SCPRedMage's page

Nope. Thats what I"m saying. That's not on the DMs side that's on the players. The DM can set the defaults but an imported token comes with whatever settings it had from wherever it came from.

I have all the tokens on my table set to owned by all (because I lend tables out) , but when someone pops onto my table with a token owned by "the dm" they can't get to it. The opposite is true. When I pop one of my commie mode characters owned by all onto another table, I can grab my character right away but the other players who imported need to ask the DM for it.

Speaking as someone who's spent a fair amount of time working on Roll20 character sheets and API scripts, I believe the reason for this is that each player has a unique ID in each campaign, meaning the ID you're assigned in the game you're setting the character up in is different than the games you're exporting them into.

Consequently, the only permission that carries over when exporting a character from your Vault is "All Players", as that is a global ID that is the same in all campaigns.

From the PRD, Feats:

Benefit: What the feat enables the character ("you" in the feat description) to do. If a character has the same feat more than once, its benefits do not stack unless indicated otherwise in the description.

So as Gary said, sure you can do it, but you end up just wasting the second feat.

If there's nothing that officially places it in a weapon group, it isn't in one; before that blog you mentioned, a lot of weapons didn't have a group.

So what's up with Chalos's HP in subtier 5-6? She's got 8 HD and her base HP is listed as 51, which means with bear's endurance she should have 67 max HP, but her statblock lists her with 77.

Subtier 8-9 checks out fine.

If you don't already use one of the other tools, the thing I've found most effective is creating a table of my own with the character sheet I want to use, creating my characters there, then exporting them/importing them to the new table. I think you might need to pay for Pro to do that though.

To clarify this and BNW's response, there are two steps when using Roll20's Character Vault:

1. Import the character into the Vault. You can import any character you can control from any game you're a part of, regardless of subscription status.
2. Export the character from the Vault to the new game. The new game has to have character importing enabled (it's just a setting in the game's settings page, but it defaults to off), and either you or the game's creator must have a subscription, but as BNW said, the $5 "Plus" subscription is enough.

So if it says "Plus" or "Pro" under the creator's name on the landing page, you can import characters from your Vault without having to have a subscription. If it says "Free", you'll need to have your own sub to import.

As an alternative, you could look into the VTT Enhancement Suite, which has, among other features, the ability to download characters as JSON files, and then overwrite a character with that data, no subscription required. You could set your character up on one table, download them as a JSON file, then have the GM on the destination game create a character and assign it to you, then overwrite that new character with the data from the character you already set up. This is a third party browser extension, so this is a "at your own risk" kind of thing, although the worst that can happen is the character gets messed up and needs to be deleted.

Personally, I stick with using Roll20's Character Vault, both because I know it works, and because I want to support Roll20; I still use the VTT Enhancement Suite because it has other features I very much like.

Waiting is the hard part.

I'm pretty sure the hard part is supposed to be the tips of the blunt arrows...

My reading would be that the "(arcane or divine)" is meant to clarify what "same type of spell" means, and it is not written to explicitly exclude any other such types later introduced.

That said, PFS campaign rules are that the type of magic (arcane/divine/psychic) doesn't matter for scrolls (or wands), so that particular restriction technically only applies to spellbooks.

Selvaxri wrote:

Then way are classes that get Firearms, or features that grant access to fire arms, banned?

Wizard Spellslinger

The Spellslinger is made legal with a chronicle.

Leadership does that, exclude something so they can put it on a chronicle.

Preeeeeetty sure that question has been settled for a bit over two years now...

Does the full rebuild bit mean I can go back and rebuild this as an Aasimar, which was legal at the time I created my lore warden?

If the character was already an aasimar, they can stay an aasimar, otherwise no, you can only change to currently legal races.

Taking 20 takes 2 full minutes. That's metagamy to be searching some 10 foot area for 20 rounds.

Uh, what? Two minutes real time is NOT that long, and I've spent longer searching my couch cushions. Taking 20 to search for traps is literally one of the examples in the Core Rulebook of a common use of the rule. No, taking 20 to search for traps is not "metagamey".

You can always make another Perception check to search for traps; just don't be metagamey about it. Making a second check just because you rolled a nat 2 is probably a stretch, but if you couldn't make more than one check you couldn't take twenty.

And before the crazies come out of the woodwork, searching for traps is literally one of the examples of a common use of taking twenty.

I'd love to know legally how the player enlarged the drake.

Well, if the paladin somehow had the ability to cast something like enlarge person or animal growth themselves, Share Spells should allow them to ignore the creature type requirements. Of course, neither of those spells are on the paladin spell list, so they'd either need an archetype (or deity) that adds it to their list, or get it from multiclassing.

Yes

It would also count towards Ninja Tricks for a ninja since the Ninja is a variant Rogue.

Hate to be that guy, but the Ninja Tricks class feature is not the Rogue Talents class feature, and nothing says it counts as Rogue Talents, so no, Favored Class bonuses that refer to Rogue Talents do not apply to Ninja Tricks under the rules. It's a pretty reasonable house rule, but it's not something available in PFS.

I'm looking at the first level pregen oracle, and this is what I'm seeing for spells:

Oracle Spells Known (CL 1st; concentration +5)

1st (4/day)—bless, command (DC 15), cure light wounds
0 (at will)—create water, detect magic, light, sparkAPG (DC 14)
Mystery flame

Is this the post you were looking for?

I was bored and looked around.

If it is, that's not exactly a binding clarification; JJ isn't a member of the Design Team, and his answers have always been how he'd rule in his own games, not necessarily what the rules actually say.

Abilities that provoke attacks of opportunities say so; if it doesn't say it provokes an AoO, it doesn't.

It's not. Those races are actively called out as having ethnicities whereas the others aren't. Any other example just falls under being really really really creepy and RAW against the refluffing rules. And yes NPCs do have tactics against specific ethnicities.

It is off-topic, because the question has nothing to do with races that might actually qualify as having an ethnicity, the question I'm trying to get answered is whether the phrase "ethnic group" in the regional affinity rules allows any character of any race to count as having that a full-blown human ethnicity.

You re really making a finer distiction than tje rules usually do and i m not surprised the venture critter didn t crank the perssnicket meter so high that a shanti mammoth tribe isn t a shoanti.

If the requirement is mammal and i m a dog i qualify.

If the requirement is american and im a new yorker i qualify

Shanti mammoth guys are a subset of shoanti, not a different group.

It's not a finer distinction; there's a very big difference between being Shoanti and being a member of a Shoanti tribe. Anyone of any race or ethnicity can feasibly join a Shoanti tribe, but only a human with Shoanti parents can be Shoanti. It's a race vs tribe thing, and the claim I've seen put forth that I'm trying to get official clarification to disprove is that you can use the regional affinity rules to meet Ethnicity (in the racial sense) prerequisites with races that very much do not have these ethnicities.

Again, the specific claim was that a full-blooded Elf could use their regional affinity to take a race trait that lists "Varisian" as its requirements. The person making the claim directly admitted that under the standard PF rules that it wouldn't be legal, but that the PFS rules allow for it. It would basically open up anything that requires a human ethnicity to any race, so long as it didn't specifically say "human" in the requirements.

but the other three have specific racial traits which actively call them out as being other ethnicities than a generic half orc, half elf, and kitsune.

And what traits are those? Because Elf Blood and Orc Blood say nothing about ethnicities (Elf Blood only says "Half-elves count as both elves and humans for any effect related to race", and Orc blood just replaces "elves" with "orcs"), and to my understanding the closest kitsune gets to it is the description in Blood of the Beast, but it's questionable whether that would count as being that ethnicity for prerequisite purposes, but certainly not without the Human Guise feat, because they don't count as human without it.

But that's off-topic here; the question this thread is asking is "what does 'ethnic groups' in the Affinity rules cover?"

And I've yet to see anyone who takes the "expansive" reading even attempt to address why the listed examples showing the limited reading should be ignored, or attempt to explain them away.

Ethnicities are, basically, racial groups. Elves, mammoth lords, and Varisians could have affinity.

And again, I believe that that reading can only be arrived at if you ignore the clarifying examples (note that it says "Shoanti tribe", not just "Shoanti"), and further would mean that you could change your ethnicity during Downtime, because the Affinity rules allows for exactly that.

I think technically you could still get the trait if your human, half-elf, half-orc, and kitsune but other than that its a no-go.

That's something that's been argued on the forums before, and I'm pretty sure it's what led to the rules allowing the half-breed races to swap racial languages for human languages to be added to the later versions of the Guide.

That said, half-elves, half-orcs, and aasimar with Scion of Humanity are only said to count as human (and elf/orc/outsider, but that's not relevant here), and kitsunes can count as human with the Human Guise feat, but nothing ever says they can count as a specific ethnicity for prerequisites, so while this is certainly a super-reasonable house rule, I don't think you can actually do it in PFS.

It is all common sense, actually. Think about it from a real world perspective.

Does your Character really know what you know? Is he that well educated like you are? Does your PC carry a Smartphone while trudging through the dungeon?

That... that makes no sense. What does this comment have to do with anything in this thread? This is a complete non-sequitur.

Sczarni crime family wouldn't be an ethnicity its an affiliation

That's exactly my point; I believe "ethnic group" covers things like memberships in tribes or other organizations, but it's been claimed (by a VO no less) that "ethnic groups" includes the full-blown ethnicities like Varisian or Shoanti, as listed in the ISWG (pages 12-23).

I disagree strenuously, but those supporting the claim continue to say "ethnic group" is just a synonym for "ethnicity", and that you thus use a regional affinity to claim that ethnicity and qualify for prerequisites as such. To my reading, you could only come to that conclusion by completely disregarding the clarifying examples of "a Shoanti tribe or Mammoth Lord following", which clearly illustrates what the phrase is supposed to cover.

If an affinity with a country, for example, does not include the ability for non humans to be from such areas then what would be the explanation for this trait Cheap to Feed, which specifically requires you be both Halfling and Osirion or Varisian?

Cheap to Feed is a region trait; the requirements listed in Cheap to Feed are region requirements (with the added Halfling racial requirement), as evidenced by it being a region trait. A halfling with a regional affinity for Varisia or Osirion would meet the requirements.

Harrow Born is a race trait, meaning the listed requirement is a racial one, indicating it's an ethnicity requirement (remember that the human ethnicities are listed in the Races chapter of the ISWG), not a regional one.

It also brings up the question that if, as you believe, human is the only option for these why would they need to specify further in such traits as these Practiced Gambler and Tattooed Focus that "Human - Varisian" is the requirement and not in traits such as the one you mentioned, Harrow Born, which simply lists "Varisian" as the requirement?

All three of those are race traits; Harrow Born is from Humans of Golarion, while Practiced Gambler and Tattooed Focus are from Inner Sea Races (the newer book). Consistent editing between books has never been Paizo's strong suit, but the fact that those are all race traits would again indicate that the one listed requirement is a racial one, not a regional one.

So a disagreement about the Affinities rules seems to have popped up on the PFS Online Discord community.

Affinity (regional affinity): Some feats, traits, or other mechanical items require an affinity with a specific country or region of Golarion. Others require membership in a certain ethnic group of people (e.g. a Shoanti tribe or Mammoth Lord following). All of these are considered regional affinities. Your PC may acquire any affinity you wish during Downtime, but may have only one regional affinity at any given time. Note any affinities gained, lost, or changed on your next Chronicle sheet after making such a change.

It's being put forth that "ethnic groups" includes the human ethnicities listed in the Inner Sea World Guide pages 12-23, such as Shoanti or Varisians, instead of something like a Shoanti tribe (one of the listed examples) or a Sczarni crime family.

What needs clarifying here is what exactly does "ethnic groups" mean. Is it meant to be as expansive as is being claimed, or is it meant to only extend to groups, as the examples indicate?

Particularly this discussion stemmed from the Harrow Born trait; specifically, it was claimed an Elf could declare their Affinity as Varisian, thus meet the "Varisian" prerequisite.

So I'm assuming that this counts as the Adventurer's Guide being added to the PRD in regards to the PFS Additional Resource requirements to use the listed updated content instead of the original versions, yes?

Questions

"Upgrades" in the form of modifications to the base item (usually denoted by their price being listed as an addition, such as "+150 gp") wouldn't be allowed any more than changing the base material; magic items are what they say they are, and no more.

A shield boss, on the other hand, is actually a separate item that's physically attached after the fact, so there's no issue with attaching one after the fact. You can tell that the shield boss is a separate item not only from the price (which is listed as a stand-alone price, not an addition), but also because the description calls them "a sturdy steel device that fastens to the front of a shield".

So you could buy a shield boss separately and then attach it to a magic shield (since a shield boss is an entirely separate item), but you couldn't take a magic shield and add shield spikes or make it a throwing shield (because those are modifications of the base item itself0).

You can’t upgrade a magic item from a +2 to a +3, but can you add specific gold amount upgrades?

While the rule may have been justified by not being able to determine pricing due to effective enhancement bonus costs, the rule is uniform: no upgrading specific magic items. The rule makes no distinction for effects with a flat price.

Just to help me understand this more clearly

If it helps, consider the fact that Sleight of Hand can be used for more than just stealing items without being noticed, which means if you're using it for your Day Job, said job involves more than just stealing items. Since there's no way of determining how much of your job is picking pockets and how much is other feats of legerdemain (maybe you performed an impromptu stage magician show for fun/profit/to distract people from the heist going on twelve feet in the other direction), you don't get to use the bonus.

Please Do Not Lick The Starstone
- The Management

There's nothing PFS-specific about this, so it should be in the Rules Discussion forum.

You traded out your racial darkvision; you're just playing an aasimar that never had darkvision to begin with. To say that means you can't get darkvision from some other source is like saying choosing a race that doesn't get darkvision naturally means you can't ever have darkvision, either.

I didn't think Familiars gained feats at higher levels?

Not normally, because unlike animal companions, they don't actually gain additional hit dice, but a beast-bonded witch can give her feat slots to her familiar.

That said, the FAQ that covers retraining a familiar's feats also covers animal companions and eidolons, which do gain feats as you level up. More importantly, you only get to freely swap out a familiar's starting feats when you first get them; if you later decide you want your familiar to have a different feat, you have to use the retraining rules. You could also use the retraining rules to swap their feats for non-familiar feats.

Unnecessarily thorough answers is what I do.

Good question. Let's look at the PFS FAQ to see what it says.

What are the rules for upgrading weapons, armor, and wondrous items?

You may upgrade one weapon, armor, or wondrous item to another as long as the new item occupies the same slot, is made of the same material, has the same general shape, and has all of the abilities of the original item.

I left out the rest because it's all just examples.

They definitely both use the same slot, they're both "slippers" ("general shape") and neither item says what material they're made out of, so those three requirements are definitely satisfied. The only thing that's even slightly questionable is whether the fact you spend the Spider Climbing slippers in 1-minute increments, while the Scampering slippers in 1-round increments; you could argue that since you have to spend the Spider Climbing in larger increments, it doesn't have "all of the abilities" of the Scampering slippers.

That's just hypothetical; I don't think you'll actually find anyone that will argue that the limitation counts as an "ability". You should be safe to do the upgrade; just tell your GM what you're doing (like you're already supposed to do), including what the difference between the items is.

If I read the rules correctly, that spell is a Druid spell that Hunters have access to and the boon specifically notes that the owlbear is treated as an animal for all purposes.

Well, they're still treated as an animal companion, and...

Share Spells (Ex): The druid may cast a spell with a target of "You" on her animal companion (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on herself. A druid may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion's type (animal). Spells cast in this way must come from a class that grants an animal companion. This ability does not allow the animal to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells.

Even if the owlbear was only treated as a magical beast, you can still cast animal growth on your own companion anyways, as well as spells like reduce/enlarge person that only affect humanoids.

Stuff

This. She didn't say it was no longer considered evil; she simply lifted the blanket auto-evil-please-don't-do-it that Mike Brock instated, putting it back before the table GM to determine if a specific instance is evil or not. That is not an all-clear to be the edgiest edgelord that ever lorded over edges.

If you're eating them simply because "yum-yum in my tum-tum", it's evil. If, as Tallow suggested, it's done for cultural or ceremonial reasons, it might not be evil. Either way, this is something that can make people intensely uncomfortable, so if you spring it unannounced on a group of strangers, you're way out of line.

Didn't realize it was time for this question to roll back around...

I think he's looking for a list of Venture-Captain NPCs, not the real-life campaign volunteers.

To my understanding, you don't need to play Eyes of the Ten with the same party in every scenario, just like other PFS scenarios. Your character must play them in order, and they can't play anything else until they finish the series, but your fifth player leaving won't stop the rest of the party from continuing, and that player can jump in with another group starting part two. Likewise, you could also have a new player join the existing party, so long as that character can otherwise legally play that scenario (i.e., they've finished part one and no more).

The only reason that that doesn't happen more often is because it isn't run that often, and the special rules surrounding it just makes it easier to run the whole thing with the same group.

To clarify: half the standard scribe cost to get access, plus any applicable scribing costs to actually scribe it. This also applies to witches, who pay the same access fee to get another familiar to teach their own.

For example, to get a third level spell, the standard scribe cost is 90gp. A wizard could pay 45gp to get access to the spell, and another 90gp to scribe the spell, for a total of 135gp; a witch would just pay the 45gp "library fee".

Hmm okay, I was curious by the ability for it to speak a language if that got over the handle animal.

Is there a pfs way to get an animal to not need to be handled?

Short answer: no, and that's intentional.

Increased price of an item is not an issue, if you did read my post carefully, you'll notice citation from Society Guide:

Equipment: If the price of an item becomes more expensive, you must sell back the affected equipment at its original full market value based on its remaining number of charges (if any). So long as you have enough gp and Fame, you can purchase the same item at its updated cost.

So you still have to pay the diffrence _including_ the cost of a slivers.

What you're citing is the rules for how to handle errata and other changes to the rules, which is entirely unrelated to the question at hand.

Been following this for my own needs. So, CigarPete's game & my own game would need to find a fourth player? I have seen threads about leaving the pregen at the entrance for "guarding purposes" if nobody wants to take control of the pregen -even if the pregen is out of tier anyway?

All PCs, including the theoretically GM-controlled pregen, have to be in-tier. If there is no pregen in-tier for a module, that unfortunately means that there's no pregen that is legal for that module, in which case there is no avoiding the need for an actual fourth player.

Though having a player swallowed by an eel would be a dramatic turn of events.

If that's a problem you're facing, perhaps you should consider a change of venue.

Well, are you running them in 'PFS' mode or 'Campaign' mode?

Emerald Spire doesn't have a "Campaign Mode".

I am not even sure it would let you buy ammunition.

Spellslinger gives you the Gunsmithing feat, and the PFS additions to that feat state that it allows you to buy ammo at crafting prices, so I imagine that'd be enough justification to be able to buy ammo in Core (interestingly, only at the reduced price; ammo would be unavailable to you at full price). You'd certainly be stuck with just the starting gun, though.

Let's not try to rules-lawyer something into being useless.

I imagine trying to call in another of your characters would be a violation of the "One Character Per Adventure" rule (page 7 of the Guide).

You're basing an argument on how the races are edited, but Paizo is well know for inconsistent editing. Also, of course the faceless stalker has its Change Shape bonus included in the skills section of its statblock: disguising itself as another humanoid is the monster's entire schtick, far more than disguising itself as a human is for a kitsune.

Look, you're trying to argue that a single racial trait grants two separate +10 bonuses to the same skill in the exact same circumstances, without even directly mentioning one of them, let alone specifying that they stack. These clearly aren't separate bonuses; the +10 racial bonus from the Kitsune Change Shape racial trait is just the bonus from the polymorph subschool, directly mentioned (and given a type, which doesn't actually change anything seeing as racial bonuses stack) to you don't have to go down a rabbit hole to find out about it.

Kitsune are not supposed to be the the premier shapeshifter of the Pathfinder system, such that they are literally a better shapeshifter (to the tune of a huge +10 bonus) than races that specialize solely on disguising themselves via shapeshifting.

Also, this should probably be in the Rules Questions forums, as this is in no way a Pathfinder Society question...

Just wondering what the ruling is on a kitsunes change shape.

Do they get +10 racial bonus to disguise, then an additional +10 for the polymorph subschool bonus totaling + 20 at level one?

or do they just get the +10 when the use their change shape?

While using their change shape ability to take their human form, they get a +10 racial bonus on Disguise checks to appear human (not Disguise checks in general). Since this aligns with the +10 to Disguise that polymorph spells provide to checks to appear as the creature whose form you've taken, it's a pretty safe bet that these are supposed to stack, seeing as they're both given for the same reason.

Probably just use the FAQ for Animal Companion item slots.

That's already PFS-specific so it should work in this case, I'd imagine.

Considering that that FAQ explicitly states that those animal companions can't actually use weapons, even if they can hold them, I don't think that works as a precedent here, even ignoring the fact that this specifically refers to animal companions, and the official stance is that FAQs only apply to the specific question asked.

Frankly, I don't think you should be able to use weapons in this case. The ability specifically shuts this down, and there are no mentions of exceptions based on what kind of animal form you take, so as written using weapons is a hard no, and changing that has game balance issues to worry about.