Search Posts
Well, Lady Ladile. I have decided to go all in with a rogue or alchemist. So as of this point forward Viggo will be a Unchained Rogue (Underground Chemist) or Crypt Breaker Alchemist if that makes your choices a little easier. Either way I want to tinker with rogue skills and/or alchemy. I guess I thought about it and in the long run the Rogue will be a better trap monkey than the Bard. So that is my final choice!
If someone else really has their heart set on an investigator, rogue or similar type of character I would be willing to run a level one character who has 2 chronicles under his belt. Eru'Tept- Warpriest of Selket [Missing Son/Daughter] Eru'Tept is from Wati, the half-city, known more for its ruins than its people. Eru, as he is known by his friends, grew up in the shadow of the many evils which have and continue to plague this region. Like many members of his family, Eru channeled his faith into action and joined a rather small band of Selket's faithful in its two-fold mission: to protect the rest of the faithful dead and rid the lands of the curses of necromancy and the undead. As such, he has picked up a few tricks regarding the exploration of local tombs and pyramids. When not adventuring, Eru is known to volunteer as a healer at his local temple and enjoys the company of his friends and can be found at a variety of taverns and theaters throughout the area of the 'Three-Cities'. Two months ago, Eru's duties as a healer were put to the test when a Varisian merchant was discovered to be afflicted with a rare wasting disease- which neither natural or divine magic could abate.
Just to be clear- Viggo is 20 years old. His apprenticeship took 5 years and it has been year since his formal graduation.
Viggo (no last name)- Human Archaeologist [Unhappy Childhood- tortured] Viggo was born to a family of fruit merchants who lived just outside of Korvosa on small farm. His family was hardworking, honest and in Korvosa that also meant poor. As was his family's practice each day the children would accompany their parents to the merchant stands which formed in long rows along the main road into the city. It was here that other merchants and locals came to purchase their agricultural supplies. This was also the place the darker elements of Korvosan society came to ply their trades and seek victims. Viggo was just another one of these hapless victims. At the age of ten while his parents were conducting business Viggo wander off... only a few yards from this mother's gaze... never to be seen again. Taken as one of Gaedren Lamm's "pupils" the next three years exposed Viggo to the dark underside of Korvosa as he was forced to become a beggar, a look-out and at times a cut-purse. During these years Viggo lived in almost constant fear and dread. Not of being caught by the authorities- of Gaedren and his brutal treatment of those who failed him. Just after his thirteenth birthday Viggo's luck ran out and a failed 'rolling a drunk' resulted in two of Viggo's comrades being killed by a potential victim- a drunk but extremely skilled duelist armed with a hidden sword. Viggo who had been the team's lookout was the only survivor. In a fit of rage Gaedren beat him nearly to death and left him to die in a dank alley. It was at this time he was discovered by a member of the Pathfinder Society- a chronicler who first paid a team of local healers to nurse the boy back to health (which took several months) and then offered to take him back home. Viggo didn't want to go and begged the Pathfinder for a chance to be something more than a thief or a farmer. So after writing a letter to his parents, in which his benefactor explained Viggo's state of good health and the grand apprenticeship in which Viggo had been enrolled- his mentor began the intense process of training Viggo in the skills of a professional adventurer. "An expert in the location, excavation and post-recovery examination of rare antiquities and arcane collectibles"- is what his mentor called Viggo at his graduation as he formally presented him to the assembled group of senior Pathfinders. Now, a year later, Viggo is ready to set off on his own and make an name for himself... and if his path should ever cross with Gaedren or his child-snatching minions... he has sworn to put a knife into their bellies!
No. Larry and I were both playing in the second part of Peril and Plunder. Our characters were both level 4 and went down swinging (as did everyone else). I think Larry's character dying is a little more a bummer for him since his character had used a couple of different boons during the creation process.
Yeah... Hopefully this will just take a hand-wave and be approved. Seems pretty obvious to me... But that's just me.
Thanks guys. I knew it was going to be a gray area. I will agree that this is another question (in a long line) that needs to be added to the FAQ. I am just hoping that this is 'approved' for use in PFS. The Pei Zin Practitioner gives up a considerable number of skills and revelations when selecting this archetype... it would be sad to see players unable to use this ability to create the limited number of 'natural' or 'plant -based' items it PFS.
Just want to clarify that it appears that since the Archetype is approved and that 'Herbalism' can be used in place of Alchemy to create alchemical cures, found in the PCC: Alchemy Manual (assuming the Pei Zin Alchemy section only), that a Pei Zin Practitioner appears to be able to 'craft' certain alchemcial items for use in PFS just like an Alchemist and/or Investigator.
@Serisan... I understand the 'Golf-Bag' but my comment was more on just how things 'look' rather than how they actually work from a game mechanics point of view. I guess 'carry capacity' is the simplest way to deal with the issue, it just has few holes in it IMHO. But like I said, its more about pointing out how ridiculous looking it is rather than wanting to redesign the whole Pathfinder Core Rules from the ground up. It's a game... I get that... But at times it does give me a headache...
Technically... I guess having a detailed understanding of how various ancient and medieval weapons were carried and deployed on a historical battlefield has 'skewed' my opinion. If you call something a Sarissa and give a pseudo-historical description of it in various rulebooks and/or supplements (and the same goes for other weapons) then its not completely ahistorical. There is a specific point of reference with an actual historical item(s). But thanks for the dismissive nature of your comment anyway. My problem isn't so much with carrying 96 pounds (with super-human strength and all), but more with weapons that have lengths of 6, 8, 10 and 15 feet carried in multiples and being 'quick drawn.' The sarissa being 'listed' as 15 feet does take into account the shortest known version of the weapon (Early Macedonian period of the mid 4th century BCE), but 'strapping up' various polearms does seem rather ridiculous. Like I said, this wasn't about rules or 'if you can.' It was about how practical it would be if Pathfinder wasn't a 'fantasy' campaign setting- which just happens to incorporate all kinds of actual historical stuff (like weapons and armor)- of which we have ancient and modern examples of and points of reference for.
This is not a 'is it legal question.' Its more of a rant against an oddity that is becoming more and more common in our local area PFS game(s). I call it the 'I have one of those' character builds. Last week I was running a game where a 3rd level fighter was utilizing six (that's right...six) two-handed weapons in a bizarre 'max it out' style of build. So here is the list for your amusement: Greatsword (8 lbs), Guisarme (12 lbs), Heavy Flail (10 lbs), Lucerne Hammer (12 lbs), Halberd (12 lbs) and a Sarissa (12 lbs). That's right and he was decked out in an Masterwork Agile Breastplate with armor spikes. Just in armor and weapons, the character was pushing 96 pounds... Being a professional historian (yes, really) and a prudent GM, I asked- how does your character carry all that stuff? His answer was simple, " I have an 18 strength and a Masterwork Backpack!" I said, "No, how does your character actually 'carry' all that stuff?" The players answer made me chuckle, "In my backpack or strapped over my shoulder." I said that's great but just from a game mechanics point of view don't you think this is RIDICULOUS? He said, "Nope." He added, "I can get to it all really quick... I have Quick Draw, so I just drop them as I go and pull out another one if I need to." I just shook my head and said, "Ok, let's get back to the game." The player responded, "It's TOTALLY legal and I have several characters who do it." Oh Pathfinder... sometimes you give me a headache...
I was happy until a few minutes ago when I re-read the section on Combat Maneuvers- calculating CMB and noticed the last sentence. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll. So that would apply to the inclusion of range modifiers. Drats, foiled again!!!
Actually that is a really good point... and I would add the only limiting factor to the trip (per RAW) would be that the range (max) could not be greater than 50 feet. Hmmmm... makes bolas a reasonable choice again.
Just to satisfy my own curiosity, how many psychics, mesmerists, spiritualists, etc... are you seeing in your PFS sessions? Not that many? A lot? I was just wondering, I'm leveling a spiritualist right now, but haven't seen too many others lately, just one or two in the past few months... I tend to agree with these sentiments. I just hate dealing with players who grab a new book, make up a new character and really don't know the rules for their newly created 'Min-Max.'
I am just wondering if any of the good folks at Paizo are reading this tread... Comments like, "Yeah, I let everyone slide on any rules for PFS that I don't like," must make them want to stop supporting PFS or making any resource available to the community for free. I guess I might have less players, but I am going to start being more diligent in this aspect of my duties as a VL and GM. Not because I like doing it, in fact I don't, but if longtime players and GMs aren't doing it why should Paizo keep supporting us? For the average scenario that I run (if I have never prepared it before), it takes me 3-4 hours to read through it a couple of times, refer to various Bestiaries, make notes and put together any minis I might need. If a player can't put in some time of their own to get their character in order so I can easily inspect it and ensure they have the necessary reference documents... well, maybe they should go play at someone else's table. From pretty relaxed to militant in the course of one forum... way to go!
Its like a rookie cop pulling someone over for driving 66 miles an hour. Yes the sign says 66 and yes the book says on page 11,974 paragraph 6 subsection d-9 that the speed is 65 but practical reality and culture is not to do that for a lot of good reasons. Based on this I would think you don't know too much about cops (rookies or otherwise). You might want to stick to analogies you have in depth experience with. I don't why you are so resistant to the thought of having good record keeping for your characters. I have level 10-12 characters myself and that's when keeping tract of every bit of information becomes even more important than ever. But hey that's me. Might be time for you to put yourself through an extensive self-audit to make sure things are 100% valid on your end.
Adventures explore ancient dungeons (crypts, temples, wilderness areas, etc.) kill random stuff and take any treasure they might find. Mercenaries get paid first (at partially) to go into the same places and kill specific stuff then collect the balance of their pay. Bandits look for rich people...waylay them and take their treasure. Venture Captains recruit subordinates to go and kill specific stuff and loot specific treasures and then give it to 'Society.' Hmmmmmm...starting to think I want to be a bandit.
If the answer is yes, "I need proof you own a PFS legal copy of that book"That would take me half an hour now, with a keyboard, a working internet connection and archives of nethys. Doing that at the table? Not going to happen. It;s not worable. If you can't show you own it in 5 minutes or less I am sure someone else would be more than willing to take your spot at the table. BTW, I never even mentioned a full audit. I merely mentioned that having a player show (either in print or on a tablet) is a good way to make sure the necessary materials are on hand for easy reference. @BigNorseWolf- maybe as you build/design/advance a character you should have some notations on your character sheet to let you know where the more obscure traits/equipment/feats are originating from- I mean you obviously are consulting the resource(s) when you design and advance your character right?
The one thing, though, the GM can do, is ask for use of the additional materials that the player is using to look things up for themselves. If the player does not have the occult adventures book with him, for example, then the GM does have the right to disallow the character, since they cannot look up the answers to questions. This exactly where I went...thanks Jack Brown And regarding the young man (GM) in question. He has never GM'd anything above a 3-7 level scenario (low tier). I have spoken to him and told him my prior decision stands... he has to suck it up and let anyone who has the proper materials play at his table. With that said, I also told him he can ask to see 'each and every' supplement being used by the player/character in question to be sure that if the need arises for him to reference a power/ability the player has it handy. Not from the PRD or OGC website... on their tablet with a watermark or in hard print. He seems to be OK with that...
You know before this thread I have only done a few (less than 10) character audits in my entire time as PFS GM. With that said, the amount of "I never check" and "I don't care" has me somewhat perplexed. As GM's it is our job to pay some attention to the books and supplements outside CORE that our players are using. I know there are shenanigans going on, but as a GM in PFS you understand the 'if you don't own it you can't use it' rule right? It's not a suggestion... As a VL (or VC or VA) this job (duty if you like) is spelled out for you in rather plain detail. Now I am not encouraging anyone to become the 'Paizo Supplement Police' but adopting a fully apathetic attitude towards occasionally checking player resources does seem to be dropping the ball. Here endth the rant.
While I am not a mind-reader... I think the 'roll with it' idea is what he has trouble with. I don't know if is a personality thing or not, but he does seem rather 'structured.' There is the additional concern of 'making' him do something he is uncomfortable with. I don't want to lose an energetic (if less experienced) GM because he feels he is swimming in the deep end of the pool and not treading water. Thanks for the advice everyone. I think I will spend some time at (or near) his table for the next few sessions he GMs and help him with the rough spots.
I recently had a rather interesting question put to me by a rather new(ish), but good GM- high energy, great prep and the players really like him. So here it is... If they (the GM) doesn't own or otherwise have access to a particular supplement or Paizo product can them limit or 'not-allow' a particular character class(s) at their table. I was inclined to say that they had to allow any player with the proper reference materials at their table, but they further explained that they do not own either Occult Adventures or Ultimate Intrigue and for that reason don't feel "comfortable" or "knowledgeable" enough to GM when parties contain characters utilizing either of these books. He explained that it slows games down when he has to either borrow the book from the player in question to double-check a power or ability and feels that because of this he is often second-guessed by players. I mentioned that he might want to just GM Core- but frankly there isn't that much (if any) call for Core games in my particular area. I am putting this out there go get some feedback from the community. Ultimately, he is volunteering his time and I can't 'force' him to do anything against his will... but I was wondering if anyone else has had an issue like this before and wouldn't mind sharing some of their wisdom. Thanks.
For those bringing up the issue of promoting the 'Cooperate' component within PFS, I fully support and understand that line of thinking. I also realize that there are some classes (Cleric and Fighter for example) that tend to have less skill points per level than other classes. But maybe...just maybe if penalties were assigned to aid another checks, some players would be less inclined to dump stats like Wisdom or Charisma and be inclined to take traits which give them access to bonuses to Diplomacy or other non-class skills- often making them a class-skill. For example the Fighter takes the 'Friend in Every Town' trait and makes Knowledge local a class skill (or Diplomacy) and gets a +1 bonus on those skills. Even with base stats of 10 in Charisma and Intelligence the character can be reasonably certain to help the party out in certain situations... rather than taking Reactionary or some other 'in combat' usable trait. Or maybe...again just maybe, some players look at utilizing Archetypes which give them more class skills and skill points, such as the Tactician or Lore Warden. Just a few thoughts... nothing in stone.
Ok. So are you of the opinion that the only person who can 'blow' the roll for a Diplomacy check is the person actually making the roll (the main character)? Why not just make EVERY character who is interacting with said NPC make their own individual rolls and adjust reactions accordingly? I do agree with the 'role-playing' requirement as well as having the appropriate languages, etc. necessary to interact properly, but that isn't actually a requirement of the rules either. So in effect, that could be considered changing the rules also. I am not trying to be snide, but the rule for aiding another is rather broad and the last sentence does leave it rather open (to the GM). If PFS added a guideline for Diplomacy that required actual role-playing by each participant, I would support that as it begins to break down the idea of Meta.
I will be brief, but a few weeks ago I was GM'ing a group of fellow PFS members, a few of whom I didn't know very well. The group contained a total of 5 players. A Bard and Cleric with fair to good Diplomacy skills, etc. and 3 other players who had each dumped their Charisma to 7 or 8. Normally this wouldn't be a problem and I am sure we have seen these type of character(s) before. Not every character needs (or should have) a high Diplomacy skill, but I was then confronted by the 'Meta-Gamer.' While the Bard (who has a +8) Diplomacy skill is trying to persuade an NPC to allow them to enter into a restricted area (blah, blah). The Cleric then adds, "I will also tell the guard about the importance of our mission, can I aid the Bard?" I respond yes and the Cleric (at +5) then rolls and obtains a result of 15 or so- successfully aiding (vs. 10). Before I begin back with the NPC, one of the other players immediately pipes up, "Hey I am going to aid too!" Then proceeds to roll dice and tell the player next to him to roll also. I ask them if they really want to do that and the first player responds, "Yeah it doesn't matter anyway, even if we fail." I then advised them while that might be true in some situations, in this particular case, if they missed their aid another check by more than 5, then I would impose a -2 modifier to the overall result. I explained that Diplomacy relies not just on saying the right things, but also not saying the wrong things, as well as there being a particular mechanism for a particularly bad roll (for Diplomacy). Needless to say, neither successfully aided, while one of the players actually failed by more than 5 (the target roll was 10). I was then told for the next 5 minutes how I am the only GM to ever have interpreted the last sentence of the aid other (when applied to skills) the way I did- i.e. 'The GM might impose further restrictions to aiding another on a case-by-case basis as well.' This gets me to my point regarding the very common META of PFS. Should we (collectively) assign some limitations/guidelines to the use of the Aid Another action in addition to those found in the Core Rulebook? I think skills like Diplomacy and Bluff (and a few others) should have consequences for failed aid attempts. What about other skills? Perhaps saying that only a character with a +0 or better can aid? This was suggested by one of the players. I for one, wouldn't like to see it, but there does seem to be a huge amount of 'aiding-another' going on. Maybe some guidelines on how many players can aid? There seems to be a wide array of table variation within PFS... which is often good, but this might be one of those occasions where might need to tighten things up within PFS. This is just food for thought and to initiate a constructive discussion... I can't be the only one out there who has thought about this before.
Boom Stick= any firearm, which must be proceeded by, "This is my..." Blaster= an arcane caster designed to do as much damage as possible with spells, most often destroying a large area and numerous enemies, as well as the occasional PC. Dice Monkey= The player who sits next to his best friend. That friend coaches (pushes) them through every aspect of the game... repeating the following phrase, "Don't worry about that, just roll the 20 sided die." Auto-Pilot= a scenario that appears to drive the characters in a particular direction, no matter how often they really screw it up or try to go off on a tangent.
From the players perspective... "I can give YOU money to buy an item that WE can all use? But I can't give you money for other stuff? And if YOU don't use the item that WE all helped you pay for, you get to keep it and YOU CAN'T pay us back any of the money that WE ponied up in the beginning?" "Yeah, you want me to pitch in 500gp for that scroll...Nah, I don't think so." As a GM, I see the sometimes very fragile 'Cooperate' component of Pathfinder Society dropping right into the toilet. If we want players to explore and work together, we need to have rules that encourage cooperative play. This might just be one of those instances.
Left over scrolls and potions. I can see this really causing a problem in game. Some players may want their 'money' back, while other players don't care. Can the party 'sell' it back for full or half price? I am inclined to allow a full remittance to all party members given the spirit of cooperation- but that is not RAW, so I will go with half resale value for now. I can see this being a constant issue with some groups, while it may never really be an issue with others... expect table variation (GM joke). This might need a clarification sooner, rather than later.
This is really quite simple. If you commonly play a build type that is subject to both an 'A' and 'B' interpretation be prepared to play it both ways. Unless the GM or another player is totally unaware of the rules or a particular FAQ(which can happen), it is YOUR responsibility to be flexible, not theirs, especially when you know there are 2 (or sometimes more) commonly accepted ways to interpret a particular issue or power combo, etc. DO NOT ARGUE. Ask, listen and present your understanding of the rules and then understand that ultimately the GM's ruling is final. Don't get fussy... Don't illicit other players to advocate for you... Don't authoritatively press an ambiguous issue... Don't phone a friend who agrees with you and ask them to explain it the GM (this one actually happened to me once). Just be ready to be flexible.
|
