RealAlchemy's page

**** Pathfinder Society GM. 1,417 posts (1,500 including aliases). 4 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 23 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,417 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Ascalaphus wrote:
I'm enjoying the idea of a solarian player going "oh, it's combat then eh?", puttering about for a couple of rounds in a space combat before wormholing the party to the rival ship's bridge and laying waste to the crew.

I do like the idea of "Screw this. I didn't build for starship combat. This is now a boarding action!"


Nefreet wrote:
Not to my knowledge, but ever since this discussion I've been allowing Solarions their Sidereal Influence.

Makes sense. Otherwise if they can't use it, they clearly can enter a mode instead and do other shenanigans (wormhole off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are other possibilities.)

4/5

Grcles de Cross wrote:

I am running three characters in 2e scenarios. Is it against the rules for me to play the same scenario with two different characters? (that assumes that the scenario is not marked for replayable)

thanks

Yes.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It is almost certainly not the store owner's problem. You probably want your local Venture Captain.

4/5

Useful to know for things like Eager Protege.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Saint Bernard de Clairveaux wrote:

I have to admit: I get a bit rankled when people call me a dude. I mean, while I was growing up in small town Washington it definitely seemed like a masculine label that I did not fit at all!

But, hey, some older folks were annoyed when I started using the word "queer" in a positive way. So I'll happily shake my cane once or twice from the front porch and deal with it. Y'all.

For Starfinder and the cantina effect, I suppose gentlebeings is a reasonable term for a group of characters of multiple genders.

4/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
"Hey you guys"...

This sounds like a case where we should just spread the more inclusive Southern "Y'all." It appears to cover all genders.

4/5

Nefreet wrote:
John Brinkman wrote:

I wouldn't want to ask questions that seem to pry for more information than you want to share.

Suggestions?

I think that's a fair question. Anytime we encounter a situation with which we haven't had experience, it can be awkward knowing how to start. Like a first date.

But Starfinder provides us with a nice segue into this particular discussion: multiple genders are a part of the setting. It's even highlighted in the intro of the book.

So you could go around the table and phrase your query as easily as:

"Hey, everyone. Welcome to Starfinder. Let's go around the table and do introductions. Please include your character's name, race, class, and preferred gender pronouns."

If someone does that eyebrow arch thing, you could elaborate further by simply adding:

"Starfinder has multiple races that possess more than one gender, and I want to make sure we're addressing everyone correctly."

And if someone tries to joke about you saying "more than one gender", you could even highlight that there are races with only one.

And in some cases, more than three or four, I believe.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like the table tents idea. Without some indication I cannot expect someone to know the gender or pronouns of Kazmarok the dwarf, Megil en Anaron the half-elf, Oraeus the Lashunta, etc.

4/5

Thin skinned enough that you can penetrate their chitin with a harsh word?
Cried out of all their (many) eyes when getting a personal upgrade installed?

Going by the brief write-up on AoN about the species.

4/5

There are a number of possibilities from Eyes of the Ten who I'm not naming because of spoilers.

4/5

~I need a Hero Point! Holding out for a Hero Point to save us from death!~ Where'sa good PFS filk when we need one?

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:

I have noticed that groups with one high adventurer and bunch of low levels are incredibly dangerous. It does help if the higher level players purchase mentor boons, but I've gotten to the point of warning players when I see that the characters are that far apart in levels.

Hmm

Agreed. Xzerrion (my -2001) bought the Envoy's Alliance mentor boon immediately on hitting L4.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Speaking for myself, I fully intended to run 1-10 at a convention in April. Then Covid happened.

4/5

Lau Bannenberg wrote:
Twilight2k wrote:
Is there a solution to non-repeatables rarely being run (other than making everything repeatable)? For instance, at ConCurrent, 1-04 is not being run at all and Quest #6 is being run only once because no other GMs signed up (presumably because they would not get xp/etc) - there are clearly plenty of players that need it (I signed up the instant Warhorn went live and, by the time it refreshed, I was 7th (3rd on the waitlist) and that was 1 minute after it opened).

Yes, there is. Ask someone to run the specific game you want to play.

Sounds so basic that it doesn't sound like serious advice, but it really is. Scheduling doesn't happen by magic or fall out of the sky. It's driven by people saying "hey, this is a really cool scenario, I wanna run it" or "I like that guy and he asked me to run this, so let's see if we can find some more players".

If I want to play a particular scenario, it isn't really difficult. I mention it a few times among some of the other people I play with a lot and someone will be happy to run it. Why? Because I'm an involved player, I GM a lot, and so a lot of people will be happy to do me a good turn in return.

And with the current era of massive roll20 play, it's not that hard to find a few other people who haven't played the particular scenario I want to play. Just post the game a couple of times in the VTT sign up links channel of the various discord servers.

This. The regular GMs in the area where I play do take requests. So do the less regular ones. And they are even more likely to take requests if they know you're willing to run something for them later, or even if you're willing to buy them a drink at our local game store/restaurant combination.

4/5

As for why different scenarios are or are not being run at an event, GMs are volunteers. They will run the scenarios they feel comfortable running and have the materials to run.
Just as an example, before Norwescon was cancelled I volunteered to run Starfinder 1-10, PFS2 1-06, and PFS2 1-07 because that was what I felt confident preparing. One of those is repeatable and two are not.

4/5

Hmm wrote:

Bob, you will be missed! I'm hoping the person they find to replace you is as awesome as you always have been!

Now the most important question: what will you be having for your Second Breakfast? I am usually partial to egg dishes with jalapeno-spiced hashbrowns.

I can make salmon breakfast hash with eggs, potatoes, onions, peppers, and cheese :) Fun things to do with Costco salmon patties.

4/5

Jesse Lehto wrote:

I'd be surprised if Datch finale isn't the special mostly because of track record of them finishing story arcs only during multi table specials...

Well besides that, I have to say that while I don't know much about Datch(since not really getting chance to play season 2 metaplot scenarios yet), my impression of her so far was that she has been this non combatant mastermind, so if it turns out that final encounter with her is just "AND NOW WE CAN FINALLY KILL HER LEGALLY" I'd be disappointed :p

(like seriously, even in modern space future, no taking down someone socially or just getting them arrested, always murder even when their primary tactic has been social media? ;D I can't be only one who really loves non-lethal/non-combat takedowns right?)

Death does not necessarily end her story. I hear the Eoxians can do creative things.

4/5

Fred Strauss wrote:
Myself I would prefer to play at a 7-person table than a 3-person table. I don't remember too many 7-player tables, mostly home games where there everyone had a +1 or +2 (significant other or child/children) and not easy to tell someone to go home or sit on their hands.

That works for you. I also know some players where the reverse is true and they will not sit at a 7 player table even when they were legal. YMMV.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sadly, the fleet feat only gives you fleet feet.

4/5

Hmm wrote:

At Rivanti's bar, the scenario says:

Rivanti's Bar wrote:
Eventually, you arrive at a shack in a clearing, from which rowdy drinking songs and squawks spew forth.

Well, here is a rowdy song in case you need one.

♫ We're feathered friends and jack-a-daws
And swordsmen without peer
We're travelers who give folks pause
And mayhap they have somethin' to fear

We're the genus corvidae!
We boldly live and boldly die
And if you cross us,
We'll spit in your eye!
Ha ha! CAW! CAW!
Pass me another beer! ♫

You're welcome.

But we don't have Tengu yet :)

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My understanding is that the decision was made for balancing reasons because a 7 player low level table could easily have the same number of challenge points as a 4 player high level table but the 7 player table ends up with a near TPK while the 4 player table faces a moderate challenge.
No matter where you set the table limit, there is a non-zero chance of a last minute player being turned away due to insufficient GMs. Setting the limit at 6 instead of 7 mostly means that occasional GMs will be encouraged to have a repeatable scenario with them (Lost on the Spirit Road for example) just in case they need to scratch together a last minute table.


Can a Kasatha have the alternate ability modifiers from Kasath Native and the alternate racial trait Crew member at the same time? I can't see anything in the strict mechanics that says it doesn't work since they replace different things, but the flavor does not seem to make sense because of the "fluff" in the destriptions as one is for Kasatha who did not leave Kasath, and the other is for crew of the Idari.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Flutter wrote:

Awwww.. FOXY!

CUddles

ow ow ow

casts

recuddles!

Experienced druids learn to cast fire resistance before cuddling the burning things :)

4/5

I did three.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:

BNW is right about the table math, but there is another side to this.

The thing is... I think that a healthy GM ecosystem includes casual GMs. You want to have lots of people GMing small amounts so that your dedicated GMs do not burn out. Under the old system, I could get regulars to come out to a convention like Anime Detour and agree to GM 2-3 games a piece, which meant that I could GM 3-4 games at the convention and not burn out. In order to gear up for getting my guys to a convention, we would let them GM practice games at Dreamers for a month ahead of time. The promise of an easy race boon would get a whole bunch of players to try out GMing, and it often turned them into casual once-a-month GMs at Dreamers later on.

We need casual GMs. The ACP system is not exciting the casual GMs as much, and I do find that to be a problem.

Hmm

Events ended up cancelling the first convention I planned on GMing at, so I cannot currently speak to how many casual GMs will appear at in-person conventions. I'm still hoping the one in August I planned to attend still happens, and we will see there how PF2 tables do.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Watery Soup wrote:


Why is nobody asking why estimates of player volume were so far off that GMs sitting around is not an outlier?

Because

1) If you have a DM but don't need them you have 1 unhappy person. If you need a DM but don't have them you have 6 unhappy people.

2) A DM can become a player on 2 minutes notice with no problem. A player cannot a DM of a particular scenario on 2 minutes notice with any reliability.

3) Cons are chaotic events. You get your players +/- 1d4 that show up (-1d8 for AM slots)

you put that all together and the most optimum plan is to overstock with DMs and adapt your plan from there.

This. Very few of the local GMs in my area can pull off a random scenario on extremely short notice, and most of them have 5 stars. Personally, I'm doing well if I can pull a repeatable scenario out of my Pathfinder bag if I was not planning on running a scenario that day.

4/5

Bob Jonquet wrote:
Hold over artwork probably. Most people don't even know that halflings changed in 2E and no longer have pointed ears.

I thought there were subraces of halflings that did and others that did not. Or maybe I'm dating myself and that is from a really old edition.

And then there's David Weber's halflings - they have small horns, which is actually kind of cool.

4/5

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
Yeah I love the fiction, but Ambrus, don't retire, we neeeeeeeed you!
Look, he's getting too old for this...

But does he have a brown robe, a white beard, and a young farmboy apprentice yet?

4/5

Not sure how much this helps, but from what I've seen a bunch of low reviews as the first reviews on a scenario can mean there's a potential problem for GMs, often some kind of a new subsystem which ends up frustrating players. (See Bid for Alabastrine for an example of this.)

4/5

The thing about that boon is because of phrasing it also requires planning ahead, since you have to slot it the scenario before you plan on buying your PU.

4/5

I've got a fun one. I just need to think up a name and flesh out the philosophy a bit.

4/5

Halfings are small.

4/5

Blake's Tiger wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
TwilightKnight wrote:
I dunno. We don't have way to gauge the actual prep time a GM invests. People who barely read the scenario once, quickly draw abstract maps during play, and used generic tokens for enemies really don't deserve the same reward as someone who spends multiple hours reading and rereading the materials, finds and uses the appropriate pawns/minis, provides the printed maps, etc. Though, I would reward the 'turds' if it means making sure the all-stars are rewarded rather than punish the all-stars because we want to punish the 'turds'.

Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?

Shame on you.

I would draw a distinction between "someone who puts in effort" and "someone who puts in disposable income".

Yeah, probably should have stuck to "People who barely read the scenario once" (or more obvious: always runs scenarios cold) vs. "someone who spends multiple hours reading and rereading the materials."

I am the latter, but I use generic tokens (and later paper OotS minis) for enemies.

Exactly. I am another GM who will read the material carefully and make sure my prep is organized, but I do not necessarily have a spare couple hundred dollars at once to purchase every flip mat for running multiple scenarios at a con and a couple boxes of miniatures on top of it. Someone who chooses to look down on people who are willing to commit their time so others can enjoy their game is not someone I'd consider welcome at a table.

4/5

Not sure how I feel about that. The idea was for those to go out for running a game, not for preparing to run. The only time I was given a race boon for a table that didn't fire, I didn't feel right about it and gave the boon away to someone who would use it appropriately but did not get a chance to run at cons.

4/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The alignment of the flip tiles is currently Chaotic Neutral. I'll see myself out.

4/5

Certain scenarios count as modules which I know I did not think were modules, such as Master of the Fallen Fortress. It makes the count slightly weird.

4/5

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


My 'counter' to Dr. Cupi's counter:

I actually feel a bit dirty when I'm playing a Boon character and someone says/asks "Hey, that's pretty neato, how do *I* get to play one?"

...and it took some GM work and negotiation via the forums to trade for the character I was playing.

Trying to explain that to a new player is... problematic.

I admit I would love to play a barathu sometime just because the floating amuses me, but I don't think I have anything good to trade for one right now.

4/5

GM Wageslave wrote:

I've yet to encounter a situation where a GM insists in a draconian manner that there is 'only one way to Profession'.

And that has been an exceptionally enjoyable experience so far.

Now, granted, as a responsible player I do try bring it up at the start of the scenario so GMs aren't completely blindsided by it, and so they can at least start thinking of ways that the Profession could be viable/not-viable in the execution of the scenario.

There's also a level of restraint required in doing such a thing. The Profession cannot become the OmniSkill: Capable of handling any skill challenge!.

There have also been a couple of times where players have suggested Professions where they weren't... quite appropriate for a given skill, but their rationale was quick, understandable, and concise, and I've allowed them -- albeit at an increased difficulty.

We are still allowed to use that judgement as GMs at the table, yes?

EDIT: It also occurs to me, as I remember some of the scenarios where character Professions came up, that the GM would ask for any Professions.

During those situations, it very much seemed like the GM was not worried so much about a player doubling down on a given situation, but rather that either: A. The character was the only one that could roll anything for a given check or B. The scenario called for 'Profession' and few if any people at the table had the points to dump into one.

I like the operative Jack of all Trades exploit. "Which profession do you want me to roll?"

4/5

It really depends on what you are trying to do, IMO. As an example, Profession:navigator might be Int based while Profession:sailor is Wis based. The navigator is great at checking maps and plotting the route, but cannot make the check on actually driving the boat.
On professions which don't turn up in the rulebook, you are asking the GM if the profession would even apply so I would be a bit less strict about which stat is appropriate unless it seems really obvious. (ie politician being charisma based)

4/5

Michael Sayre wrote:

Okay, OFFICIAL clarifications per discussion with the design team-

Pathfinder Lore and Pathfinder Society Lore are the same thing and should be treated as such. If you took the Pathfinder Hopeful background and then took the Pathfinder Agent Dedication, the Pathfinder Society Lore you gained from the background would be bumped to Expert by the dedication.

RE: lores- You cannot have a lore about an extant nation; the largest this category can be for modern-day knowledge is a settlement, such as "Magnimar Lore" or "Xin-Edasseril Lore". This would mean that "Thassilon Lore" and "Thassilon History Lore" are functionally the same thing, because to have a lore category that encompasses an entire nation, that nation would need to be one that doesn't currently exist. Similarly, you could have "Ancient Osirion Lore" or "Jitska Lore" but not "(modern) Osirion Lore".

Am I right in thinking you can have Darklands Lore, since that sounds analagous to Forest Lore which I know exists?

4/5

GMs at tables I play at tend to ask (for example) for Nature, Forest Lore, or to give an argument for anther applicable skill you might think is relevant so the GM can decide if it fits. It's still a secret check, we just know the GM is rolling one. This is how I ended up using Herbalism Lore creatively in one scenario to get a certain goblin some mood-altering herb.

4/5

I'd suggest a couple of the season 10 scenarios about the Tapestry like 10-15 and 10-20. Avoid the Gloomspires theough - hard to do nonlethal damage on undead things.

4/5

Numeria? Tell me there will be ray guns on the chronicle sheet. I want a laser!

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dennis Gregg wrote:

<snip>

With that said Datch has become a favorite npc for me. I hope she is around for a long long time.

As a Borai after somebody doubletaps her head.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Flutter wrote:

We're all safe as long as Urgothoa doesn't branch out into computer viruses...

"Urgathoa, Urgothoa, Urgothoa, I'm ... hooked on a feeling ..."

4/5

Mike Bramnik wrote:

By the by, are folks using the central blackened area of Dragon's Lair as a pit or a wall? Graphically it appears to be drawn as a pit, but the scenario makes no mention of depth so I'm wondering if it's supposed to be vertical (which does make for bottlenecks in combat going both ways...).

Thanks in advance!

When I played it, it was treated as a pit so we started making ranged attacks across it.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

As a GM I would have a really hard time arguing that a player could not roll Pathfinder Lore when a scenario called for Pathfinder Society Lore or vice versa.

4/5

Zachary Davis wrote:

Maryland's Governor just put a restriction on no gatherings over 250 people. Which means our Convention for this weekend just got cancelled.

Luckily this does not include our smaller venue games.

Washington's governor did the same. I'm watching to see what will happen with Norwescon Easter weekend.

4/5

Thomas Keller wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

That's first edition. The second edition games you'd be interested in are [yellow].

There's a column that tells you which games are still open (with a red "NO" or a green "YES").

As of right now there's still:

• Escaping the Grave
• Flooded King's Court
• Star-Crossed Voyages (use a pregenerated character)
• The Burden of Envy
• Devil at the Crossroads (use a pregenerated character)
• Lions of Katapesh
• The Blooming Catastrophe
• Grehunde's Gorget (a quick game)
• Port Peril Pub Crawl (a quick game)
• Archaeology in Aspenthar

Yes, but episode 1 "Initiation in Absalom" has no open seats. You have to start a character with that one, right?

Nope. You can start a character in any scenario which is playable by a L1 character.

1 to 50 of 1,417 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>