Sean Montgomery 7819's page

Has anyone tossed around the idea of some type of 2 hour bounty like adventure? I feel like the bounties are super short and fun but so often leave you wanting more. I usually run two on any night when I run a bounty and it is usually with the same characters playing in both sessions. (Running two bounties in a row often feels like you spend so much of your game time setting up the story. I feel like a 2 hour bounty style adventure would lend to a little more complex story and some more interesting combats (especially if you had two combats and got to manage your resources a little better) and also skip those times when the bounty is over and some players didn't even get to contribute to the combat either via really luck rolls by other PC's ending things before round 1 is over or just having a bad roll on there turn and then the combat ends before the get another turn... I have also noticed that a few of the more recent bounties really feel like they try to squeeze too much into a one hour session and are begging to be just a little bit longer. Anyway, that is my two cents

I feel this should be noted in this thread as well:

Linda Zayas-Palmer wrote:

Hi! For those of you running this, there's an error in the challenge point sidebars for Subtier 5-6 for encounters A1 and A2: they should use the standard high-subtier categories of 19-22, 23-27, 28-32, and 33+ instead of the ones from the low subtier. The scaling instructions are otherwise correct.

This was posted in the product page.

Never mind, it is posted above I just missed it:

Am I missing something here, I am trying to prep this but on pg 12 and pg 14 for scaling encounter A1 and A2 respectively it relists the information for scaling the low tier for cp 10-18 instead of the high tier of 16-36..
(The date on my watermark is 6/6/2020) Is the correct scaling listed somewhere else or am I missing something? (I did check the "Converting Early Scenarios section of the OPFg but there was nothing there about it either..

Wait did I read that right and there is only going to be 4 PF2 bounties coming out in 2022? Can someone confirm this? I thought it must have been a typo but it sounds like maybe not…
Did Starfinder getting 6 bounties take away from the Pathfinder bounties? I guess you can only publish so much and I suppose we have to share.

Highly encouraged by reading the above. What impact, if any, will this have on length of Society seasons in real time? Will the seasons become two years in length (real time)? Will the average number of seasonal meta-plot scenarios decrease or remain about the same?

Running a bit off the tracks with that train of thought, I would not be opposed to seeing a "season" for society play go longer than a year. Not only could this allow for a more complex story line for the season goals in general, it could still have specials and such with major points to the plot and it might allow those who are not "caught up' on all the meta scenarios a little more time to get there...

I was just thinking of this as sometimes the meta plots feel like they could be expanded on more as they are really interesting. Just wanted to share my thoughts, cheers for all you guys do and thanks for the wonderful gaming!

As far as Society play, I know this runs in "Adventure Mode" and interpreted that to mean that you get to apply credit (and get full credit, sans any un-found items) to your society character regardless of a character death. Can anyone confirm this for me?

-Here is the text for Adventure mode from the Organized play guide:
"Adventure Mode is used for adventures not published for society play, and allows the GM more freedom to adapt those adventures, including running the adventure in Pathfinder using GM house rules, and the ability to alter encounters and statistics found in the adventure."

*And here is the text from the sanctioning document:
"APPLYING CREDIT
Players who play through Dinner at Lionlodge, as
well as GMs who run the adventure, can apply the
adventure’s Chronicle Sheet to any of their Pathfinder
Society (Second Edition) Organized Play characters.
Players must decide which character to apply credit to
when they receive the Chronicle Sheet and the GM signs
it. The Chronicle Sheet gives 4 Experience Points and
10 Treasure Bundles appropriate to a character of their
level. It also grants 8 days of Downtime. An individual
may earn one chronicle for playing and one chronicle
for GMing. Replays may be used to earn additional
player chronicles.
Players earn access to the items and options listed on
the Chronicle Sheet through their actions during the
adventure. If the PCs don’t discover an item or fulfill the
conditions described in the adventure to gain access to an
option, cross that option off of each player’s Chronicle
Sheet. If a PC gains access to an option presented on the
Chronicle Sheet that can only be obtained by one member
of the party, they earn that option on the Chronicle Sheet
for all members of their group."

Thanks for any help or clarification. I was pretty sure of my interpretation but someone else called this into question and my third running the other night was a TPK so I need to find out for sure...

I appreciate all comments regarding this one. I know when I played it I had no idea how to solve the puzzle and we failed and then the rooms were collapsing on us in the chase but our GM had forgotten about one thing as we were leaving with the gem. I am happy to be reading all this feedback from others as I will be running this this weekend for PaizoCon Online 2021 and got some great pointers. Thank you all!

Is there a page for discussion of this with spoilers ok? Just curious as I have now played it once and ran it twice and just wanted to provide a little feedback and I don't want to post any spoilers here. It was amazing fun for me playing it and for both sessions that I ran!

Quick comment on Jaden, his +1 dagger should be +10 to hit when thrown (an it is not listed but +14 when used in melee). At my first pass over, everything else looks correct. (I am guessing it is just missing the +1 to hit from the +1 magic of the dagger)

For Elsir, he should have 5/4/4/3 spells for a 5th level Sorc. Also, what are his signature spells and what spell should he have prepped from his spellbook. (I am assuming he would have Crashing Waves prepped as an additional 3rd level spell and I can kinda figure what his signature spells might be based on the spells he has. I am guessing magic missile, hydrolic push and lightning bolt? but again, looking for an official ruling).
Also, thank you Jason for clearing up the domain and focus spell for Lavanna! *Sorry to be so finicky about the pregens, for the record, I am looking forward to running this. It looks like it will be a really fun adventure!

Shisumo wrote:

Muertee wrote:

I haven't gotten the main pdf yet, but was looking over the pre-gens and it seems to me there is a major bug on the rogues Acrobatics skill. Say's he's trained and only has a +2. Trained 5 Rogue, Dex +4, should be +11 Acrobatics, is there a way to get a clarification if this is a typo?

It should actually be a +12, thanks to the bracelet of dashing. A 1 got dropped somewhere.

A couple more small issues: Lavanna seems to be missing her domain. I'm giving her the Water Domain (though I could see an argument for Travel as well), but she definitely should have one. And her Perception modifier is right, but she's Expert, not Trained.

I just noticed the missing domain and focus spell as well. Is there an official ruling on this?

I am a little confused by the ruling on difficult terrain. By RAW, it seem like you travel and extra 2.5 feet worth of movement when moving diagonally though difficult terrain. This is a minor gripe I guess, but what it boils down to for me is that if I were traveling through a large area of difficult terrain I could go 100 feet in one direction, but if I went diagonally I would be able to travel 125 feet for the same movement cost...

Shouldn't each square of diagonal movement in difficult terrain cost 15 feet of movement?

And as long as we are on the topic of movement, wouldn't it be easier to say a square of movement if five feet, then measure movement in squares? Then instead of counting out movement by multiples of 5 (or 10 or 15) you could just count out squares... I see too many people miscounting by 5 for some reason so I admit this is a pet peeve of mine...

I just found out the distance traveled diagonally is 7.04 feet not 7.5 (I swear I read somewhere it was 7.5 feet.. 3.0 or 3.5 maybe?). That being said, I would rather use the Raw rules and give a little leeway to the player as far as movement. I really thought it was exactly 7.5 feet and was making my statement from that false pretense!

Hmm...that seems simultaneously more complicated and less accurate than just calling diagonals in difficult terrain three squares. Or am I missing something?

I just read Bugleyman's post, he is exactly right and is the same point I am making but in a much more concise way!

I am a little confused by the ruling on difficult terrain. By RAW, it seem like you travel and extra 2.5 feet worth of movement when moving diagonally though difficult terrain. This is a minor gripe I guess, but what it boils down to for me is that if I were traveling through a large area of difficult terrain I could go 100 feet in one direction, but if I went diagonally I would be able to travel 125 feet for the same movement cost...
Shouldn't each square of diagonal movement in difficult terrain cost 15 feet of movement?

And as long as we are on the topic of movement, wouldn't it be easier to say a square of movement if five feet, then measure movement in squares? Then instead of counting out movement by multiples of 5 (or 10 or 15) you could just count out squares... I see too many people miscounting by 5 for some reason so I admit this is a pet peeve of mine...

Sean Montgomery 7819 wrote:

<<snip>> (sometimes just to help out and make a table legal)...

This the ONLY time that a person can replay an adventure that does not have the repeatable time. It is not a "sometimes" thing.

I don't think awarding AcP for replaying an adventure that is not a repeatable should be allowed. We already have so many things special things happening on AcP that the website is still not correct.

My last post was a bit of a rant about my opinions. I meant to address what you were stating Gary about not "awarding AcP for replaying an adventure".

For reference,this whole conversation got started as my player from the Convention that I mistakenly allowed to replay in my games (in one case to make the 4th player and in the other to make a 3rd live player) Contacted me because he had received credit for one session (and seemed to be under the impression he did receive AcP for it) but had not gotten reported and recieved AcP credit for the second game.

Unless I am misunderstanding what he was seeing on his organized pay records online, it seems like the AcP system is already set up to award the credit for replaying and is relying on proper enforcement of the RAW to keep this from happening. As the convention organizer found the RAW rules, the credit from the game he did get the AcP for was removed per RAW, it just felt like a blow to my player who really helped fill out the table and make the game fun and really wasn't expecting much for the risks he was taking except a few AcP points.

I bring this up because Unless I am misunderstanding something, it feels like there would not need to be any changes to the way AcP's are awarded and therefore no taxation on the resources already devoted to making the AcP system online work without bugs.

Even if I am misunderstanding the situation and there would have to be some work to make this happen on the back end eventually, can you really tell me it dosen't feel right to make that happen? Even if not today due to other more pressing concerns with the system?

Maybe its just me, but I feel like it is reasonable and fair and should at least be a goal we can work toward in the future.

Sean Montgomery 7819 wrote:

<<snip>> (sometimes just to help out and make a table legal)...

This the ONLY time that a person can replay an adventure that does not have the repeatable time. It is not a "sometimes" thing.

I don't think awarding AcP for replaying an adventure that is not a repeatable should be allowed. We already have so many things special things happening on AcP that the website is still not correct.

Oh shoot, I feel sheepish. Obviously I don't have a lot of experience with players replaying scenarios for no credit as I did not realize it could not be done unless it was necessary to make a legal table. I mistakenly allowed a player to join two of my games at a convention for no credit, one made 4 at the table and the other made three, but it looks like I was not to have allowed this unless there was only 1 at the table? I hope that would not invalidate the other players experience as it was an honest mistake on my part. The player was under the assumption (not from me as I didn't know either way, but from other GM's he had played with) that he would not receive any credit for replaying with his character despite the risks and resource expenditure, but thought he would still receive Achievement Points for his participation. I am glad I know now how what the RAW is for sure and can correctly advise players going forward.

Regardless of my previous actions however, I still think that it would make sense to at least provide this small benefit to someone replaying a scenario considering the risk they take and the enjoyment they contribute by helping fill out a table.

Also, I would like for a reconsideration of the RAW: "Replaying for No Credit: A player may replay an adventure to help create a legal table. Replays grant no rewards. Players should record any items expended or gold spent and may be given a blank Chronicle for this purpose. This is an exception to the restriction that you should never assign more than one copy of a Chronicle to a given character." -

-In my opinion it would it would make sense to allow someone to legally replay a scenario to help fill out a table size of 4 still while still keeping with the spirit of the current RAW rules. Considering that a legal table is now 2 players (for for scenarios up to min level 5), as written you can only allow a replaying person if you have 1 player. (Or 1-2 players for the eventual min level 7 tables). (Am I interpreting the RAW rules correctly?)

As a GM I know it tends to be easier to have four real players than 2 real players and 2 NPC's even though that is a legal table. Also my opinion, but I feel like 4 players really is a sweet spot for everyone having a great time without turns taking excessively long. With 2 living players I feel like you lose a little bit of the role-playing possibilities (I am sure some people can really manage to role play two characters at a time really well in my experience if feels less natural).

These are all just my opinions of course and maybe there is something I am not considering as far as why the organized play RAW are the way Rules Are Written. :)

Considering the Achievement point system that we are now all using, I wonder if we can get Paizo to reconsider the replay policy and at least reward Achievement Points for replaying a scenario.
To me that would feel like a nice "participation" benefit since you already use your resources and risk death to your character for no XP, prestige or gold rewards. To me a few Achievement points for having played through a whole adventure (sometimes just to help out and make a table legal) seems like a reasonable thing...

Any thought!?!

Ah, that was my problem, I had the guards that had scent more than 30 feet away from the pillar so the scent never kicked in. Good point for my second group, I will have the guards camping right next to the pillar so they are within rage of the scent abilities!
Also with the first party that has bypassed most of them, the darn rogue kept passing his disable check on the first try or that would have given them away as well. I wish they had made the pillars need 2 checks to disarm instead of just the one... I suppose I could just rule that but I think making sure the guards are a little closer will do the trick!

So, I am a bit late to the party but I am curious if I might be missing something. I am running two different groups through AoA and both are now in book 2, the Cult of Cinders. Both groups now have a caster with invisibility sphere and both groups use it to get up to the dragon pillars and disable them before the battle even starts.
I feel like the pillars are not supposed to be so easy. Am I missing something here? I don't see any way for the pillars or their guards to detect the party while they are invisible, though I did rule the guards immediately became aware once the magic of the pillars was disabled. Any thoughts on this? The fights so far have mostly been piece of cake for the party when they don't have to deal with the pillars and the guards.

Huzzah! (and Happy Holidays Paizo and fans!!)

One of my tables just completed Book 1, Hellknight Hill and I am working on their Chronicles for society. I have the sanctioning page but it dosen't mention anything regarding Downtime. Do they gain downtime? (I am assuming no Fame as there is no more fame in PFS, so that one is easy...)
Thanks for any help!

To clarify...fame has been this stupid thing I've been tracking forever on all my sheets and it's just going to 'go away' and you think this is a good idea?

I worked for that resource. It took my time and all the other players time, and now you are just going to throw it out with this as the explanation.

Good thing I like pathfinder 2nd edition enough to deal with your society nonsense. You guys need to get your act together.

For future notice if your Player community works for something, then tracks it, you could at least give them something for it. Seriously this week alone I played 5 games, each one the DM had to note fame, and track it. Now it's garbage. I'm betting that this was 5 hours of combined human effort. How many hours do you think players have tracked this if you add up all their combined sheets. You could at least let them spend it on gold or boons. You literally make all this up. Just make something up to replace their hard work.

So disrespectful to your community.

Wow, that's a lot harsher than I feel about this change!

So I thought i had heard that for Society Play you would be able to make your own Kobold to play in the adventure as long as it was first level (alla the Skittermander Free RPG day stuff) but now I am not finding anything that says so. Did I imagine that or am I just missing where that info is? If anyone can verify or deny that for me or point me in the direction to find said info I would appreciate it.

Does anyone know what time on Monday registration begins? Or how the payment for slots works? I have a tentative schedule worked out but would like to be a little more prepared. If anyone has any advise, thank you!

I am only a little concerned as I am trying to play all my games in Fantasy Grounds as it is by far my favorite VTT. (Classic or Unity)!

For those that are interested, I am running PFS2 1-21: Mistress of the Maze on Fantasy Grounds Classic the first day of the con in Block number 3 (the last slot of the day), just FYI.

Thanks all and have a great time at the Con!

Ok, I am a bit late to the "table" as I just followed the links here and got all the info I could. I have never been to GenCon before, well, I made the last two years of GenCon SoCal but never the big event so I am excited.
I think I followed all the steps correctly and signed up to run one slot B3 PF2 1-21 Mistress of the Maze on FGU(gotta get some more Fantasy Grounds games available!).
I also made a list of games I would like to play in. As far as signing up for the games, do you have any more info? If it is $2 per game do I load all the slots I want into a shopping cart and purchase them when I am done? If anyone can advise I appreciate it, otherwise I will be sure to be trolling the GenCon Site up to and during the signups till I figure it out!

Looking forward to it!

When I reported Q3 it came back as repeatable. :-(

Same here, in fact, it seems all the reporting I have done lately the mod claims when I report it that it is "repeatable" and you will get credit for each time you report it, weather this is true or not. (Specifically 1-02 Mosquito Witch, and 1-00 Origins of the Open Road for sure both said this when I reported them.

Aww... You got rid of the landscape format... :(

Yes, were is my landscape sheet? (and perhaps with a different color schemes?)

It looks good overall and Im sure Ill get used to the color if I have to but I would still prefer a landscaped sheet!

Aaron the Paisley wrote:

Sean F. Montgomery 1978 wrote:

What happened to my landscaped character sheets?

Perram over at Know Direction made a great landscape version of the P2 character sheet. It can be found here.

That's a nice sheet. It'd be even nicer if it was fillable.

Thank you for that link,, the sheet looks great to! I think i like it better than the color scheme from the Paizo sheets at the moment. No offense Paizo, generally I prefer your stuff but the new character sheet in the Core book as well as all the sheets from the character sheet pack are not landscaped and the color scheme is somehow a bit jarring to me (and uses more printer ink ;) though I am sure I'll get used to it over time. I would have even been happy with just one generic style landscape sheet so I had the option. I think for now I will be using Perram's sheet as I really do prefer the landscape style.

Landscape for me as well.
Now I'm just sad the landscape character sheet is gone...
Here is hoping they bring it back as well!

First of all, Thinman, I am sorry I don't know where the downloadable sheet is. I ordered the character sheet pack and am able to download that. In the meantime you should be able to print it from your core book pdf.

A separate critique/question/request about the character sheets...

What happened to my landscaped character sheets? I was so pumped that the play test had moved to the landscaped sheet and I ordered the premium sheets thinking they were going to be so amazing, but now it seems I may need to use the play test character sheets if I still want to use a landscape version...!?!

Similar to GM screens which for me are too tall and leave me feeling separated from the players (where as the landscape version is just right), as a player I feel like the traditional character sheet takes up too much of the valuable table space while the landscape sheets takes up less of the important center table space where the action is often happening. At least for me the landscape sheets are so much nicer for that reason. (Perhaps it depends on table size for people, or perhaps comfort level and familiarity with the traditional style sheet? I still really prefer the landscape style of sheets.

Is there any chance of an official landscaped character sheet coming out? I'd pay for the premium sheets all over again if they came out in a landscaped version!
Tell me its going to happen! Please!

(And by the way, thank you again for the landscaped version of the GM screen!!)

To the man above, that regularly gets in the first word, I salute you. Huzzah!!

Also thank all of you at Paizo for making Society play amazing!