Vaienna's page

I tend to agree with that understanding of the rules. I simply find the rules a bit vague as to the exact understanding. I agree it would seem weird if the arcanist specific bonuses were not to be understood exactly as they are written. But since it's almost a complete copy of the wizard bonus I wouldn't put it above Paizo to simply have reused it for consistency.

Greetings.

I'm sitting here with my advanced class guide. And I'm a bit confused about a specific aspect of the arcanist favored class optional bonus for humans.

On page 71 it states that "Add one spell from the arcanist spell list to the arcanist's spellbook. The spell must be at least 1 spell level below the highest level the arcanist can cast."

Sounds simple enough right? Well if we then look at the arcanist's spell class description in the spells section it states:

On page 9 it says "Feats and other effects that modify the number of spells known by a spellcaster instead affect the number of spells an arcanist can prepare."

So my question is: Does taking this favored class option add one spell to the spellbook, or does it add it to the amount of spells the arcanist can prepare?

Additionally. Could you provide an example of feats/abilities that is affected by this rule?

Thank you for your time.

I guess that my biggest question is: If you are designing/allowing so many ways to avoid consequences, why bother designing consequences at all?

A really good question. As you perhaps could gather from my earlier post/suggestion, I'm not of the belief that bandits "need" anything to avoid the rep loss. It comes with the job I'd say. Same as being a merchant carries the risk you might become the target of bandits.

I believe that any S&D mechanic should be more of an assurance to the person who pay the required money, that said bandit will not just murder him anyway. Such a mechanic will just happen to also benefit the bandits, as people might be more likely to pay up.

That's what I think anyway.

Breathe, OK I can do this.

Reading though all the posts and threads on the PFO forums I've come to realize how cluttered everything is. Recruitment posts, discussions about blog content, crowd forging and even people who just enjoy talking about how much they're looking forward to the game.

As PFO goes into Alpha, then Early Enrollment it will only get worse so I was wondering if it's time to add some sub forums?

I know that our beloved goblins are planning on eventually moving everything to a site dedicated to PFO and they probably have a lot of other ideas in the works. But for now would it be an idea to get a few sub forums so that people's recruitment threads and such do not get drowned out so quickly?

What do you think?

Please don't hurt me!

Speaking of altruistic bandits. Wasn't there a mechanic that was supposed to allow people to "donate" reputation, the same way it could be used to lower someone's reputation at the cost of your own? In that case the "Robin Hood" type bandit could still hold merit. I mean, if you steal something and loose rep, but then give away some of those stolen goods to needy people or a poor settlement who reward your selfless ways by donating some of their rep to you?

I think it might work. Or maybe I'm just being daft. ^^

It's funny you should mention it because I plan to find a nice inn to settle down in and then never move. Of cause it is rather unlikely I'd actually be allowed to do that. Sooner or later I'd run out of money so I'd have to venture outside, and risk death, or worse... Maybe I can get a job as a barmaid? ^^'

On the flip side maybe merchants will be less cautious because "it's just a small trip to the next town over". I'm more worried about if your neighbor is a chaotic evil, demon worshiping, power hungry, warmongering state of lunatics (And you're not one yourself). I imagine it would feel like waging war on your next door neighbor.

Of cause I could be wrong and you could get along swimmingly with just that distance. ^^

Please don't hurt me.

That's really good advice actually. Thankies!

Reading though some of the immense amount of posts in this thread (because reading though all of them would take the better part of a day), I find a lot of innovative and curious ideas as how the S&D system should work.

While each and every one seem to have their own merit, I can't help but to wonder why it needs to be so complex. I believe a simpler system would be most effective.

Allow me to elaborate:

Rather than employing some different system one can simply use the trading system. Let's say you "craft" a stand and deliver note that holds whatever people is in your groups name on it. This note is essentially a promise to not attack the "buyer" and his/her traveling companions (group).

When you open a trade with someone and place that in your trade window, you and your group becomes attack able by the victim and their group without a rep loss. The vital thing here is that you do not receive a rep loss either for proposing the S&D so if they decide to attack you, you are of cause able to attack back without a rep loss. This will allow for aggressive retorts from the victims of the S&D, and leave the proposers free of any repercussions. (Other than death if they underestimated their victims).

Now assuming the victims do not instantly attack let's look at their options.
1: They can pay the fee.
2: They can try to haggle. (It's a trade window after all. Maybe you do not have the money, but you might have something else they might want instead)
3: You can call their bluff and refuse to pay.

If the trade goes though both parties revert to non hostile and anyone noted on the S&D note will receive double rep penalty for attacking anyone from the buyer's party for a set amount of time. (After all you did promise to not attack) Also since the victim can read the names on the note during the S&D it should be easy to notice if only half the bandits are on there. Buyer beware and all that.

If the trade did not go though and the victims did not attack, it's in the hands of the bandits now. They called your bluff, will you prove to them that you weren't bluffing, rep penalty be damned? Or will you let them go, they did not seem wealthy enough to be worth the hassle after all?

Now let's look at a few issues with this system in a Q/A format:

Q: Wait if we use this system I cannot freely attack people who refuse to pay me?
A: Very true. It only means you will not loose rep if you come to an agreement or that the victim attacks you first.

Q: Why would I use the system at all then? I could just demand their money and not give anything in return.
A: Also very true. You must understand that the S&D system in this form would not be a direct benefit to you but rather a "service" to your victims. They might be more inclined to accept your demands with some form of assurance that you won't simply attack them anyway. In that way it'll indirectly benefit you. (Also some trigger happy merchants might think they stand a chance and attack. Thereby netting you a kill free of repercussions.)

Q: With a S&D system build like this I won't receive any rep benefit from using it will I?
A: Actually you will. Not in the sense that you'll get a reward for each S&D or something like that, but instead by the virtue that you are not actively doing any actions that causes loss of rep. And as the rep system is build right now the more time you go without loosing rep the more rep you'll gain. In that sense you're rewarded for using S&D and should still have enough spare rep to "make an example" out of an uncooperative merchant now and again.

Well that's my take on a possible S&D system. Sorry about the wall of text, I know it seems awfully complicated when you look at it but it's really simple. I swear! I'm probably overlooking a few things or there is stuff I forgot to mention. Not to mention places where I'm outright wrong, but that's what a forum is for right? Discussing ideas and finding the merits and flaws for the betterment of a game we're all passionate about.

Also, this is my first post. Please be nice to me. ^^'