Singularity's page

2e’s first AP, Age of Ashes, was literally all about aiudara.

"Age of Ashes" is only about a very small part of the aiudara network, only about Alseta's Ring. The aiudara network is much larger than that. It also extends to Castrovel. Check out PF1e's AP #17, "A Memory of Darkness", for another very small piece of the network.

Starfinder mentions the aiudara on Castrovel in the "Temple of the Twelve" AP.

I'd like to see a map of the entire (known) network, at least on Golarion.

I wanted to generate one for part five of Second Darkness, which was intended to have a significant section about navigating the aiudara network as a way to sneak into a fortress through a forgotten magical back door, but the adventure turnover went in a different direction and there wasn't much time to course correct, so we ended up having much more of that particular volume focusing on a big dungeon crawl than I'd anticipated.

As far as I know, we've never really had much of a chance to do more with aiudara networks or maps since then. Hopefully we'll get a chance to so eventually, but for now I'm pretty sure we don't have an official map of the way they all link. Just close to two decades of print product containing a lot of examples in text that might be tricky to all track down. :-/

I hope you get around to it. I think it would be cool to see more APs use/focus on the elf gate network. I'm using them in my game so that I don't have to have the drudgery (IMHO) of trekking via ships, caravans, on foot, etc., when I really just want to move the action to the next location hundreds or more miles away.

Thanks

I have tried to piece together what info I have about the aiudara (elf gates) from PF1e and PF2e material, but if anyone has put together a map (or graph) of how the elf gates are interconnected, I would love to have a copy.

I've learned a bit from the link Elf Gates, and the AP #17 A Memory of Darkness, as well as from PF1e's Distant Worlds.

A map (or graph) of the elf gate system would still be mighty useful.

advTHANKSance

Try this link: Elf gate - PathfinderWiki
and this PF1e Adventure Path book: A Memory of Darkness (Oh you already reference this as AP17. Oh well, I've added the link to it on PathfinderWiki.)

Don't forget Hellknight Hill from Age of Ashes.

My Question:
Is there a network map, showing the connectivity of the elf gates? I want one.

A Nimble Elf with Fleet would have 35, and classes like Monk and Swashbuckler grant further increases to that at level 3, so it's pretty easy to have 40+ move speed. By level 19, said Monk would have a move speed of 65, and if you add Boots of Speed that goes up to 70.

[rest of excellent explanation deleted]

Wow! I'm a GM that hasn't gone thoroughly enough through all of the PC feats. I hadn't considered that they could boost your speed to such heights.

That does make the description of Search and Expeditious Search make more sense. I wish they had written it better.

Sorry if this is a repeat; I searched and found only one other thread that discussed Expeditious Search...

Preface: I know of no PC with a move higher than 35, most are around 25. This means that maximum speeds are around 250 fpm, with a half speed of 125 fpm. Even a fleet elf with speed 35 has a half speed of 175 fpm.

So how do the 150 and 300 fpm numbers in the definition of Search ever come into play? Even Expeditious Search says "(up to half your Speed)," which seems to nullify its usefulness.

If a PC moves at "full" speed at 250 fpm what are the consequences? Are you no longer taking "educated guesses," (> half speed) or are you still being "thorough and guarantee you checked everything" (< 300 fpm)?

Background Info:

Table 9-2: Travel Speed

Speed Feet per Minute Miles per Hour Miles per Day
10 100 1 8
15 150 1-1/2 12
20 200 2 16
25 250 2-1/2 20
30 300 3 24
35 350 3-1/2 28
40 400 4 32
50 500 5 40
60 600 6 48

Search
ConcentrateExploration
Source Core Rulebook pg. 480 2.0
You Seek meticulously for hidden doors, concealed hazards, and so on. You can usually make an educated guess as to which locations are best to check and move at half speed, but if you want to be thorough and guarantee you checked everything, you need to travel at a Speed of no more than 300 feet per minute, or 150 feet per minute to ensure you check everything before you walk into it. You can always move more slowly while Searching to cover the area more thoroughly, and the Expeditious Search feat increases these maximum Speeds. If you come across a secret door, item, or hazard while Searching, the GM will attempt a free secret check to Seek to see if you notice the hidden object or hazard. In locations with many objects to search, you have to stop and spend significantly longer to search thoroughly.

Expeditious Search
Feat 7
General
Source Core Rulebook pg. 260 2.0
Prerequisites master in Perception
You have a system that lets you search at great speed, finding details and secrets twice as quickly as others can. When Searching, you take half as long as usual to Search a given area. This means that while exploring, you double the Speed you can move while ensuring you’ve Searched an area before walking into it (up to half your Speed). If you’re legendary in Perception, you instead Search areas four times as quickly.

I really like the Incarnate spells!

It looks like I need to add some disclaimer material to the "product."

This [website, character sheet, or whatever it is] uses trademarks and/or copyrights owned by Paizo Inc., which are used under Paizo's Community Use Policy. We are expressly prohibited from charging you to use or access this content. This [website, character sheet, or whatever it is] is not published, endorsed, or specifically approved by Paizo Inc. For more information about Paizo's Community Use Policy, please visit paizo.com/communityuse. For more information about Paizo Inc. and Paizo products, please visit paizo.com.

Thanks for the warning.

EDIT: Important caveat... I see that you are using some of Paizo's IP (icons). You need to make sure you compliant with the community use guidelines.

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll check it out. Do I need to check what Archives of Nethys's IP policies are, as well?

Here is a screenshot of one of the examples that I put in my Dropbox...

C-k-D-P.png

I've created a static HTML/CSS project for myself that allows me to create Bestiary-like stat blocks using an XML-like format.
It's for my own personal use, but I thought I'd share it with you. This is a pet project, so I'm not going to be heavily maintaining the project, but please feel free to make any changes you want to your own local copy.

That doesn't mean I don't want feedback, but please remember this is only a pet project, by someone who is just beginning to learn about CSS. (Any CSS suggestions are definitely welcome.)

The project repository is on GitHub: PathfinderCreatures

Clone the repository into a directory, and click on the .html file of your choice to load it into your browser.
It should be pretty obvious how to make copies of these .html files to load up your own creature stats.

BTW, they seem to save to PDF pretty well.

advTHANKSance,
Singularity

Update v2.0.0

Second update for adding GMG Variant Rules. Version# increased due to a change creating a minor breaking of the Standalone Party Tracker. [rest deleted]

Charon Onozuka, would you please provide a latest (or sticky, if you can) post with links to all of the [fantastic] sheets you've been working on?

Welcome everyone, and congrats on the promotions!

I especially want to thank Brian. I know not everyone appreciates the software developers and architects, but since I'm one it's one of those things that I notice.

I want to say that over the last months I've seen a noticeable improvement in the web facing portion of Paizo. I still think there is room for improvement, but it's definitely coming around. Thanks.

One more thing. When this Covid mishigas is over, I would really like to come out to Seattle and visit y'all at Paizo. I hope that's allowed (during more normal times).

Hey - my players have have come up with a way to pretty much completely negate the dragon pillar encounters. they use invisibility, then mage hand a bedroll or equivalent light item on top of the pillars eyes, making it essentially blind. the DP entry specifically says it sees through its eyes, so presumably attacks using them for sight. Does anyone have a way that this shouldn't work? Or some other way to get around this? they discovered this on DP 2/8! so I'd rather not have 6 encounters made much easier due to something this simple. I realise that player creativity should be rewarded, but negation of 6 sever enc seems way too much!

As a GM you have to give the players credit when they come up with something clever. My players figured out that a successful 3rd level Dispel Magic will disable the pillar (level 4 counteract). It worked the first time; the caster does have to get in range to do it. Let's see if they can do it to the rest of them.

Remember, they still have to fight the protecting monsters. Those seem to be the real challenge of the pillar encounters. (Also, finding the locations of the pillars, in the first place.)

Umm the pillars they are searching for. The "full size" ones I assume you mean the ones at the shell, and they wouldn't need to send people out to see what's going on since it's in their yard.

Pg 28 says as they find and destroy the pillars the shell weakens.

Thank you, Keerthray. I had glossed over that passage.

No. By the full size ones, I mean the ones at A5, A7, A8, etc.

What do you mean by "and they wouldn't need to send people out to see what's going on since it's in their yard?"

So, as the ones at A5, A7, etc. are damaged, the color should drain out of Dahak's Shell, then. Should the corresponding replicas become inactive, as well?

Dahak's Shell Question **Spoilers (maybe)**

As dragon pillars are destroyed, ...

Does this refer to the replica dragon pillars, or the previously (hopefully) destroyed, full size dragon pillars? Should destroying full size pillars affect the efficacy of this hazard?

At this point I am assuming a fully armed and operational battle station, er, I mean Dahak's Shell, no matter how many full size pillars have already been destroyed.

Thank you Charon! These are great.

So failing the flat check when firing magic at a target in low light results in firing magic missile at the darkness... :)

Bien has been getting off easy. Not any more. Now your GM knows the rule!

Concealment applies.

It effects the targeting phase.

Quote:

A creature that you’re concealed from must succeed at a DC 5 flat check when targeting you with an attack, spell, or other effect. Area effects aren’t subject to this flat check. If the check fails, the attack, spell, or effect doesn’t affect you.

It doesn't affect and is all about the targeting phase not the hit/miss phase so it doesn't matter if the spell says automatically hits.

[...deleted...]
So the spell goes off but you targeted the wrong thing and it is wasted.

That is a very compelling argument, very convincing. You've made me vacillate again. My brain hurts. I'll flip a coin (d2) next time I need to make that decision. :-)

Nothing against your feelings, but are your NPC casters and player characters now also hitting all their touch spells despite their adversary having concealment?

CRB page 304 wrote:

Touch Range

A spell with a range of touch requires you to physically touch the target. You use your unarmed reach to determine whether you can touch the creature. You can usually touch the target automatically, though the spell might specify that the target can attempt a saving throw or that you must attempt a spell attack roll. If an ability increases the range of a touch spell, start at 0 feet and increase from there.

That description of Touch Range feels less emphatic than the Magic Missile description. I would impose the DC 5 in most cases. If you are already in touch with the target some other way then I would skip the DC 5 check.

I vacillated on this one, but the spell description says "You send a dart of force streaking toward a creature that you can see. It automatically hits and deals 1d4+1 force damage."
I have seen no other spell description that says automatically. That makes me feel this is an exception to the spells referred to by the Concealed condition.

BTW, I am the GM referred to by the OP. I have now offically changed my ruling for our home game.
Thanks DireLemming.

[...deleted...]

Alternatively, if I tried to make something like that as a stand-alone sheet, I'd probably use the Roll20 NPC entry as inspiration and mix in a bit of my own style from the character sheet with things like simple auto-calculations. It probably wouldn't be as complex as my Character Sheet, but might be easier to enter information if creating a stat block exclusively for an NPC or Monster.

Either way, it may take a while before I could have it ready, but let me know which you think would be closer to what you are looking for.

That would be exactly what I'd be hoping for. Thank you for even considering doing this.

[deleted]

Singularity wrote:

I have one major request, though...

After the GM Mastery Guide comes out would you please consider making one of these for NPCs and Monsters?

Hmm... One of the things I'm currently looking to recreate/update is my GM Sheet which can automatically pull stats from these character sheets by entering a link (Along with providing rules notes/tables and areas to record campaign notes). As part of that sheet, I was planning to upgrade my NPC recording area from being just a section on the main page to being an independent tab that can fit some more details for easily referencing.

I wonder if this would be similar enough to what you're looking for? Are you more interested in an area for a GM to record details of NPCs/Monsters to reference in play, or something that helps with the creation of NPC/Monster stats? I'll probably try to include any NPC/Monster creation rules into the GM Sheet where I can, but if it'd be helpful to also have an independent mini-creation sheet to build/record these, then I could look into doing that after having time to review the new rules once they're out.

I mostly would like a tool where I can create the stat blocks that you see in the PF2e Bestiary. Roll20 has an NPC version of their PF2e sheet that works fairly well, but I really love your PC sheet, and would like to be able to fill out NPC/Monster stat blocks with something like it.

I guess you wouldn't need the GM Mastery Guide for that. The Bestiary has everything I need, for now.

In the future, having a tool that implements the NPC/Monster creation process, as promised by Jason Bulmahn, would be icing on the cake.

Charon Onozuka,

This is fantastic! I'm greatly impressed by the quality and attention to detail. I have one major request, though...

After the GM Mastery Guide comes out would you please consider making one of these for NPCs and Monsters?

advTHANKSance

Singularity wrote:

Hellknight Regalia

... deleted ...
Any pointers as to where I can find the section that describes the PCs' acquisition of Hellknight regalia?

advTHANKSance

I'm pretty sure it's referring to the Order of the Nail insignias the party can find in A6.

These insignias were originally tokens for recruits, called armigers, to wear during drills in the courtyard...

That doesn't sound like regalia to me. You may be right, though.

Hellknight Regalia
I've been searching this thread for the answer, but can't find it.

I've seen Hellknight regalia mentioned several times in the thread and in the Hellknight Hill AP, but I have not found where or how to acquire such regalia. Granted, I've just skimmed the AP, and searched the AP PDF for the word "regalia," but have not noticed the means by which the PCs can acquire them.

Any pointers as to where I can find the section that describes the PCs' acquisition of Hellknight regalia?

advTHANKSance

Following

Dante Doom wrote:

I think Erik Mona said that Adventure's Pack is just 1 Bulk.

Which is the only logical explanation for most of the math. But does anyone have a source for this?

Mark Seifter confirmed to me at Gen Con that the bulk for the Adventurer's Pack was calculated incorrectly in the gear list, but was correct in the Class Kits. He said that if you add up what's in the pack it comes up to 1 Bulk, but I have not yet confirmed (should take a minute to confirm, but I'm still on my second cup of coffee).

Do we have a 2nd Ed Errata or FAQ forum for these? I haven't found one with a quick search.

Thank you for keeping us in the loop.

PFS2 1-00 is a pregen only event. The characters will be available at the table.

PFS2 1-01 is a standard scenario in that pregens will be available if needed, but player-characters are welcome according to the Core Rulebook and Guide to Organized Play

Thank you, both Bob Jonquet, and Blake's Tiger. That was exactly what I wanted to know.

I still hope to pick up my PF2 pre-orders at Gen Con. I'm leaving space in my suitcase for them.

Both "PFS(2) #1-01: The Absalom Initiation (Levels 1-4)" and "PFS(2) #1-00: Origin of the Open Road (Level 5 pregens)" say "Materials Provided: No, materials are not provided for this game. You must bring your own."

What materials may those be? And must we have Gen Con pickup of PF2 rulebooks in order to play????

Also I just created my Pathfinder Society Badge. What else must I do before I show up to the game? The FAQ seem a bit opaque to me. (I've never played an organized play event before.)

Singularity wrote:

Do you have to join, or already have joined, the Pathfinder Society in order to play "Origin of the Open Road" at Gen Con?

Don't know if it's required but it would definitely help. Time is always at a premium at convention

newbies guide here

official guide here

Thank you BigNorseWolf. I'll create a character, and read the guides.

Do you have to join, or already have joined, the Pathfinder Society in order to play "Origin of the Open Road" at Gen Con?

I definitely want to know the process, when it's decided.

NielsenE wrote:

If I have subscriptions to basically everything, and am buying a copy of the deluxe version outside the subscription, are any of these slated for GenCon pickup?

Very likely yes, but we haven't made any announcements about Gen Con pick up yet.

When you do make a decision, please make a very big, noticeable, announcement. I have subscribed to several items that are available now for PF2 (still waiting for APs and World Guides, will skip accessories) and plan to attend Gen Con. I hope to come back with a very full and heavy suitcase.

Will it contain creature/NPC creation rules like those in the appendices of Starfinder Alien Archive?

Yeah... we had two deaths just in AP1. AP2 is even more cut off from civilization and infested with poison and disease. If they are breezing through those, I think the GM has bigger issues than Stamina points.

Poison and disease did quite a number on the PCs, but combat usually didn't get them down in HP very often.

No!!!! Please don't add Stamina to Pathfinder 2nd Ed (PF2e).

I'm a Starfinder GM, and have been totally frustrated by not being able to significantly hurt any of the PCs during Dead Suns. (PCs need to be hurt sometimes, in order to give them a sense of mortality.) I can usually get a couple of them to lose some or most of their Stamina in a single combat, but as soon as the combat is over they rest for 10 minutes, spend a resolve point, and viola! back to full health.

Our Mystic was totally frustrated. She had nothing to do. Medpatches? Who needs them? Medicine skill rolls? Only for diseases... I finally homebrewed a rule that the Mystic could "cure" Stamina instead of HP on a case by case basis.

I don't think that was a good solution, but at least it gave the Mystic something to do, at least until we made it to Eox. (But that's another story.)

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE... No Stamina in PF2e.

Secondly, if characters approach an area where there are enemies that are hiding, and the enemies then try to launch an attack, as I understand all that would change is that I would do the initiative roll with stealth for the monsters and perception for the PCs right? There is not surprise in this playtest?

That's how I would do it.

It's my understanding that it's based on what Exploration tactics the individual PCs are using. On pages 330 and 331 of the Playtest Rulebook it says, under Searching tactics,

To be absolutely certain of having a chance to detect any hazard or secret before walking into it requires an overland Speed no more than 100 feet per minute (1 mile per hour). If the group moves faster than that, a searching character should get a chance to attempt a Perception check to detect any secret that’s in a place that stands out (such as near a door or a turn in a corridor), but not one that’s in a more inconspicuous place (like a random point in a long hallway).

My interpretation would be if there are a couple of PCs who are in Searching tactics during exploration, and they are moving at no more than 100 feet per minute, I would give them secret perception roles, as per the beginning of the Searching section on page 330. If they are moving at most half speed, I would roll for the more obvious trap and secret door locations. Any faster, and I would skip the rolls completely.

You Seek meticulously for hidden doors, concealed hazards, and so on. You normally move at half Speed and make an educated guess as to which locations are best to check. In order to guarantee a chance to detect any hazard or secret before walking into it, you must move at a travel Speed of no more than 100 feet per minute. You can slow down to that travel Speed if thoroughness is necessary.

I don't like the word "basic" in basic Reflex save. I'd use a more specific term like "damage Reflex save," or "basic damage Reflex save." Just using the term "basic" makes it sound like it is an unmodified saving throw, instead of a more specific damage-related saving throw.

Jason Bulmahn, Director of Game Design, posted in this post about these rules.

I would make sure to reply in that post to make sure he knows that we want those rules released during the playtest.

Jason Bulmahn, Director of Game Design, has a post where he mentions such a long sought-after magical device...
this forum post
I'd make sure to reply to his post, and request that they release those rules. I did.

There are rules that we are using internally to create monsters, but they are much more like those in Starfinder than the ones in Pathfinder 1st edition. All and all, I have found using them make my life as a GM immensely simpler, especially when working on the fly in the middle of an adventure.

...

Of course, as always, this system is also open to review and your feedback.

I would love to get my hands on these rules!!!! (Edit: Right Now! During Playtest)

BTW, I loved the monster creation rules in Starfinder Alien Archive (similar to Pathfinder Unchained). I'm currently running Rise of the Runelords with Playtest rules, and would love to convert some of the monsters and NPCs from the adventure to PF2 (those that aren't in the bestiary, or have been modified from the vanilla bestiary versions, e.g. Erylium the Quasit spell-slinger.

Dragonchess Player wrote:

One issue I found: In room C8 of the Acreon, the disruptive fusion seal (5th) is almost useless.

I understand the probable intent (to help fight the void zombies and driftdead on the Drift Rock), but by RAW the fusion seal can only be applied to a level 3 (minimum to apply a level 3 fusion), level 4, or level 5 weapon (cannot apply a fusion seal to a weapon of higher level than the seal) that does bludgeoning damage (per the disruptive fusion description on pg. 193 of the Core Rulebook). This makes the only possible weapon that can benefit from the fusion seal a Tactical Swoop Hammer (level 5, 3,360 cr) or possibly a soldier with the Armor Storm fighting style using the Hammer Fist technique; no Tactical Swoop Hammers appear in the adventure and the PCs can't afford one until sometime during the next adventure.

The disruptive fusion seal (5th) should probably be replaced with a holy fusion seal (5th).

I wonder if disruptive was a level 1 fusion at some point in the non-final rules.

Even that won't help agains void zombies or the driftdead. Neither one has DR nor Energy Resistance.

Only the Bone Trooper has DR, and you would have run into it on the Acreon.

The Ghostkiller fusion would work, but it's a bit high level, 5th.

OK, I can see how the Disruptive Weapon Fusion Seal can work against the Driftdead, even though the Driftdead has no DR nor Energy Res.

SFCore p. 264 says incorporeal creatures are immune to all non-magical kinetic attacks. A weapon fusion makes the weapon magical, SFCore p. 191.

I'm going to lower the level down to 1st and allow it to work on all kinetic weapon types, B, S, and P.

Any comments?

One issue I found: In room C8 of the Acreon, the disruptive fusion seal (5th) is almost useless.

I understand the probable intent (to help fight the void zombies and driftdead on the Drift Rock), but by RAW the fusion seal can only be applied to a level 3 (minimum to apply a level 3 fusion), level 4, or level 5 weapon (cannot apply a fusion seal to a weapon of higher level than the seal) that does bludgeoning damage (per the disruptive fusion description on pg. 193 of the Core Rulebook). This makes the only possible weapon that can benefit from the fusion seal a Tactical Swoop Hammer (level 5, 3,360 cr) or possibly a soldier with the Armor Storm fighting style using the Hammer Fist technique; no Tactical Swoop Hammers appear in the adventure and the PCs can't afford one until sometime during the next adventure.

The disruptive fusion seal (5th) should probably be replaced with a holy fusion seal (5th).

I wonder if disruptive was a level 1 fusion at some point in the non-final rules.

Even that won't help agains void zombies or the driftdead. Neither one has DR nor Energy Resistance.

The Ghostkiller fusion would work, but it's a bit high level, 5th.

Gary Bush wrote:

Luke Spencer wrote:

This is the multiattack universal creature rule from the Alien Archive (pg 155):

"When making a full attack, the creature can make all the
listed attacks, instead of two attacks, at the attack bonuses
indicated. It can make the attacks in any order."
so basically any creature can full attack, but if it has multiattack it can attack with all it's natural weapons rather than just 2.

And it looks like the monster alien does not take a penalty for using their multiattack option during a full round. They would if they choose to full-round with their single attack.

Most monster with a listed multi attack have the attacks at 4 lower than their single attack bonus

I just wanted to put the complete rule into the post... AA p. 155

MULTIATTACK (EX)
When making a full attack, the creature can make all the
listed attacks, instead of two attacks, at the attack bonuses
indicated. It can make the attacks in any order.
Format: Multiattack bite +10 (3d6+5), 2 claws +10 (2d8+5).
Guidelines: Use the appropriate damage column for the
creature’s array, and impose a –6 penalty on these attacks
instead of a –4 penalty.
[\quote]

Looking at the chart, it appears to be the same way they determine other NPC Save DCs. By the chart (or within a point of that in one or two cases). Which makes perfect sense given how NPCs work (ie: their stats never effect Save DCs).

So the Item Level of the grenade does not enter into it. I can sort of see why.

Thanks

I know from the CRB p. 183 that Grenade DC is

DC = 10 + 1/2 Grenade item level + attacker Dex Mod (ignoring penalties).

But looking through Alien Archive example NPCs the Grenade DCs are all over the board, and don't seem to be related to that formula. I thought then they must be related to the Ability DCs listed in tables 1, 3, and 5. But they don't seem to be related to those, in any way I can determine.

For example take the Nuar Specialist on p.86 of AA. It has a frag grenade III DC of 18.
A frag grenade III is item level of 8. The Dex mod is +0 The CRB would have

DC = 10 + 1/2 8 + 0 = 14

Table 3 for Experts of CR 8 have Ability DC of 18.

Ok, I thought, just use the Ability DC for Grenades. But that doesn't seem to hold.

Aeon Guard (CR 3) p. 6 of AA

Grenade DC of 14, regardless of Grenade level. But Table 1 has Ability DC of 12. The NPC has a Dex mod of +4, so that can't be it.

How does one determine the Grenade DCs for NPCs?

What about an open room? Your analogy describes tumbling through an opponent’s square (which is much more difficult for a reason). That's not the situation I brought up originally.

Maybe have the Str.Mod apply if trying to move through an occupied square.