the clarification doesn't say what the "drawback" of the ability is and makes an assumption that people know what it is talking about. We need a clarification for the clarification still.

My assumption is:

Upon death, a feysworn is immediately resurrected and she must immediately expend 4 Prestige Points or the effect fails.

This means you could choose not to pay 4 PP and have some else raise you.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You need rhino charge so you can ready an action to charge once in the air.

I did some theorycrafting with this build a while back because I love dragoons also. I couldn't find a good way to get around being inside a dungeon or building as a downside.

You want to be a class who can cast Cheetah's Sprint so you increase your movement speed to 10x your base land speed as a swift action. This is because jump distance is limited by your max movement speed. You can't end your movement in the air without flight or you will simply fall.

So the order of actions is swift action cast Ceetah's Sprint, move action jump, ready action to charge when you reach your maximum jump height.

The weapon you will want is the Akitonian Blade which is a +1 Bill (so perfect for a dragoon). The wielder triples the result of any Acrobatics checks to determine how far she can jump. In addition, a successful DC 15 Acrobatics check allows the wielder to negate any damage from the first 30 feet of falling damage and converts any damage from the second 30 feet to nonlethal damage. It is simply perfect.

Rod of Balance can also be an option but costs a little more. +10 competence bonus on all Acrobatics checks involving long jumps and high jumps; additionally, the wielder covers double the normal distance for a jump when making an Acrobatics check.

Locust cuirass is a decent armor for this build. The wearer of a locust cuirass can take 10 on Acrobatics checks to jump even if distracted or in danger. It also lets you feather fall.

Bloodrager is probably the most practical class for this. With fast movement and casting sprint you will have 400ft movement. This is exactly enough to jump 200 ft up and come 200 ft down dealing the maximum 20d6 brance pounce damage. I highly recommend going into dragon disciple after enough bloodrager levels simply for flavor.

Also make sure to take the Death from Above feat to gain +5 bonus to hit instead of +2 for charging from higher ground or flying.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think there is an option to retract the request so I guess I'll just say it; I don't want a FAQ answer for this anymore. My opinion on Paizo development has changed since 2 years ago and I won't like the result they will produce so it is best for everyone if they just continue not to answer this.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Ragoz wrote:

The gaming industry survives off "whale" spenders who spend a massive amount of money compared to other people. It's just the truth. It is much more likely a very small minority could raise the majority of money for a charity. It also complies with the local regulations.

While on the topic I hope Ghoran, Wyvaran, or even Kasatha show up. I would pitch in for those or maybe a cool prestige class.

Then perhaps the paradigm needs to be revisited before the industry prices itself out of reach of the average person?

These are free to play game models though. They will never be priced out of reach of someone because they don't cost the average user anything at all. They survive purely from the spending of the top 2% of players typically. Everyone else gets the benefits of that.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Whatever raises the most is fine by me. It isn't about everyone getting a chance at a boon it is about donating to a good cause.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It isn't ignored but there is very limited time during a game to check characters.

Are you sure those characters don't have ant haul, a bag of some kind, maybe mithral? There are plenty of ways to not be encumbered.

Quote:
discovered there is often not a single meaningful skill check and it's all about combat

I too wish it was 2013 again.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While it is a shame it happened in your first game at least it didn't happen in like your 10th. It doesn't feel better dying 50 hours of character time in. This sort of stuff happens and is part of the game.

I had to run Trial by Machine for a group that was a huge majority new people. By the time they were at the end they ran for their lives after I probably fudged at least 20 rolls in their favor. (I would absolutely only do this in the case of many brand new people and because I was asked to go easy by the VO.)

The Exchange 3/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.
plaidwandering wrote:
Tallow wrote:
Time. When Seekers of Secrets was written the developers and authors did not have the same command of the game and whats too much as they do 9 years later.
unfortunately I'm not seeing this. There are still tons of never used trash options...and they are usually unable to moderately nerf something that they think is overpowered in most cases turn it into more never used junk. Several recent FAQ answers are highly inconsistent with other rules or the game as it seems most play it, and bardic masterpieces are still in limbo ;p

I'm not seeing it either. I think maybe there's a change in perspective and culture in development but saying the current team is "better" than previous ones is a bold claim to me.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In 10 scenarios out of 159 I didn't receive max prestige. It seems like specials where a pregen is used or a particularly low skilled character is played is the cause generally.

Also my data says Iammars is best GM. Hard to argue with the facts.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It looked too spooky to someone and was banned. Emotional response.

The Exchange 3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

What if I think it wasn't broken?

Lorewarden was not broken and didn't need fixing.

The immunity to evil mental possession and control is 1/2 of the 2nd benefit of protection from evil. It is 1/6th of a 1st level spell. Not broken. I've never bought this item.

The dusty rose? It sounds like it was useful for what it did before (it did something besides give +1 initiative as the cracked version!?).

I don't think just because a change is made that the devs are automatically right. In every other thread where this happens people always rush in after the change and say "See I was right it was broken after all!" and it simply isn't true. It isn't that the options are objectively unbalanced but rather the perception of the development team has changed in the past 2 years. There's an echo chamber saying "We need to nerf character options. We need to make sure half of all published scenarios can be solved by a diplomacy check. We need to badwrongfun people who don't enjoy our way".

So no I disagree reselling you mandatory new content is correct. I disagree it was broken. I disagree making published content into published trash is going to help the game. The old version of the content should be made available again in downloads. It's not like Paizo lost access to this. Your old content made people happy to purchase it but now I can't use it anymore. Please give me it back so I can go play home games with the original rules so I can stop asking people to play 3.5 again.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tallow wrote:
Ragoz wrote:
andreww wrote:
supervillan wrote:

I follow the rules.

I bought the Field Guide so I could play a Lore Warden.

I bought Seekers of Secrets so I could use Ioun Stone resonances (not just the clear spindle).

Now it seems I won't be able to use content I have paid for - and it's possible that if I want to use the nerfed versions I would need to make another purchase.

I object very strongly to this. I am not certain I will want to remain a part of this campaign if this is Paizo's policy.

Did your books spontaneously combust? Pathfinder material is not written specifically for PFS. Your books remain perfectly workable for any other form of gaming. PFS is a living campaign and you can expect things to change over time.

Actually yes mine did spontaneously combust. All my pdfs are now not what I purchased with no recourse to download the original. Why do I have this errated nonsense when there is an errata document or at the very least not another version of the pdf?

I want the material I purchased back so I can go play it in the home games and not PFS.

Did you re-download the PDF? If not, your saved and downloaded PDF did not spontaneously change.

Yes I re-downloaded when the change was made to read it. I don't have access to the original download anymore.

Captain Yesterday wrote:
More specifically they haven't even technically changed the books you already own.

Yes they have? This issue isn't just about reprinting in one book. That book is a symptom of a larger trend happening for the last 2 years. My PDFs downloads HAVE been altered without access to the original.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
andreww wrote:
supervillan wrote:

I follow the rules.

I bought the Field Guide so I could play a Lore Warden.

I bought Seekers of Secrets so I could use Ioun Stone resonances (not just the clear spindle).

Now it seems I won't be able to use content I have paid for - and it's possible that if I want to use the nerfed versions I would need to make another purchase.

I object very strongly to this. I am not certain I will want to remain a part of this campaign if this is Paizo's policy.

Did your books spontaneously combust? Pathfinder material is not written specifically for PFS. Your books remain perfectly workable for any other form of gaming. PFS is a living campaign and you can expect things to change over time.

Actually yes mine did spontaneously combust. All my pdfs are now not what I purchased with no recourse to download the original. Why do I have this errated nonsense when there is an errata document or at the very least not another version of the pdf?

I want the material I purchased back so I can go play it in the home games and not PFS.

The Exchange 3/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.

My willingness to spend money on Paizo products has dwindled considerably. For the past 2 years I've been burned by additional resources choices and nerfs to all existing content. It is obvious the only thing saving the other books I own is the time it takes them to implement the changes.

I know a couple people who have canceled subscriptions. I never had one but have probably hundreds to low thousands worth of products. I'm not buying anymore.

I don't like the nerfs. It's obvious my words don't matter so maybe money will. Most people don't actually buy the resources they use in PFS anyway so maybe losing more and more big spenders will have actual impact on their bottom line.

Its hard to stay civil on this topic because I'm actually being robbed of my purchases but I think this gets the point across.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Book of mandatory nerfs for $40.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It is designed for 4 players though. Anyone bringing more is going in over-prepared in the first place.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I actually thought they were going to radically reform factions if not drop them entirely this season. "Factions' Favor" surprised me. Without there being faction missions for every faction in each scenario it felt alienating that some people had something extra to do and most didn't every single adventure.

With the war theme I thought it be more a "United Pathfinder Society" this season instead of doubling down on factions which I think are simply a relic of the older season scenarios.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I certainly wouldn't mind if it was only one subtier. I already wish I could play these specials in both of the subtiers available because I feel they are different games. It would make it easier to enjoy.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
N N 959 wrote:
thaX wrote:
To be sure, the text is assuming a melee weapon in most of the text until and only when it mentioned the ranged weapons in the small paragraph that contains that reference.

No, the WotC text is not assuming melee weapons. It's assuming all weapons. When WotC wrote these rules, a +5 bow and +5 dagger conveyed the exact same benefits for overcoming DR. There was no need or intent to differentiate between ranged or melee because everyone got the exact same benefit. In D&D 3.5, there was no DR that a +5 dagger could overcome that a normal arrow fired from a +5 bow could not.

The FAQ came out because either Paizo failed to update the original rule when they created DR/bypass or they suddenly decided that this was an easy way to bring ranged combat down a notch, or at the very least make ranged combat more tedious.

This is my biggest problem with the situation. They are using a conflict between Pathfinder rules and D&D rules to side on nerfing ranged combat rather than affirming their rule set works as stated.

It's a little ridiculous how little faith they have in their own game system.

The Exchange 3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Swashbuckler wrote:

Been playing PFS for just over a year now, and going to start DMing soon. In talking with some of the other DMs, it doesn't sound like I'll be able to get any of the older racial boons that were handed out at previous conventions.

That being said, I'd really love to get the boon that allows a wayang race; shade-blooded, I think.

If anyone has one available, I'm open to negotiating for it - all serious offers considered.

You are in luck.

Additional Resources wrote:
The boon restriction to create a kitsune, nagaji, and wayang was removed at the start of Season 6 and all three are now available for open creation.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Cosmic Captive. All tiers I believe.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Linda Zayas-Palmer wrote:

John, Tonya, and I have looked at this issue and talked it over.

If you have acquired more than a +1 bonus on your projectile weapon in order to overcome DR, you may perform a one-time exchange of the bonus for ranged weapon special abilities for no cost. For example, if you have purchased a +5 longbow, you can convert it into a +3 holy longbow or a +1 frost holy seeking longbow.

While I do appreciate how quickly the team came to a decision I feel there is a disconnect between the solution and the problem. These magical bonuses aren't going to help characters fix their issues with DR. We need the gold back to purchase items. There is also going to be retraining costs if people need the feat which we might be stuck with either way.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Quickly looked through the posts. I'm honestly shocked that Pathfinder FAQ went with the design choice they did on a thread over 2 years old.

A +3 bow makes an arrow fired be a +3 arrow and we have rules which say +3 weapons overcome certain DR types. Why complicate things with exceptions?

The Exchange 3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Does anyone know if there is a thread associated with this FAQ? It adds needless complication of the rules which deviate from an 8 year old book for the sake of continuing "The Great Nerfening".

The Exchange 3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Scott Wilhelm wrote:

I never had a chance to play a character using that temporary rule that Spell-like abilities count as spellcasting for the purposes of access to prestige classes.

I really wanted to play a Tiefling Mystic Theurge who started taking MT levels at level 4, or an Aasimar Eldritch Knight who started at level 3.

The best of times.

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We are just going to run into this issue again eventually down the line if it the FAQ isn't made inclusive. Is there a reason all characters who have the poison use class feature can't craft poisons?

I vote yes at the very least.

1 to 50 of 202 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>