Congratulations to the new campaign coin recipients, the coin is just a tiny recognition of the positive impact you had on your community and we are lucky to have you all. Also congratulation to the new 5 Nova and Glyph GMs, it takes many hundreds of hours of prep and plenty more to get recognized like this. You likely already know this but thank you so much for enabling so many players to enjoy this game. Without GMs like you, this would not be such a lovely community.
Not really my cup of tea, particularly on an ancestry level, as the world is a large place and different regions should feel differently. But to be frank, I am likely not the target audience and prone to ignore a lot of writeups like this when I build a character (ancestry is rarely a super relevant aspect for the characters I tend to play).
I am a big fan of the amazing, hard-working volunteers ^^, I find myself GMing a fair number of tables these days, and that would not be feasible without such amazing tools. It is no hyperbole that without them, I could not have shown PF2 to so many new players. Their hard work has saved me hundreds of hours of prep at this point, I can recommend the Beginners Box, Bestiary Token pack, and Abomination Vault on Foundry without any reservations ^^
and that there is a “you have to play PFS to earn the right to play in a non-PFS pbp” culture that has formed onlineThat is not a thing.People have kept telling me that I need to play in PFS PBPs if I want to join a non-PFS pbp where I can play what I actually want to play,I highly doubt this. I suspect I know where that is coming from, a lot of people are prone to invite people they have already played with in org play scenarios into their home game adventure paths games etc. It's as always mischaracterized, after all in this context playing org play games is just a good vector to get exposed to other players before starting anything that is a longer commitment. Frankly speaking, it boils down to "Many people enjoy inviting those that they like and play well together, and org play is a good way to hang out for a short time" (though pbp is different). Unfortunately for OP, it is not really possible to have a uniform experience in org play, it gets rather close but different tables with different groups of players and GMs have different sensibilities, interests in RP duration, and understandings of rules... Even more unfortunately, if one approaches org play from the position of feeling forced and compromising, it's not really a great starting point, and looking at previous posts in a bunch of places, it seems like the structure and setup of org play are not a great fort for what they are searching for.
At most levels of play, your character is likely not to know the alignment of another character, even player characters. And these are rather broad generalizations, I would not worry about it at all. GMs are very unlikely to even bother to tell you how your character should feel about another character outside the use of certain spells. I did not love the "But no good GM would force your character to think a certain way because of this" part of your post but in general, considering many of the issues you bring to the forum. Pretty much nobody cares, how your character is supposed to feel regarding another character. This might all seem very confusing if you just read the rules like that. There are obviously exceptions if your character has a sort of code (like a champion) but even those are very much relaxed in org play. GMs in org play are supposed to follow the rules to the best of their ability, but there are always going to be aspects where table variation and individual GM understanding are going to be different. The rules say that a Liberator has to be CG, but that does not mean that any liberator is yelling that they are one, or that in-world the term liberator is even used for this flavor of a champion. Champions of Calistria and Shelyn likely do have different names for that. My suggestion would be to just play a session or two with a pregen, where you are not so exceedingly attached to every minute detail of your character, and what unlikely occurrence might or might not happen. Lastly.. this is not an organized play-specific question, you likely just want some sort of binding ruling for something that is subject to table variation, and that is not generally what org play does.
I have been GMing for a few and I am currently having blast playing one, so I am keen to help. Well, the most common interaction is that with Act Together, no matter how you split up the actions either the eidolon or the summoner can make a 2+ action activity. To give an example, if the summoner casts a 2-action spell, there eidolon can't also cast a 2-action spell (for example the fey eidolon) or use many of the 2-action activities given unique to each type of eidolon. The class gets some level of free lunch, but there are hard guide rails. Something that has recently surprised a player of mine when I pointed it out, and later showed him the rules: Summoners and Eidolons share MAP, even if they are not using the mounted combat rules. So spells that require a spell attack are not very easy to use in many cases, so the players should plan carefully. I am not certain what sort of local interactions you are seeing, so it is harder to give good feedback. Regarding your second point, I am not sure what you are referring to. It is not a very simple class to pilot and benefits from some consideration before your turn. To be frank I encounter more players piloting very complicated and involved investigator and thaumaturge builds where they tend to forget limitations ^^
I agree with many of the other posters, enemies still get the choice which option applies to them. It is also worth mentioning, that mindless enemies still react to things, like environmental conditions, attacks etc.
Though the reaction does not have the mental trait anyway, so I would not worry too much about it.
CaptainRelyk, I have seen your posts and questions on a fair number of discords and on the forum, so please assume that I have seen most of it, particularly since you tend to ask the same question in a lot of spaces, and many of us are active in more than on discord. As many have been trying to explain to you, this is not an org play issue, many aspects of the rules that you worry about, are written so the GM has some freedom to adjust things to their table. My suggestion would be to accept the very nature of table variation, and that playing in a collaborative game like Pathfinder, the GM is going to have to be the final arbiter on a lot of things. That will also affect things related to your character. How certain spell effects can look like, or if you ever have the chance to meet your patron... those are aspects of storytelling that are within the hands of the GM. Organized play has to keep a tighter rain on some aspects, as many, many people have been explaining to you already, but in many regards, the way that your table GM interprets things will not always interact with that. Table variation is always going to be a part of this hobby, and your appeals to authority are a bit tricky. Everyone can argue and petition for a rules change, and posting on the forum is generally a good way for the developers to see it, but especially as far as organized play is concerned... it helps to have some experience by actually playing it. Only wishing to play, if the game meets your specific requirements, or even asking for a lot of major changes to the cost and availability of certain options, is going to severely limit your ability to play this game within the constraints of the organized play campaign. Arguing for a rules change or update in order to convince some of the people who Westmarch Style campaigns/Living worlds is also not really a very productive step, as there is no pressure for them to accept every update or not even introduce any houserules or changes they might like. But that subject also feels like an appeal to authority to me. Frankly speaking, very few people can influence a GM like me on how to run their game, outside or inside of org play. And trying to convince them by running to some of the designers and so you can use their answers to reinforce your argument, is very likely to cause the exact opposite of what you want.
Congratulation to the new 5 Donut GMs, without your hard work, this would not have been possible.
The Game Raccoon also does some very neat Golarion-specific artwork for products on PFinfinite ^^
Also, for those who don't have the funds to commission artwork for a product, there are lots of extremely good artists who put up stock art on sites like DriveThruRPG for relatively reasonable amounts. Earlier today I was looking at an artist, Dean Spencer, who has an enormous amount of amazing stock artwork for relatively reasonable prices. There are options. Excellent point, I feel like with options like this, and all of the artwork you can use via infinite products, there is plenty of material to make your products look appealing, without having to resort to AI tools
I don't offer the Beginners Box for new players, or rather players that have found org play, because they often already have a CRB and have to build a character. Forcing them to use a different set of rules to create their characters for the Beginners Box is somewhat confusing, and as Hilary mentioned, org play char creation rules are already rather complex. Paradoxically, PF2 is a game that is known for the number of creative, outlandish, and versatile heritages/ancestries... and we completely hide that absolutely outstanding feature of the game, by limiting players to play a couple of ancestries in the Beginners Box. ---- Personally, I would suggest retiring the old sanctioning with the decadent amount of ACP, or finding a way where that only applies to people that play it for the first time. My reasoning for this suggestion is that it can negatively affect the community if people want to replay this one, thus causing our scheduled offerings to become less diverse. The Beginners Box is not a bad dungeon crawl, but dungeon crawls are just sliver of what PF2 and org play have to offer, and I would hate if this would cost us players that are less interested in this sort of experience.
I am delighted with the product I have purchased, and the showcase the hardworking people who made this a reality, have gotten here ^^ Edit: The post seems to be missing a link to the product description https://paizo.com/products/btq02eat?Pathfinder-Tokens-Bestiaries (or I could not spot it)
Congratulations to Erica, Jess and Landon, without your hard work org play would be a pale shadow of itself.
Well, it depends on the options, sometimes all that is needed is to be creative when you describe the action or the spell, avoiding gruesome or graphic descriptions. It is similar to how we treat spiders when a player with arachnophobia is at the table, replacing the token, not using the word spider etc. We have a similar setup with the skeletons, people are supposed to respect people's boundaries at the table.
I vastly prefer the concept of players meeting the candidates during the scenario, since old blog posts can be hard to find, that said, if the people who are to be included can give more details upon request, that seems sensible. Honestly, some cool in-world promotional flyers for their candidates would be nice handouts for the scenario, and ideally, that could also include a link to the actual voting survey. It is likely easier for a GM to provide the link to vote in the election with the chronicle sheets. It's also worth mentioning that the actual players are likely not in a great position to explain what future plotline they are representing since the details and concepts for those metaplots are likely something the org play developer will have to come up with. Personally, particularly with the regrettable recurring loss of developers, I am much more interested in what sort of stories they want to tell.
Hammerjack is correct, at the time of writing no option to access that particular creature does exist, but you can spend some ACP to get an undead mount that might look a tiny bit like a drake. From my understanding skeleton mounts arrive in a tightly packed package full of bones and glue.
eddv has a good point, before some of the price hikes, it was moderately viable to support a local store with purchases, while also buying the same product from Paizo because one wanted/needed the pdf. With the new cost rising to the level of or eclipsing the cost of the physical books (after all many retailers do various levels of discounts) it can feel a bit weird to pay the same or less for a physical book that must have included the cost of printing, shipping etc. Ideally, some sort of option that enabled retailers to sell the book with a pdf code, or to generate one as they sell it to you, would help. In my limited experience (FLGS are somewhat less common in my area) org play players that play at the store will find other ways to spend money, card sleeves, snacks/drinks and dice are popular options, but for players that want to have access to their books on the go, .pdfs are unfortunately very hard to beat, and thus the hardcovers don't seem to sell well. Unfortunately, while Paizo.com sells "Print/PDF Bundle" that option suffers from the same issue as subscriptions, as far as customers outside the US are concerned. Shipping cost and tax make it prohibitively expensive, and while that is not a problem Paizo can solve, a way to discount the pdf significantly if you already own the printed version might make that product more appealing to stock. Though to be honest, this has been discussed to death, if the higher cost is helping to make sure that wages are not eaten up by inflation, I am all for it.
This adventure is designed so that it cannot be adequately completed by a skilled partly at level. In fact, I don't see how it could be completed unless the players are literally psychic and guess their way into the correct solution in time. It looks a lot like you're meant to believe your party can have an impact on the metaplot, but you're actually just meant to lose, and that's a terrible game experience. 0/5 stars, arguably worse than Lions of Katapesh. If you want to write a review, that is at the top of this page to the left of the discussion tab. Reviews help the people who craft these scenarios to figure out what worked well and what was not so well received, so they are super appreciated. If possible it helps to list factors like the tier placed and potentially CP. Whatever information you can provide is very much appreciated.
I was really keen to read and playtest the new class, but the lack of developer clarification on how certain things work... certainly reduced my excitement to playtest or enable it :(. At least from my point of view, some more developer feedback in the forum would be quite welcome.
I can't comment on the quality of all the listed products, but there is not a single Starfinder product listed, could it be possible to maybe list at least 5 things from each system? PF2 is great, but so is Starfinder and right now it feels like one system seems to get showcased exclusively (I realize that fantasy likely sells more than the genre Starfinder is in, but I feel like that's a better reason to showcase products that have gotten traction). And while I personally do not play the cardgame, it might be nice to have that one featured as well.
I think it would be smarter for them to make it a purely PDF product for people to print it out and they provide the art. Not hard to put them on card stock or foam core and make our own pawns and they wouldn't be out the cost of producing physical products.No. Printing is pretty much useless. Who has access to a printer? Or wants to spend all that time? And there's TONS of competition (and GREAT ones at that) in the space for ready-to-print standees. I do, in fact, I printed the set of Starfinder pawns for an AP. By printing on thicker paper and laminating it, I got some useable pawns that worked well (though I used a spacer to augment them sitting in the pawn stand. Unfortunately, the pawn set pdfs have a rather low resolution so suggesting them to online GMs for the purpose of VTT token creation is not very easy.
|
