amorangias's page

amorangias wrote:

Color Spray - it only affects low level creatures, but when it does, it's an area save or die effect.

Error you are stuck in 2E when it had a HD limit.

In 3.5 and Pathfinder, Color Spray afects all creatures of any level. It has more profound effects on weaker HD though.

Technically true, but the effect it has on higher HD creatures is pretty negligible. Still, it's nice that it scales at all, unlike - say - Sleep.

Quote:

Grease is probably the most versatile first level spell. It creates an area between the team and the monsters where anyone who enters has to save or fall down, stopping chargers and giving team's archers a few rounds of free shots. It can also help with escaping grapples and act as a magical disarm, depending on what you need.

Weaker in Pathfinder as it no longer denies dex except as AoO.

Also true, but still pretty effective as area denial effect.

Quote:

Web is Grease on steroids, with higher save DC and a much more debilitating status. Everything that gets caught in it is a free target for all the team's fighters. In certain environments, it can even stop flying creatures.

Web is 3.5 grease on steroids.

Even better then ;)

Quote:

Glitterdust cancels invisibility and inflicts blindness - both are area effects. Blinded enemies have a hard time doing anything against the team, and the ability to effectively dispel invisibility is a godsend at such low levels. The only downside is, the blindness effect allows a save each round.

Yah, they added a save in Pathfinder.

Still a good spell in my book. It just means it'll wear off... eventually... on some enemies... instead of "not until long after all enemies are dead".

Quote:

Pyrotechnics also blinds enemies, but with only one saving throw - the downside is, there has to be a source of fire nearby. Or, if you don't wish to blind enemies, you can instead create a cloud of smoke that obscures all vision and inficts a -4 penalty to Strength and Dexterity....

Just cast Flaming Sphere (2nd level spell). Best note, the spell doesn't deactivate the flaming sphere only non-magical fire sources are turned off.

And since Flaming Sphere happens to be a pretty cool spell in itself, it makes for a really nice combo.

One on One is the Only way to compare power level. Anything else brought into the mix changes the math and will make one class better then the other depending on the situation, environment, creatures etc... The only True way to compare power is one on one. I am not talking group dynamics but strictly class power.

One on one gives you a thorough and objective analysis of how the class acts in a situation that never occurs in the game. I'm pretty sure I can build a Monk that will do very nicely in 1v1 combat against different classes.

@Amorangias If your winning encounters with those spells well you have not faced a veteran DM of worth.

Ah, the No True Scotsman Fallacy, my old nemesis!

As for RP... Paly can out diplomatic a Bard any day of the week. Lol.

How does he do that? I can understand blowing ranks into Diplomacy, but how does that compare to Charm Person/Monster, Suggestion, Dominate Person etc?

Level 1 - Color Spray and Grease

Level 3 - Web, Glitterdust and Pyrotechnics
Level 5 - Sleet Storm, Spiked Pit and Slow.
Level whatever - black tentacle

Wow. I must go read up on these spells. They've never been part of my repertoire but now that someone is making a list of all the win buttons i'd better do some homework...

Is this really true? Are web and color spray win buttons in pathfinder? I have to admit I've never bothered to read them partly because they're just not my style, put partly because they used to kinda suck... I've never been much of a combat wizard though...

Perhaps we can make a separate topic where we list all the win buttons so that they can be erratad and people can start playing campaigns above level 8 again...

Color Spray - it only affects low level creatures, but when it does, it's an area save or die effect.

Grease is probably the most versatile first level spell. It creates an area between the team and the monsters where anyone who enters has to save or fall down, stopping chargers and giving team's archers a few rounds of free shots. It can also help with escaping grapples and act as a magical disarm, depending on what you need.

Web is Grease on steroids, with higher save DC and a much more debilitating status. Everything that gets caught in it is a free target for all the team's fighters. In certain environments, it can even stop flying creatures.

Glitterdust cancels invisibility and inflicts blindness - both are area effects. Blinded enemies have a hard time doing anything against the team, and the ability to effectively dispel invisibility is a godsend at such low levels. The only downside is, the blindness effect allows a save each round.

Pyrotechnics also blinds enemies, but with only one saving throw - the downside is, there has to be a source of fire nearby. Or, if you don't wish to blind enemies, you can instead create a cloud of smoke that obscures all vision and inficts a -4 penalty to Strength and Dexterity.

Sleet Storm is a mixture of Grease and Pyrotechnics - it creates an area where no one sees anything and movement is hampered. Again, put it between the team and the enemies and you gain a few rounds to prepare for the oncoming battle.

Spiked Pit is just what it says on the tin - you create a spiked pit into which the enemies can fall and take damage. Use in conjunction with any of the vision-obscuring effects above (or even Fog Cloud, another good 2nd level spell, just not as versatile as those above).

Slow is a straight up mass save or suck. Staggered is one of the nastiest conditions you can put on a monster relying on physical attacks.

None of these spells is an absolute "I win" button, except maybe Color Spray on really low levels. Instead, each of these significantly hampers the enemy forces, either straight up debuffing them or buying your team time to buff without dealing with those pesky attacks. Each of them affects many targets and leaves a relatively long-lasting effect, which is key to proper use of magic in PF.

Then, there's Black Tentacles, the closest you can get to a true "I win" button at low-middle levels. It creates a field where everyone who enters is attacked with a grapple, and then crushed for your pleasure. No save, no SR. Just roll for grapple using your CL as BAB and adding +5. I've seen it wreak havoc from level 7 to about 13, then it starts falling behind enemy CMD, but while it lasts, it's absolutely amazing.

I am just not in the wizard camp. They are all situational and bound by feats and school choices. Yes they rock at higher levels (say 7th or more accurately 9th) if they have the right spells ready. Paly rock from 1st level and do not need team support as wizards do until later levels. Most my game I have players end between 10 and 12 the level. So penny per pound I would take paly against any class one on one.

Level 1 - Color Spray and Grease

Each of these can effectively win an encounter. School choices matter little in PF because you can still learn and use all spells ever. And they aren't even situational - you really can't go wrong memorizing either of these spells. Ninth level isn't more accurate than 7th because 7th level is where you get Black Tentacles and win every encounter against ground-based enemies until long after tenth level. One spell expenditure, one standard action - BAM! entire room full of enemies is now hardcore hentai material, while the martials can only watch and grind their teeth. Again, this is a no-brainer spell and you'll never regret memorizing it.

Self-reliance and 1-on-1 comparisons are the worst way possible to gauge class power, because a)you won't be going alone and b)neither will the enemies. It doesn't matter how awesome you can be in a duel, it matters how much you can contribute to a 4-5 person party fighting an equal or greater number of opponents. And in this regard, the paladin has nothing on wizards and clerics.

Paladin is good as far as martial classes go. Smite makes him king against single big evil dudes, and his overall survivability carries him through the rest of encounters. He also gets a very badass list of spells, perfect for boosting his offensive when evil isn't around.

That said, he's still a martial class. He can't teleport out of the dungeon when there's no other way to escape. He can't stack miss chances on himself until the enemy BAB becomes irrelevant. He can't divide the enemy forces with walls or single out the boss with Resilient Sphere/Prismatic Sphere/Forcecage. He can't handle entire rooms of weak enemies with one casting of Black Tentacles. He can't Gate-in a 30HD outsider to help with the fight. He can't effectively cover for other classes with a right use of high level Summon Monster. He can't create his own plane of existence where the whole team can chill and rest while only a fraction of time passes in the outside world. So on, so forth.

Even other martial classes can keep up with him, except poor fighters. Barbarians get all sorts of nice things (Reckless Abandon is practically Shock Trooper on steroids, then there's Pounce, Witch Hunter, Spell Sunder...). Cavaliers lose out on the awesome saves and immunities, but their Smite-equivalent works against any enemy you might encounter. Plus, they get Mount, they get ridiculous damage on mounted charge, they get a few extra feats... Rangers also get an animal companion, a very versatile spell list, free combat feats without needing to meet prerequisites, awesomeness that is Favored Enemy/Terrain, and ultimately even Save or Die effects on their weapon attacks.

Can a Paladin dominate an encounter when there are other martial classes around? He can, situationally. Just like the Ranger will dominate against his favored enemy (and preferably in his favored terrain as well), or the Cavalier will dominate when there's room for mounted charge, or the Barbarian will dominate... pretty much all the time when others can't get their preferred situation, but especially against magic users.

Meanwhile, a Wizard with the right spells memorized can dominate any of the above, regardless of whatever the martial types want to do about it.

Just tell her that the Ranger will eventually cover everything she wants out of her character, she will just have to wait a couple of levels for some of them (not unlike in WoW).

And I actually wouldn't recommend either Skirmisher or Trapmaker. Quite a few Ranger spells function in a way similar to WoW "special attacks", and generally having spells is much better than... not having spells (duh!).

Is there a nature themed rogue Archetype?

Have you asked the players why they are "dissatisfied with the full Base Attack Bonus"? Why don't you ask them what they want instead.

There isn't one per se, but a Scout archetype with lots of Rogue Talents blown on Favored Terrain could work for the kind of character these guys have in mind.

I used to love the rogue. But not so much anymore. Just about the only thing the rogue brings to the table is the ability to find magical traps.

Also possessed by the Sandman and Archeologist Bards and the Urban Ranger, each of these a much better class.

Sneak attack is a cool thing, but I view it as sort of like crit fishers. It's awesome when it works, but it's never easy to make it work.

It's not even that awesome when it works, as proven by various DPR calculations on this board.

The best thing a Rogue can do with a damage-dealing contest is not to enter. Sneak Attack is kinda alright as a vehicle for Crippling Strike and Bleeding Attack, but it's just too much of a hassle for an option that's not that powerful in the long run.

amorangias wrote:

Aeric Blackberry wrote:

With a +1 Amulet of Mighty Fist with Agile ability Dex si your primary atribute, closely followed by Wis. You don't need strenght for anything but taking power attack...

If you're going to buy your way out of MAD-ness, why not just enchant it with Guided and make Wisdom primary?

Because Dex is necessary for stealth, acrobatics (and Disable device with a trait), reflex saves...

Which means you're still trying to shoehorn the Monk into a scout role, which is still a bad idea.

Using Guided instead boosts your Will save (and effects saved with Will tend to be much, much worse than those saved with Reflex), more Perception (the most used skill in the game), more AC (in this aspect, it admittedly ties with Dex), and most importantly - your Ki pool, which lets you make more attacks for more damage.

Either way, buying your way out of MAD is not such a hot option compared to just being a Str-primary, Wis secondary Monk. You can stack more actually helpful effects on the Amulet, or your weapon of choice, you maintain relative equipment independency - sure, you still want to squeeze every gp until it bleeds to be competent, but now every monk weapon found in the loot is potentially a boon to you, rather than something you have to sell for half it's value - and you don't go from 'relatively competent' to 'completely useless' in this one moment it takes to sunder your amulet.

well I had meant that with there big skill spread they can be tooled to most if not all jobs E.G. mouth(bluff,diplo) theif, forger, crafter ect.

Or you can be a Sandman Bard. Six skill points instead of eight, trapfinding, half sneak attack, six levels of spells, some powerful performances, adds half his level to all essential thieving skills. Better as a party face because he gets so much more out of high Charisma.

Or the Archeologist Bard. No sneak attack, but that's actually a good thing, sneak attack is a trap. Still gets trapfinding and bonuses to infiltration skills, still gets six levels of spells with the Bard's wonderful list. Trades performance for a decent self-buff and a bunch of rogue talents - not the best deal ever, but workable, especially since you don't need to blow any of those on making Sneak Attack somewhat usable.

Or the Urban Ranger. Also gets trapfinding and six skill points, on a full BAB class with an animal companion and four levels of divine casting.

If you're really into Sneak Attacking, go Vivisectionist Alchemist instead. Full Sneak Attack, four skill points on an Int-based class, can take Rogue Talents essential to maximizing the usefulness of SA. Six levels of "spells" with a very nice list, can buff his physical stats to "over nine thousaaaaaaaand!", can build himself for using natural attacks to somewhat make up for medium BAB.

It's sad, but there's really no mechanical reason to ever pick Rogue. Each of the guys I listed is a better scout, better combatant, and at least the Bard options make for vastly superior "party faces". All at the same time. To borrow from Order of the Stick, these classes have single features that are stronger than the Rogue's whole 20-level progression.

Quote:

Dex isn't a primary ability for Monks. It's barely tertiary, considering they get almost all the benefits of Dex from boosting Wis instead.

You can build a Monk to be a good scout, but Dex-based monks suck in combat, so you better make sure you get a lot of fun from being the stealthy dude who doesn't contribute in any other way.

With a +1 Amulet of Mighty Fist with Agile ability Dex si your primary atribute, closely followed by Wis. You don't need strenght for anything but taking power attack...

If you're going to buy your way out of MAD-ness, why not just enchant it with Guided and make Wisdom primary?

Dipping into Wizard is great, but the caster level will be a steep limitation - consider getting the Magical Knack trait, it will make the difference between your spells' duration being painfully short (with it) and so-short-it's-actually-worthless (without it).

Still, great utility. Having three cantrips to cast at will makes it almost worth it alone (Detect Magic, Ghost Sound, Prestidigitation, Dancing Lights...). Then you get first level goodies such as enlarge/reduce person, silent image, vanish (with Magical Knack, it's three rounds of invisibility - not very powerful, but it has it's uses).

Also, you get a familiar with all your skill ranks - absolutely great for scouting, and a one level dip into Wizard is much better for it than getting it via Rogue Talent.

I guess the rules weren't fine-tuned for dealing with three-armed characters. Preposterous negligence, might I add.

Best answer - ask your GM. I'd personally allow it.

BTW, any 1h weapon can be wielded in two hands for 1.5 Str to damage, so don't bother with the bastard sword.

ITT: Paizo forum goes full /tg/.

Roberta is right - you can apply your PA bonus damage alright.

By pure mechanics, the monk is probably your best bet. The two primary skills for a scout are Stealth and Perception, which plays right into a monk's primary attributes: Dexterity and Wisdom.

Dex isn't a primary ability for Monks. It's barely tertiary, considering they get almost all the benefits of Dex from boosting Wis instead.

You can build a Monk to be a good scout, but Dex-based monks suck in combat, so you better make sure you get a lot of fun from being the stealthy dude who doesn't contribute in any other way.

the question i have is if the were rat was in hybrid or human form when it was trying to parley with the party in the first place.

in hybrid form its alignment is lawful evil. no doubt.

in human form its alignment might have been different.

Source please?

I'd like to point out some things:

1. I just checked the lycanthrope template on the PRD and it says nothing about forcing alignment change. So all this talk of wererats in general being dangerous, untrustworthy rabid beasts is just people talking out of their behinds. Maybe it's true for specific settings or campaigns, but I fail to see the merit of judging a nebulous situation based on people's favorite houserules.

2. I also checked the Detect Evil rules, and I don't get where some people get the idea that concentrating longer would have detected whether the creature had evil intent. The spell says those with evil intent also detect as evil, but it's a moot point when the creature is evil to begin with. There's no point in the spell's description where you can use the spell to go from "I know this creature is of evil alignment" to "I also know it intends to do evil".

3. Assuming it was in the dungeon, how does that change anything? The "dungeon" is a form of a habitat existing in fantasy worlds, it's not a magical place where everything you encounter is evil and out to get you. Whether they encountered the wererat in a town or in the sewers, or in the gorram Evil Temple of Ancient Doom(tm), the situation remained the same - a sapient creature asked them to leave her home, and didn't even fight back when attacked.

I am sorry but share spells is not two separate abilities. Separate abilities are denoted by separate entries, not multiple sentences in the same entry.

You mean like wizard's abilities to learn, prepare and cast spells are denoted separately?

I see no reason why the cleric couldn't have it, so feel free to homebrew it in.

Rynjin wrote:

Seems like they'd come out even to TWFs, it's basically the same thing except they can keep a hand free for Deflect Arrows or something.

Except that, if a monk flurries using a weapon, they can use that same, single weapon with all of their flurry attacks - in other words, they only have to spend half as much money on their weapons as a TWFer. And now that their unarmed strikes can count as both cold iron and silver, it seems like they'd have less trouble with DR than twfers would... to say nothing of the way their unarmed damage scales.

Saving up on a weapon - yes, at the cost of giving up the use of two class features and some very good fighting styles.

Additional options for bypassing DR - yes, long after armed characters can afford the same set of options, and using it forfeits the advantage of only having to buy one weapon.

Scaling unarmed damage - yes, technically. Practically, it's only a minuscule addition to your average DPR. The cost of taking advantage of it includes buying an expensive amulet rather than saving up by sticking with one weapon, and still having problems with DR (see above).

All in all, it's a very small change that doesn't affect the balance of the class drastically. I welcome any positive change to the monk, but instinct tells me it'll be hardly noticeable.

Noone has metioned Caustic Slur yet? It is actively worse than Monkey Lunge and Elephant Trample because not only are you losing a standard action, you are using it to make your opponents stronger. Now that prone shooting is out of the equation I think it takes the cake.

Ouch, that sucks.

Another completely useless feat from Gnomes of Golarion, btw.

My candidate for the worst feat ever is Helpless Prisoner.

You thought Strike Back was bad for locking an intuitive option behind a feat? Well, thanks to this little gem, it now takes a feat to bluff a guard into loosening your bonds just a bit in order to get a circumstantial bonus on Escape Artist! And apparently only Gnomes can employ this sort of arcane trickery.

To add insult to injury, it lets the GM arbitrarily screw with you by declaring the guard a cruel sadist, in which case your action actually penalizes your EA roll.

I hate this feat so very much. It's bad game design at it's finest.

yeti1069 wrote:

One thing that really galled me in 3.5, and still does in PF, is that your choice of race typically has only a little impact for the first few levels and then drops off from there.

I agree with the OP in that i would like to see race play a bigger role in character progression. It isn't a matter of it being "better" than any other option, and you shouldn't restrict any races from playing any class, but I think a level 20 elf fighter should be different than a level 20 dwarf fighter.

Ultimately, there's only so many things you can do with any single class - even if PF classes don't follow molds as strictly as, say, 4e, roles do exist.

Mechanically, there's only so many ways to make a character good at any particular role. If you want to do damage, you want power attack. If you want to do maneuvers, you want the improved/greater maneuver feats. So on, so forth. Since the characters fulfill a role by interacting with a small subset of the greater Pathfinder system, the number of effects which can affect a given subsystem is limited, and it's nigh impossible to make all such effects equally viable in the long run. Thus, tying more vital options to races will inevitably limit the number of possible builds.

Note that the game already accomplishes your stated goal in a much more elegant way - while theoretically you can build your dwarf and elf fighters exactly the same, they will not be equally effective with the same build. This gives you the incentive to find builds that synergize better with your racial abilities. You're much better off building an elf fighter as an archer, or making use of his Int bonus to qualify for Combat Expertise and maneuver feats with a smaller hit to more important abilities, than you would be if you tried to match a dwarf fighter in terms of front line stamina.

That way, race matters, but not so much that single race/class combos dominate the game entirely.

Stome wrote:

I have to disagree. With alternate favored class options, Racial archetypes, Racial feats (some of which are very good.) and types of sight (dark vision is always good.) There is plenty of long term effect.

More specifically half elf is great if you need EWP on a class without full BaB and many times can make a build come online faster and be more effective long past the early lvls.

Human as any spontaneous caster will always have the edge over about any other race.

Half-orc in a intimidate focused build will always be measurably better.

A halfling with a mounted build does not need to worry about having room for their mount like a medium race does.

Could race choice perhaps mean a little more? Sure. but it is hardly as little as you make it out to be.

Well, as I said earlier, I had forgotten about the favored class bonuses, although for some combinations the bonuses are quite strong, while for others...not so much, but I'm also over-emphasizing the point a little, yes.

I'd like that "little more," and would like to see a lot of the feats tied to races show up on character sheets. Clearly, I'm in a minority among posters here, at least.

I'll thank the people who contributed with cogent arguments and points at least for stopping by. The few who did nothing constructive can go troll somewhere else now, as I'll drop the point.

Consider what the human favored class bonus did to spontaneous casters, or the half-elf bonus to Summoners.

The more incentives there are for a certain race/class combo to be built in a specific way, the less chance you have of seeing differently built characters in your games. That's unanimously a bad thing, because sometimes you just really want to play that Dwarf Bard or an Elven Barbarian, and they already fare noticeably worse than more optimal race/class combinations - push that even further and what may be a weaker but enjoyable concept right now may become completely unplayable. It's not realistic to expect that increasing the number of options will also increase the number of viable options - consider how many feats PF has now vs how few of them are endorsed by optimization guides for each class, time and again.

Rynjin wrote:

I mean bad because it locks you into a certain race if you want some Feats that would make a lot of sense for there to be available to everyone.

Elven Accuracy, for example. Or Cleave Through.

Race SHOULDN'T matter too much beyond RP value and a tiny bit of class optimization. It keeps variety going.

Think about if Power Attack was Half-Orc only. Would you ever use any other race for a Fighter or Barbarian?

depends on if other races get roughly-equivalent feats or not.

With a mechanic like feats, you'll always end up with some options being vastly better than other.

At my table, there's an ongoing rule: you can cast Ray of Frost on your beverage to create 1d3 ice cubes in it.

That's about the extent of the spell's usefulness as far as I'm concerned.

Lord Snow wrote:

being mythic is all about beating impossible odds, not about being the strongest dude around

I totally agree. Being "the strongest dude" around would be Epic not Mythic !

Heracles was so strong, he could hold the sky. Odysseus was the wittiest man in all Greece. Achilles was the best warrior of his time, even before we took his invulnerability into equation.

Three traits from three mythic heroes that were essential to their myths. All of them are primarily expressed through numbers in Pathfinder.

Fundamentally, the concepts of epic and mythic are closely intertwined.

Fortification on your armor is a no-brainer here.

Other than that: please post your character sheet so that we know what we're working with.

If you want a trained full caster with a hint of martial prowess, why not simply take the Cleric with Magic and Protection domains?

Medium BAB, decent HD, high Fort and Will saves + bonuses from Protection + high Wisdom, up to medium armor, lots of spells to screw with casters and/or buff your combat capability. Most definitely requires a lot of training.

Edit: Details on Kyra Steelskin

i built a female Suli Battle oracle of Gorum a while ago, i had trouble thinking of a name, the DM handed me his inner sea guide and told me to browse the Keleshite names, i asked him which would be easiest for him to remember. so he picked "Kyra" because of the iconic cleric, and after the campaign, i gave her the title "Steelskin", referring to her power to harden the carbon in her body to the point her skin was strong as steel. (reflavored revelation). she wore Glamered Plate, and slew powerful eldritch horrors with a greatsword, she carried a glaive as a backup weapon.

the easy ways to recognize a Kyra Steelskin Expy in our group are

planetouched human crossbreed with a bonus to strength and charisma (Suli and Angelkin for Example)
worships gorum
wears a suit of glamered full plate or eventually buys one
either has a reach weapon or some means of gaining reach
dumps wisdom
martially oriented oracle
usually comes at around 7th level or thereabouts

...and here was I, just getting my hands on Blood of Angels and thinking "hot damn, would it be cool to play an Angeltouched Oracle of Battle!"

So thank you for shattering any delusions of originality I may have still harbored regarding this cheesy build.

amorangias wrote:

It pains me greatly that whenever I think of a Rogue character, I keep asking myself "why not take either Sandman or Urban Ranger instead?"

Sandman has same BAB and HD, better saves, bonuses to all essential rogue-ish skills, six levels of spells, trapfinding, ton of bardic performances (although he loses out on the ever awesome Inspire Courage), the absolutely amazing ability to screw with spellcasters by stealing their spells. The trade-off is Evasion (this one admittedly hurts) less sneak attack damage and two skill points less per level (though he easily compensates for the latter with Jack of All Trades). Now that's what I call a rogue!

Urban Ranger has full BAB and better HD, better saves, only slightly less skill points, trapfinding, four levels of spells, animal companion, favored enemy, greater invisibility... not as good at social stuff as either rogue or bard, but definitely good enough at infiltration and trapfinding, and can pull his weight in a fight much better.

Rogues definitely deserve better.

none of them can chain fear every enemy they encounter.

I feel enlightened. Truly you have shown me the folly of my ways.

Oh wait, you didn't. You just proved a class marketed as a multitool can be spec'd into a one trick pony and do his one trick slightly better than classes that simply have better things to do than fear-locking enemies.

Still, a cool one trick pony. I'll probably use it someday as an enemy to troll my group.

It pains me greatly that whenever I think of a Rogue character, I keep asking myself "why not take either Sandman or Urban Ranger instead?"

Sandman has same BAB and HD, better saves, bonuses to all essential rogue-ish skills, six levels of spells, trapfinding, ton of bardic performances (although he loses out on the ever awesome Inspire Courage), the absolutely amazing ability to screw with spellcasters by stealing their spells. The trade-off is Evasion (this one admittedly hurts) less sneak attack damage and two skill points less per level (though he easily compensates for the latter with Jack of All Trades). Now that's what I call a rogue!

Urban Ranger has full BAB and better HD, better saves, only slightly less skill points, trapfinding, four levels of spells, animal companion, favored enemy, greater invisibility... not as good at social stuff as either rogue or bard, but definitely good enough at infiltration and trapfinding, and can pull his weight in a fight much better.

Rogues definitely deserve better.

Ashiel wrote:

Nicos wrote:

Ilja wrote:

Nicos wrote:

You ae missing the point againg, if it can be done it can be don, if th player do it poorly is playres fault not class fault.

Alaso, besides spells, what rebuild...

That sounds like an excellent design philosophy. Why don't you start a gaming company? I'm certain it would go well! Why not start with a superhero game?

I mean every class can be used wrongly, it is not special about fighter so i do not see how that can be an argument.

In a current campaing of Red hand of doom the paladin choose dodge, ewp (bastard sword), combat expertise. He do somthng like 1d10+2 of damage. bad choises are bad choises, and with fighter and most of classes they can not be cnaged so easily.

I pretty much thing EWP:Bastard Sword blows regardless of your class. I'm curious though. Which of those poor choices prevents him from tanking, hitting stuff, and healing stuff?

He tank and cure great, but he does +10/+5 1d10+3 (including weapon bond).

Is he actually interested in dealing damage, or is he content with being a tank/healer?

Paladins get as many feats as warriors, that's why I didn't account for that. And yes, it was obviously a hyperbole, but if you're in a campaign that isn't heavy on smiteable foes, getting your bonded weapon sundered at 10th-12th level will feel far worse for the paladin than the fighter.

If you're in a campaign light on evil foes, a Paladin isn't that hot a choice anyway. At least if you aim for being the damage dealer - he still makes an outstanding tank and a good secondary healer/buffer.

Even if you want to be the damage dealer, at the levels you speak of a Paladin can carry his weight with spells like Righteous Vigor and/or Deadly Juggernaut - weapon bond is by no means necessary to stay competitive.

Nicos wrote:

Ashiel wrote:

Paladins don't need evil enemies. They are OMGWTF-AWESOME if their enemies happen to be evil, but are still quite capable of preforming with quite literally any weapon they pick up and don't lose their class features because they're swapping between a bow, a mace, or an axe..

Unless somebody sunder his weapon.

Agreed on that though. The fighter gets his sword sundered? "Oh well, I have a backup one here and I'll get the other one fixed asap"

The paladin gets his sword sundered? "Oh well, now I'm going to be a lot weaker for a month, basically a warrior against anyone non-evil"

Oh my, it's almost as if the Paladin had only two class features, Smite Evil and Weapon Bond!

Oh wait, he doesn't. By the time he has to pay any special attention to getting his particular weapon sundered (assuming he chose that over a mount, which I'm pretty sure many people wouldn't), he can also heal people several times a day while simultaneously removing one negative condition from them (that includes a self-heal as a swift action), cast one or two spells (including Magic Weapon which at fifth level acts exactly like the weapon bond), and grant his allies a +4 bonus on saving throws vs fear while being immune to fear and disease himself. That... doesn't sound like "basically a warrior", and doesn't take into account what happens should someone evil cross his path after all.

Mind you, this is just at the lowest level when getting your chosen weapon sundered becomes an issue for the paladin, and doesn't account for feat selection in any way.

I don't feel competent to comment about the fighter in specific, but I don't like feats as a mechanic too much. My biggest gripe with them is, as the line progresses, the demand for feats increases, yet each particular feat loses value.

Now, I'm not sure I can explain myself properly, so please bear with me. Say you're making a fighter. Screw optimization, you want to have fun doing lots of things in combat, so you want to do a lot of maneuvers. Core gives you sunder, disarm, trip, bull rush, overrun and grapple. Each of these maneuvers has at least two feats tied to them, one of them negating the enemies' opportunity attacks and the other upgrading the maneuver in some way. You probably don't need to worry much about upgrades, but eating AOOs hurts, so if you want to utilize all these maneuvers, you really want the Improved feats on them. That's six feats spent just on not being hit a lot of extra times by the enemy. Still, for a fighter, that's not impossible - in a few levels, you can collect them all.

Then, APG comes, and with it: Dirty Trick, Drag, Reposition, Steal... that's four more maneuvers, and again, each is handled by two feats minimum.

Obviously, few people actually care about being able to do all the maneuvers, but what I'm getting at is this: playing with core only, each Improved or Greater (Maneuver) feat you took covered 1/12 of total possible competence when it comes to executing combat maneuvers effectively. After just the APG, each feat covers 1/20 of total possible competence. Meanwhile, the total number of feats a fighter can take in the course of going through his twenty levels stays the same.

The same principle applies to any feat chain one could be interested in. Every big sourcebook adds something to the chain, and sometimes player companions add something useful as well as a racial feat. This way, each particular feat becomes less awesome, because no matter how good it makes you at doing something, you can count on there being another feat that lets you do the same thing even better - so you want it as well, hence you want more and more feats all the time. It's a never-ending race which you cannot win, because you keep operating on the same limited resource.

One could say the same applies to spellcasters and their toys - casters generally don't get to cast more spells with consecutive sourcebooks, not anymore than fighters get more feats. This is partially true for non-prepared spellcasters, but vastly mitigated by how many spells they get to learn. A 20th level Bard knows 40 spells total, a Sorcerer 52 including those granted by his bloodline. Same for Inquisitors and Oracles, and that's before things like human's favored class bonus adding another 20 to the lot, or blowing feats on Expanded Arcana (purely theoretically, you can gain another 20 spells this way). Meanwhile, wizards, witches and magi can pay to include worthwhile new spells in their books, and clerics, druids, paladins and rangers simply get every new addition to their list at no cost. These eleven extra feats fighters get suddenly don't look so hot, do they? Sure, casters still have a limited number of spells they can cast at a given moment, but somewhere around 5th-6th level, it turns out they can cast enough of them to pull their weight in several encounters, and high level casters rarely deplete themselves in the course of the day. Huh, wouldn't it be nice if fighters could retrain all their extra feats each morning?

One could also say it doesn't matter whether you have absolutely all the feats related to what you want to do, as long as you can do it effectively enough to contribute. This is essentially true, at least for most teams I know of. Still, if you have a role overlap in your team (say, more than one person wanting to dish out damage from the front line), this may cause unhealthy competition and make a character unfun to play if the other guy keeps upgrading his performance while you'd rather take a few "fluff" feats, like some very cool but ultimately kinda useless racial stuff. Again, it's not about some abstract DPR competition or other form of theorycrafting - you'll probably be alright doing a few points of damage less, but if it ever reaches a point where it's clear that the other guy can do all you can in your chosen field and half again as much, pursuing that activity may suddenly seem pointless and a lot less fun. Of course, some players will not care even then, so more power to them!

Phew, this turned out longer than I expected. I hope it's comprehensible.

I haven't tried playing this kind of bard, so this is just a hunch, but in my experience you want to have Inspire Courage up most of the time you're fighting, so getting Dazzling Display to debuff the enemies while you buff your team seems like a worthy investment.

TarkXT wrote:

Because it's ultimately a waste of time on your part.

I don't know what to tell you. With regards the Pathfinder playtest, that wasn't my experience at all. Many errors of that type that were pointed out during the Pathfinder playtest got fixed, and many errors that weren't pointed out (or that weren't pointed out loudly enough) made it to the final product.

The kind of open playtest that Paizo does has it's advantages over a more formalized form of playtesting usually employed.

One of them being, the feedback on spellchecking and minor stylistic mistakes can be delivered separately from the really important stuff, because everything gets sorted into forum threads.

In a classic closed playtest, the same information stuffed into your playtest report is just white noise. You know, just like you don't start threads in the playtest forum on the topic of "X looks like it needs to be toned down, also they spelled Y wrong".

It's still good advice, just not directly applicable to the kind of playtests Paizo's running.

The gist of Monte's advice, as far as I understand it, is to acknowledge there's a thin line between helpful playtest data and the "white noise" of things that might seem important to potential playtesters, but prove ultimately unhelpful to developers. I see nothing insulting about it.

I firmly believe Monte Cook made several very poor decisions when designing 3e - decisions that up to this day negatively affect all incarnations of the d20 system.

I also think his advice for playtesters that Sean linked here is pure gold. Monte may have ideas I neither share nor endorse when it comes to design, but he's also a consummate professional who knows how things work.

Painful Bugger wrote:

Try adding mythic tiers to the eidolon equal to the summoner's. I have a feeling that will make things a bit more even.

That wouldn't be useful for the playtest, though, as there's no current way to add mythic tiers to a summoner.

It wouldn't test the rules as written, but it would test a possible solution to an established problem with the RAW. Sometimes, Jason fishes for such solutions, so it may prove handy for the playtest.

MyTThor wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Ishpumalibu wrote:

Why does everyone like the prehensile hair so much? I guess I just don't understand it's power...

Reach, and caster stat for damage/attack rolls.

Secondary natural weapon, which means caster stat for attack but at -5 bab, and 1/2 caster stat to damage. No?

Not if it's their only natural attack. Then it's Primary, and x1.5 for damage.

SKR agrees.

See SKR's post here.

Even with that, it's still a physical attack on a low BAB full caster. What's the point?

Archmage almost literally means "a (very) powerful mage".
Champion is a word with many different meanings, one of them being simply "a person who fights". Other being, "guy who is really good (at fighting or any other form of competition)" and "one who fights for a specific person, cause or ideal".
Hierophant means "one who reveals divine mysteries".

All are appropriate to the flavor of their respective paths. They sound nice and are broad enough to encompass many different concepts.

You're building a Barbarian/Wizard, yet you worry about optimal allocation of resources? :)

Smug jokes aside, I don't see your concern affecting a whole lot of people. Those who have a concept in mind are unlikely to worry about losing out on 3-4 HP due to their first level choice, and those who optimize will... well, optimize, whether they have a concept in mind or not. After a few levels, those few hit points won't make that big a difference after all.

If it really bothers you, just hand out maximum HP at each and every level, for PCs and NPCs both. This way nobody is ever cheated out of his meaty hit points. The downside is, fights will last longer this way.

EDIT: And why is this topic in the Mythic playtest subforum?

That'd be good. Still a bit punishing to Paladins and Rangers, but take what you can get - and they're objectively a fringe case anyway.

Put is shortly, I think the requirement of Endless Power to be able to cast 5th level spells is unnecessary. The prerequisite of being a Tier 6 Archmage/Hierophant is more than enough to keep this ability limited (for a moment, let's assume that being able to cast infinite spells potentially up to level 3 can pass for "limited" in some way).

All the second requirement does is favor full casters over other classes who might potentially want this ability. Six level casters can qualify for it whole 4 levels after cerics, witches and wizards, while four level casters don't qualify at all. I see no reason for this, considering full casters already can cast many more spells (including those of higher level) and tend to have better spell lists. If we assume the ability to be balanced in the hands of a 9th level wizard, it's definitely balanced in the hands of a 9th level bard or paladin.

Paladins and Rangers especially could benefit greatly from this ability - they aren't the most likely classes to tread the path of the Hierophant, I'll give you that, but I can see a lot of appeal in a "Holy Man" paladin at least. Plus, they are already the weakest classes that can call themselves "casters", so the buff at mythic tier would be handy.

Thoughts?

My own DM expressed her concern with the ability, which is why I brought it up. It's a Planescape game using pathfinder rules, and though she wants us to eventually obtain mythic tiers, she doesn't want us carving through swaths of angels and demons like they were goblins. As well she doesn't want to go and hand out mythic templates to everything we fight.. So I dunno.

To be honest, her expectations may be a bit contradictory. Mythic rules are heavily biased against non-mythic opponents.

That said, she should still be able to challenge you if she knows her job as a GM. And if you ask me, Planescape is a perfect setting for keeping an entire gallery of mythic opponents on retinue.

If it was Tier 1, I'd share your worry. At Tier 5, it seems about right. A spellcaster who knows his job will simply fall back on spells that don't require saving throws, so this mostly shuts down already suboptimal tactics and various "cheap shots".

Cool, finally some AP report instead of just theorycrafting.

Those damage numbers are really scary.

I just went through 6-5D with my local group and it is rough. We went through with 4p each, and I don't know how 5-6p would handle it.

First time, our team had a relatively high explore velocity and was able to get it on the last turn. The other team (we have 2 tables of 4) missed it by 1 explore (and they had a relatively low one).

Second time, we swapped the groups around, my team was able to finish due to the second last henchman being on the top, but the villain was in the last location and we may not have finished.

My group didn't like it. The combination of Hostile and the extra 2 monsters in each location really made it a slog.

Did other groups find this to be the case?

The Build the Vault for Sanctioned WBH is this:

Build the Vault: The vault should contain all level 0 and 1 cards from the Core Set.

But the Build the Vault for Sanctioned The Dragon's Demand is this:

Build the Vault: The vault should contain all Core Set level 0 and 1 cards. You may also add the level 0 and 1 cards from any Adventure Path box.

This means Sanctioned WBH doesn't let you add AP box cards to the vault. This is rather clunky for me - it means I have to remove and add cards back to the box when I'm setting up for something with a WBH and Manor session. It also means people currently setting up for the standard TTS setup (which by default is set up with Core + Curse) is actually doing it wrong.

Can we add the "You may also add the level 0 and 1 cards from any AP box" wording to WBH as well?

The Hour Power says: "The first time you examine cards this turn, heal 1d4-1 cards."

The "you" applies to each person who examines cards - but is the "first time" global or for each player?

I assume it's for each player who examines this turn, since wording.

(This turned up this week and I just happened to have an examine power off turn.)

I moved one of the items to the sidecart because it wasn't in stock but I wanted to put it in so I remember to take it out when it's available.

So I did that, but then removed it because I was confused about how store credit was applied. So I can't find it in my sidecart anymore.

Did that order actually charge my store credit (for the item in the sidecart I mean), or can I just readd the item to a new order and just treat it as if it were new?

I ask about this because strictly speaking these are not "conflicts" (you can change your hand size and then set your hand size, therefore I don't think this is a conflict).

(This was inspired by 2-5D, which has the scenario power: "When you reset your hand, if your hand size is 3 or more, succeed at a Constitution, Fortitude, Arcane, or Divine 9 check or reduce your hand size by 1 for the rest of the scenario.")

Storehouse has a "At this location" effect:
"Your hand size is increased by 1."

Zova allows you to set your hand size.

Shapechange also lets you set your hand size.

1) If Zova is at the Storehouse and sets her hand size to 5, does she have a hand size of 5 or 6? (As in, does Zova's Hand Size setting power override the +1 from the Storehouse?)

2) If Zova is in 2-5D and fails the check once, and she tries to set her hand size the next turn to 5, does she have a Hand Size of 5 or 4? (As in, does Zova's Hand Size setting power override the -1 from the scenario power?)

3) If I am at the Storehouse and I cast Shapechange, and I choose Hand Size 7, is my hand size 7 or 8?

4) If I am in 2-5D and fail the check once, and I use Shapechange (Curse)'s at the start of turn power, do I have a Hand Size of 7 or 6?

"If undefeated, mark this barrier's location with the scourge Entangled, then reload this barrier into its location."

What happens in a Siege scenario (eg 5B-1B) when the barrier is undefeated? We would have run into this if not for the fact that the barrier was actually defeated.

The rule in the storybook is:
"When you would explore, instead encounter the top card of the siege pile as if it were the top card of your location. If it is not defeated, shuffle it into the siege pile."

The Golden rule says the storybook overrides the card, so it shuffles back into the siege deck. That part is clear.

The other part isn't. Does the location you are currently at get Entangled, since you are encountering it as if it was the top card of your location? Or does "this barrier's location" not exist?

It's probably the former, but I've been wrong before.

"□ When you would recharge, shuffle, discard, or bury a boon for your character or role power, you may reload a Blackjack boon instead."

This power is obviously very powerful, though it can only work on the Blackjack's powers or powers on your base card.

So what powers does it work on?

Let's pull out a few powers that are questionable:

Athnul, Monk Class deck:
You may reveal a blessing to evade your encounter. (□ Then you may recharge that
blessing to explore your location.)

Can you reload a Blackjack boon instead of recharging the blessing to explore?

Raz, Paladin Class deck:
You may discard the top card of your deck to add 1d6 (□+1) to your check. If that card has the Mount trait, you may recharge it instead.

Can you reload a Blackjack boon instead of discarding the top card of your deck? What if the top of the deck is a monster (let's say some friendly summoner gave you a monster to hold and you managed to reload it.) What if there's a monster in your deck and you don't know if the top card of your deck is a boon?

Lirianne, Gunslinger Class deck:
When you play a card that has the Firearm trait, if you would bury (□ or discard) (□ or recharge) it or shuffle it into your deck, you may keep it and perform the required action with another card instead.

Can you reload a Blackjack boon to substitute against "perform the required action with another card instead"?

Lirianne, Gunslinger Class deck:
When you encounter a monster, you may examine the top card of your deck. If it has the Firearm trait, you may draw it; otherwise, recharge it. (□ You may then recharge a card that has the Firearm trait from your discard pile.)

Can you reload a Blackjack boon to substitute against the "recharge it" part of the character power? What about the "recharge a card that has the Firearm trait from your discard pile."? (These don't do anything useful, but I still want to know.)

Zelhara, Hell's Vengeance Character deck 2:
A character at your location may bury an ally ( or a card that has the Corrupted trait) from her discard pile; if she does, shuffle a random card ( or 2 random cards) from your discard pile into your deck.

If you are the one that buries an ally, can you use reload a Blackjack boon instead?

Celeste, Pathfinder Tales Character deck:
You automatically succeed at your check to recharge a spell that has the Arcane trait. ( You may shuffle it into your deck instead.)

Are you allowed to reload a Blackjack boon to substitute the "shuffle it into your deck instead" part? If so, what happens to the original spell?

Imrijka, Inquisitor class deck:
You may recharge a card that has the Divine trait to add (□ 1 of that card’s traits and) 1d4 to a combat check by a character at another location (□ or your location).

If you reload a Blackjack boon and the feat box is checked, you have to add 1 of the Blackjack boon's traits, correct? Also, do you have to have a card that has the Divine trait to invoke the power still, or do you just need the Blackjack boon?

More Blackjack questions as I think of some.

So, some characters have powers that depend on location traits like Urban/Wild (like Core Lini, Siathorn, Varian)

However, old locations don't have those. I'd like to compile a list, but I unfortunately don't have time at the moment.

But before that, should old locations be updated with the location traits? It's kind of hard to play the characters that depend on them in older scenarios because they're dependent on the trait being there rather than it being absent.

Attempting to run through Sanctioned Curse to AD5 for HJT (Monday). Wish me luck!

If a card you banish to play has a check that can allow you to do something other than banish it, put it in a recovery pile and attempt that check at the end of the turn. You should also put it in a recovery pile if you have a power on your character card or on a displayed card that can allow you to do something other than banish that card.

The issue is, Quinn doesn't work very well with some conversion stuff.

Here's Quinn's power:
"You are proficient with Alchemical. On your check to recharge an Alchemical item whose level is lower than #, you automatically succeed."

Potion of Healing, however, doesn't have a check to recharge, so it isn't subject to the conversion alteration. This means that Quinn can't recover it, since his power doesn't interact with PoH either.

In fact, the new wording on the Alchemists don't interact with Potion of Healing either.

Am I missing something or is Potion of Healing currently broken in Core? I feel like I'm missing something big here.

It used to be that this link had a "Pathfinder Society Adventure Card Guild" link that would point to the PACS forum. I'd have preferred the PACS posts be there as well (like it used to be a year or two ago), but what's done is done.

However, now the link is gone. Could you please restore the link? The above forum is basically the main portal people who play the card game go through and the convenience link is really useful.

A link!

"Jen" is Jen McTeague, iammars on the forums

A bit of news that hasn't been there since PaizoCon.

Bob is looking for someone who can run 7+ slots at GenCon.

If you're considering going, and you play ACG a lot, consider running! We're a great crew! And there are incentives :)

Since we have about 8 weeks left until Core comes out at Paizocon, as a last hurrah until the new ruleset comes out, I'm going to present some puzzles that will see how crazy we can make things. It'll most likely be once per week. The first scenario is titled:

"Bonefist, at the Murder Hole, with..."

This was inspired by the 0-6D scenario; as something to get started, it's a straight boss rush.

Here are the rules:
-You get 4 blessings in the blessing deck (1 turn is meant for setup cards like Shapeshift). You can choose these blessings from the ones available in S&S, but they are all non-Basic.
-You build a PFSACG (PACS) legal character (1 class deck and 1 ultimate deck with possible promos/characters) with 6 skill feats, 7 power feats (3 is pre-role), and 6 card feats. You also get a role card.
-You can stack the deck any way you want.
-Summoners and any character who can pull monsters or barriers into their hand can start with 1 monster/barrier of AD6. If they can draw a monster/barrier into their hand, it is also AD6.
-If you play Named Bullet or somesuch, you can name any trait without having to put a monster on it.
-No Potion of the Ocean antics (though to do that you actually have to go through worse antics than actually just defeating the villains.)
-Your character is at the Murder Hole (+4 to checks to defeat monsters.) No other locations.
-There are 3 villains at the location (Hyapatia, Captain Horus Riptooth, and Kerdak Bonefist). Defeating a villain does not close the location, and you can stack the location however you want.
-Since dice rolls are subject to RNG, if you have a 70% chance to defeat the villain (after post-roll adjustments), you defeat the villain. This isn't 70% to both checks by the way - if you have a 80% on the first check, and a 80% on the second check, you have a 64% chance to defeat the villain and thus don't defeat the villain.
-Hypatia (Lamia, Sorcerer traits) Combat 32 THEN Combat 32 with adjustment from the Murder Hole. The other text isn't important.
-Captain Horrus Riptooth (Lycanthrope, Barbarian, Captain, Pirate, Aquatic) Combat 32 THEN Combat 36, but all the blessings in the deck are non-Basic, so it jumps to Combat 38 THEN Combat 42. The other text isn't important.
-Kerdak Bonefist (Human, Captain, Pirate) Combat 44 THEN Combat 44 with adjustment from the Murder Hole. 54 THEN 54 if your check to defeat has the Ranged trait (sorry Rangers). Before a character plays a card that has the Pirate or Swashbuckling trait in a check to defeat Kerdak Bonefist, that character must first recharge a card.

I believe that's the rules, though I reserve the right to curb any wild infinite loop I see fit :) you shouldn't need it (I have a character in mind that does this fairly easily, and I can see a few others that are probably okay.)

Post the character's feats, then their deck, then their starting hand and how they tackle the boss fight.

An example of the format (not a character that can beat the scenario given she's Tier 4):

I have some boon checklists for people to see at a glance what they get when they progress through a Season:

Season of the Shackles
Season of the Righteous
Season of the Runelords
Season of Plundered Tombs
Season of Factions' Favor

Please let me know what you think.

4-6E was I think the first scenario we thought was genuinely difficult. Though that could just be we were playing 5p without a lot of specific undead killing stuff.

One of my players did complain about the Nyctessa exception to the damage, he thought it was too blatant a tie-in for the HV2 deck (I never managed to play 3-2P so I don't get to play Nyctessa).

There is definitely a lot of attrition with the extra location, so I would say it's borderline in difficulty (we actually almost finished the scenario anyway, so even though we failed it was fine).

We were bothered about the non-trigger trigger, though I imagine it was exactly to prevent Estra shenangians.

What were your thoughts?

discussion happens here.

4-1: CHASING YELLOW SAILS
Still recovering from the fierce battle for Absalom, the Pathfinder Society was appalled to hear reports that a former ally—onetime faction leader Pasha Muhlia al-Jakri—helped coordinate the betrayal and subsequent two-pronged attack that had threatened the city. Though citizens, soldiers, and Pathfinders alike rose up to thwart the foul plot, the assassin al-Jakri managed a narrow escape. Not only is the Pathfinder Society embarrassed to have trusted a betrayer for so many years, but it is horrified that she used Society connections to nearly bring Absalom to its knees. Uncertain whether she may possess other secrets or allies, the Pathfinder Society desperately needs to track down and capture al-Jakri before she can hatch any other sinister plots. You have been set the task of bringing her to justice.

After some preliminary investigation, it becomes clear that most of al-Jakri’s lieutenants perished in the battle. There is one who was seen escaping, however: a Keleshite man named Satyar Siddique. He was last seen boarding a ship that was then intercepted by a large galley bearing the infamous yellow sails of an Okeno slaving ship. Siddique is now undoubtedly being ferried to Stonespine Island off the coast of Katapesh to be auctioned off at Okeno’s notorious Fleshfairs—markets where slaves of all races and nationalities are sold like chattel. If the Society wants any chance of stopping anything al-Jakri may be setting in motion, you must track down Siddique and convince him to share what he knows. Every moment you delay brings him a greater risk of being traded, tortured, or killed by slavers who are unaware how valuable he is.

Venture-Captain Roderus of the Winding Road Lodge, one of the Pathfinder Society’s local headquarters in Katapesh, has done all he can to equip you for your mission and warn you of the cruel gnolls that are seen as villains elsewhere yet are welcome in Okeno. You’ll cross to Stonespine Island on a merchant ship, and from there you must keep a low profile to avoid unwanted attention. Into the Yellow City of Okeno you must go, with hopes you will not fall to a slaver’s noose.

COMPLETE THESE SCENARIOS IN ANY ORDER:
4-1A: Amid the Yellow City
4-1B: Imposters in the Compound
4-1C: Unfettered Frenzy
4-1D: Trouble Following Directions
4-1E: Seaward!

DURING THIS ADVENTURE
The scourge die is 1d4+1.
When creating the blessings deck, replace 1 blessing with the support card Liberty’s Edge Favor.
If the result of your first check to defeat of your turn exceeds the difficulty by 7 or more, shuffle a monster from the box into your location deck.

REWARDS
Each player unlocks the ability to play Crowe from the Wrath of the Righteous Character Add-On Deck using the Magus Class Deck.

I'll be running a Season of Factions' Favor box during PbP Gameday VII! If you're interested, please post in the thread indicating which character you want to play and which Adventure as well.

Hi, I got the Ultimate Intrigue add-on deck via subscription and it seems that I'm missing a card in it - I believe it's the Harrow Deck card.

Here's the discussion thread!

Season of the Runelords

Who hasn’t heard of the Heroes of Sandpoint? Surely all of Varisia knows of the brave adventurers who ventured into the ruined heart of the Thassilonian Empire and slayed Karzoug, the Runelord of Greed. You’ve always thought it strange that those ancient folks wanted to worship at the altar of various sins, but since the ruins of their old nation-states litter the landscape even today, it must have worked for them.
But the whole “defeat a legendary power thought long dead” routine raises a few questions in your mind, and the muttering you’ve heard in tavern after tavern proves you’re not the only ones wondering. How did Karzoug come back from the dead after thousands of years? Why did he come back from the dead after thousands of years? And the big one, the question that keeps you up sometimes at night…

Why do people think he’s the only Runelord to come back?

OA2 Mavaro has this in his card list: "When building your deck, you may treat 1 or more cards of 1 type of boon as boons of your favoured card type."

The problem here is that you choose your favoured card type at the beginning of the scenario, presumably for the scenario. However, building your deck happens after the scenario, so what exactly do you do?

Also, how does OA2 Mavaro's deckbuilding work in OP?

So let's say I start with base Mavaro and have a card list of 2 weapons, 3 spells, 1 armor, 5 items, 1 ally and 3 blessings. But I really want allies (because I'm going into a scenario heavy on diplomacy and that's one of my only ways to get them).

So I want allies to go into my item slots, so I want to "treat 1 or more allies as items".

1) Do I have to pick item as my favoured card type for all scenarios from this point onward if I want to keep this property?
2) What happens if I change one or two of these parameters? Let's say the scenario calls for more combat and I want to get more spells into my deck instead. If I want to "treat 1 or more spells as items" instead, do I fill out the deck with spells and/or items and lose as many allies as I need to to stay legal? Or if I want to "treat blessings as weapons", and take a blessing deck upgrade can I have a deck with 1 weapon, 4 blessings, 1 ally and 5 items?

It seems that Kinetic Blast is a spell designed for Yoon, yet it has a Arcane and Perception check (which is the Psychic spell template) rather than the Arcane and Fortitude check. Is this intended? Yoon doesn't have Perception, so she's worse at using this than Erasmus.

I should have caught this in v4.2, but:

Each Adventure Card Guild character’s Class Deck may include up to 1 copy of each class-appropriate promo card from the Pathfinder Battles: Iconic Heroes miniatures line.

Class-appropriate isn't defined here. It does give the Agna example which is good, but in a world with characters that have a class and is not from a class deck, this gets confusing.

I understand at least that the class of the character is what matters here, not the class of the class deck. So Zadim from the Mummy's Mask set playing with the Inquisitor class deck can take the Dawnflower's Petal, but not the Mysterious Disk. And Nyctessa from the Hell's Vengeance 2 character deck can take the Arcane Robes.

The wording of "Character's Class Deck" does seem to imply it's the Class Deck that matters and not the character, so I think that needs to change.

If your character is from an Ultimate Add-On Deck, you may add the cards from any 1 Class Deck.

p.6 mentions that any Character Deck and Ultimate Add-On deck also count as a class deck.

1) Does this mean that an Ultimate Add-On deck can include another Ultimate Add-On deck as its 1 "Class Deck"?
2) If 1 is true, does this mean that an Ultimate Add-On deck can include another copy of the same Ultimate Add-On deck as its 1 "Class Deck"?

Page 7 of the PFSACGG v5 states this:
"If the back of your character lists a specific card, that card must be in your Class Deck box."

MM Estra lists the Loot ally Honaire. But is that specifically MM Honaire or does CD Honaire count as "that card"? Or could both count? (Both Honaires work best with their respective Estras so it shouldn't come up often, but it probably will.)

This is specifically when you use Estra in OA1. It's unclear whether or not you can put MM Honaire in at all since the only things the rules tell you you can explicitly put in are the character card.

Also, the page numbers are very hard to see by the way, I understand the compass layout for the page looks cool, but not at the expense of readability.

I know the PFSACG scenario 3-P had been reportable for a while, but I am not able to report it anymore.

In addition, 4-2P and 4-3 are also currently not reportable.

So, Bladewind Simoun has this power:

□ When you encounter a card, before you act, you may recharge a card to draw a random weapon that has the Knife and Ranged (□ and Magic) traits from the box. After you act, banish that weapon.

All well and good. But the Python cohort from the new Hunter class deck has this power:

"While displayed, you may put this card on top of your deck to ignore a power that happens after you act, or before you act if you have a role card."

Now, this requires a cooperative non-Adowyn Hunter, but let's say you have one. You can get free Knives out of the deal. If Elites are banished, they're also AD3+ (and all quite good).

I searched, and the Python cohort power is the only one that ignores non-bane powers, sadly. Still interesting.

Incidentally, across the search I came across the Shrine to Baphomet:

At this Location: Ignore the Magic trait on all boons.

So, what happens if the Magic trait box is ticked, and only Magic boons are left? You don't draw anything? Does "ignore the Magic trait" mean even on powers like this one?

We finally completed Season of Plundered Tombs today, triumphant!

Ulunat was pretty intimidating, but we sacrificed body and limb (and cards) to rescue everyone, so we were able to get to 9 rescued allies without much incident.

By the way, Ulunat was in the last location, near the last card of that location. It was pretty ridiculous actually. Since we closed every other location before that one (Surgery), we managed to _defeat_ Ulunat twice.

I'm going to be so happy with the extra Sunburst trade before every scenario.

This actually came up a while back (around 3-6Aish) but I should ask about this.

If you trade a card, and shuffle it into a location due to Baited Jewel Box, then retrieve it, how would you know the card was traded? You don't know which cards are in the deck, and retroactively remembering the cards that were encountered seems silly. There could be two of that card in the location, and if you pick up one of them, you wouldn't know which card it was.

2 questions:

1) Would it matter for banishment purposes? You did exchange a card for the traded card, and I would expect that it is subject to similar rules as the 5.0 version of cards you exchange as loot.

Or maybe I'm completely wrong and you suffer no consequence if you trade for a card and it gets banished.

2) If you picked up the card, could you put it in the cards acquired during the scenario? The card doesn't have memory of being traded, and you kinda don't have the memory of which cards are in the location either.

Vic mentioned that the Shrine of the Infinite Void could permanently change your role. 3-6A includes the location, so does this apply to PFSACG?

I assume it does since there's no rule preventing it from happening, but how do you mark it down? I guess notes would be as good a place as any.

I realize this doesn't normally happen, and yes I'm deliberately trying to do this. I realized that I really want to use the other role for 3-P, and it's tough enough that I want to squeeze a little bit of advantage here.

Hi Paizo customer service!

The order is currently pending, however I will not be home when the shipment will arrive. Could you please delay the order until next month? I still very much want it, but I'll be out of the country for a while.

It looks like in the RPG/ACG separation that was done recently /acgCharacters/{characterNumber} was broken. No matter which character you select, no sessions appear.

Is this an in progress thing or is it a bug?

Since SoPT is out, I can go request corrections :P

General: Not a correction, but the way traders work really messes with setup. If I technically follow the rules the way traders are set up, I can't set up the locations until I deal with traders. This prevents pre-setup. In time-critical places like conventions I may not have that luxury.

3-1B: This says "Each character draws an item from the box." However, the intention on this I believe is similar to the Season of the Runelords rewards, so that's now "Each character adds an item from the game box to the cards acquired during this scenario." The Season of the Runelords rewards, in my opinion, should also switch to this wording.

3-2A: Story nitpick: I had noticed the story indicates the Raid Leader is male. However, the Raid Leader's card art seems to be female-presenting. I can accept the Raid Leader using male pronouns, but is this the intention?

3-3E: It says "When you defeat a Conflagration, ... close the location it came from ..." I believe it can't come from a location since it's displayed immediately.

If you're in the Greater Seattle area and are interested in a Mummy's Mask demo or to try out the Season of Plundered Tombs, head to the site and sign up for some sessions (or walk up). I'll be bringing class decks with me so you can check out some of the newer ones.

Are these supposed to be drawn from your class deck box (like in Season 0) or are they supposed to be drawn from the game box and added to the reward pile (like in Season 2)?

I didn't look closely at the reward before distribution and it uses the same wording as Season 0 so I thought I'd ask.

The PFSACG guide says

"After upgrading your deck, if your deck doesn’t have enough of certain card types to meet the Cards List requirement on your character card, and your character is Tier 2 or lower, choose the extra cards you need from your Class Deck using the Hierarchy in the sidebar on page 7. If your character is Tier 3 or higher, you may instead choose appropriate cards that have an adventure deck number at least 2 lower than your tier."

It seems intuitive, but I believe the guide also doesn't tell you when you advance your tier. Is it after all scenario rewards, etc have been granted and you've gotten your tier rewards?

The intuitive answer seems to be yes, but I want to check. If so, I'll ask for an edit in the guide for clarity.

I had always thought Blessing of the Gods copying a Corrupted Blessing would cause you to discard a card (since the Corrupted Blessing is always on top). However, MM rulebook, p.23:

"If a card tells you that you may treat it as if it has the same powers as another boon, do not include paragraphs that are not powers."

In particular, this means that:
-The discard not-a-power on Corrupted blessings does not activate ("After you play this card, if the top card of the blessings discard pile has the Corrupted trait, discard a card.")
-The not-a-power on Blessing of the Ancients does not activate ("After you play this card, if the top card of the blessings discard pile has the Basic trait, recharge this card instead of discarding it.")

Is this really intended? Or is it obvious to everyone else and I'm like the only person who didn't understand this?

If I noted that the not-a-powers that the a lot of the new blessings use - "After you play this card, if the top card of the blessings discard pile has the $deity trait, recharge this card instead of discarding it", I think it would be more obvious. Of course. The MM cards actually don't use the new template and use "if the top card of the blessings discard pile matches this card", which is the old template and isn't affected by this (you don't get the effect either way, since the card name doesn't match).

But this also means I've been teaching people wrong and I'm unhappy about this :( (This doesn't affect the demo, as the demo doesn't have BotG. But this is a common occurrence in OP)

I had compiled a bunch of these, but I haven't actually had time to push them out until now.

There's a tiny amount of spoilers about the season ahead, so be warned.

In 3-3A, I kept pronouncing the henchman as "a-keytar". And doing little air keytar mimes, of course. It caught on quite quickly.

During 3-3D, the henchmen were Sandstorm Rocs. Mavaro had picked up a Clawhand Shield along the way, but Mavaro kept ending up at the current player's location - and the current player would somehow encounter the Sandstorm Roc (which would move any other character at the location away, then deal 1 Ranged combat damage). Watching Mavaro bounce around like that was extremely amusing, especially since he didn't take any damage from it (since he could reveal the shield). Wheee, flying.

The choice in 3-3E was interesting. We kinda roleplayed it out.