flupwatson's page

That's great, thanks!

Hello Flupwatson,

I just heard back and it looks like the item that is holding the order up, Risk, is currently being reprinted and is listed as backorder while that happens. Reprinting is a process that can take a few months, so depending on when that process began it may be a while before it arrives and we can ship it. As mentioned above I can get it separated out or cancelled so everything else can get going. Let me know which you prefer.

Sorry for the late replay, I was out of town. You can just cancel Risk and send the rest of the stuff. Thanks so much for you help!

What's the status on my order? It's been over a month now and it still hasn't shipped. Is anything wrong?

Ok cool! Thanks so much for your help, Katina! I've haven't ordered anything for a long time, but I've always been impressed with the great customer service at Paizo, so I'll definitely be ordering again soon! Thanks again!

Hi,I emailed this on Sunday, but I haven't got a reply yet , so I decided to paste it here as well:

This is concerning Order 2642604 which I placed earlier this day. If it is at all possible, I would like to cancel one item, Burning Wheel: Torchbearer Player's Deck. The reason is that I thought that one deck would be sufficient for all players, but now I understand that you need a deck for each player. Sorry, I just didn't read the description carefully enough. If possible, I'd like to replace it with Munchkin 2: Unnatural Axe Expansion - Revised Edition. The difference is $4.46, which of course I'm happy to pay, just let me know how to go about doing it. I'm assuming it wouldn't make any difference to the shipping charge.

Thanks again for your help,
Phil

Please cancel my Pathfinder Adventure Path subscription.

Thanks!

I have a 6th level alchemist. As I understand the vanilla bomb does 3d6 fire damage. For the explosive bomb, it states in the rulebook that creatures that take a direct hit burst into flame doing 1d6 fire damage per round. My question is whether this extra 1d6 fire damage starts from the 1st round, in addition to the 3d6 original damage, or from the second round. thanks in advance!

That's super nice to hear. Cool, now I get to throw my explosive bombs with DEX mutagen active, and then mop up with a flaming poisoned rapier and then maybe for desert using my spider vomiting extract. Alchemists are just too much fun!

I'm playing an alchemist with a flaming rapier and I was wondering if it's allowed to apply poison to it. I haven't seen anything in the rules to contradict this, but logically it seems strange. If the sword deals fire damage, wouldn't it burn the poison off?

I just got a group of expats here in Moscow and since I was the only one with books and gaming experience I'm the GM.

I never really understood how much I suck at improv and acting until our first session. As a player, I never had many problems (maybe because I mainly played a fantasy version of myself), but as GM and having to act out different NPCs it's really hard. What's worse is that my group insists on doing it all 1st person and they themselves are very witty. It's not that I don't have a sense of humor myself, but it's just coming up with comebacks and appropriate reactions of NPCs is really hard for me.

Any else find themselves in such a situation? Any advice?

always wanted to try 2nd ed! Playing 3.5 now...

There are lots of old school AD&D games going on on google+ via video chat

@Malag good point. Especially considering that I'm GMing for a group of Russian kids for English practice that cheat with the dice like crazy. Best bet for me is to roll in secret as much as possible when they aren't watching.

One thing I've never been clear on. Should the GM roll for the players to notice or know about stuff? For example, the party enters a dungeon with unusual feature X that isn't immediately obvious. Should the GM roll a dungeoneering knowledge check secretly or should this only be rolled by the players who explicitly state "I want to use my dungeoneering skill to see what I know about X"? Or another example, players encounter some new kind of monster. Should I roll for them as GM to see what they may know about it already, or should I wait for them to inquire as to what they know and let them make the roll? In other words, should these kinds of checks generally be passive (secretly rolled by the GM) or active (only rolled when the players state they are using them)?

Of course, I know there are probably cases when one or the other is appropriate, but some general advice and guidelines would be greatly appreciated.

I just recently got on google+ and was really impressed by the number of rpg fans hanging out there. What was really fantastic though was playing there on via video hangout. There was almost no lag, 6 of us playing at the same time. It really felt like playing in person. We were playing OSRIC, and most of the other games seem to be old-school retro clones, I guess because they don't use figures and tactical maps.

I haven't been able to find out any games with Pathfinder, though, and I was wondering if any of you hang out there and if there are any games going on.

excellent points all around! This whole thing with introducing pathfinder to my English lesson was just an experiment really, and one I don't regret. They all hated English before and now love role-playing and I think when they get a bit older they may like combat more as well, but the whole point is getting them to speak English, and making combat more cinematic and just making stuff up to speed things along I think will work best of all. The biggest problem now is with treasure because they practically start screaming at each other on who gets what loot, it's actually pretty nasty, the boy being the greediest of all. I solved it partially by having the mummy who got one hit on him give him mummy rot that takes away his strength every time he gets greedy and wants to take stuff away from his sisters but goes away when he's generous.

I've got a most unusual pathfinder campaign going on with triplets two girls and a boy, age 11. This is here in Moscow, and I'm getting paid for DMing because it's actually an English conversation lesson.

The problem is one of the girls HATES combat with a passion and just wants to talk and role-play. The other girl doesn't mind a fight here and there, but gets bored if combat lasts more than 5 minutes. The boy as could be guessed is a total munchkin and just wants to kill monsters and take their treasure, but also is impatient and shouts at me to hurry if I have to look stuff up or if things drag.

They all love treasure and XP, arguing endlessly over who gets what, and so there has to be SOME combat, but it needs to be speeded up to an extreme.

I've taken to shortening battles artificially - for example, in a fight with a mummy, I had a talking bird fly in to give a tip to one of the characters to use fire, and then when the sorceror cast spark, poof - the mummy goes up in flames, battle over.

I've also thought of scrapping initiative for each character and going back to 1st edition AD&D initiative rules. We actually did play AD&D at first before pathfinder, but they found combat slow there as well, so I need to figure out how to speed things up even more.

Any advice? What to do when players want role-playing, XP and treasure, but lightning fast combat? Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

AFAIK, fear effects stack unless specified otherwise. That means that you could Intimidate your foe several times in a row to make them frightened.

That's what I mean about confusing - there seems to be no consensus on this at all with some people saying fear stacks and others that it doesn't specifically in regard to demoralize. I've already seen long threads on just this one aspect.

I really wish the developers would weigh in and end the debate on this once and for all!

one other bit of confusion, if you try to demoralize an adjacent foe, does it provoke an AoO?

I've been re-reading the rules and looking at other posts here, but I'm still a bit confused on using intimidate in combat due to all the contradictory views.

If I understand it right:

1) you can only specifically target one foe at a time (i.e does not affect multiple monsters)

2) It does not stack, i.e. if you intimidate someone you already have intimidated (shaken condition) they won't have the fear condition, but will just be shaken longer.

Have I got it right??!!

Damn, I was hoping to skip this book thinking it was just a tome of extra spells, but now it looks like with all the cool stuff and new mechanics I'm going to have to fork out the cash and pick this up - already SPENDING WAY TOO MUCH MONEY here! Anyway, keep up the creative work Paizo - spellblight and bleeding from the eyes, wow!

Also keep realism out of rpgs, it has no place in them.

You make some very valid points, but I think this is pushing things in the other extreme, otherwise if we are chucking realism out the window why have rules for encumbrance for example. Part of the fun comes from trying to make things somewhat realistic and the points you make in your very own post make things more plausible and realistic. I'm a huge fan of the original Gygaxian 1st edition DMs guide for this very reason.

Just make sure you apply that rule to ANYONE who's carrying potions, scroll cases, . I get the same urge to Bards with thier lutes, but I restrain myself.

I'm always leery of people who use "realism" as an argument base. By realistic reasoning an adventuring alchemist isn't neccessarily using glass beakers for his potions or extracts, but something specifically designed for dungeoneering use.

Just remember as a DM it's also your responsibility to view things from the player's side as well. If you're going to specially target a class because you think it's amusing to do so. the rational part of you should ban that class from your players.

No I totally agree, this post is just partially in jest and simply a gut reaction to the artwork of the iconic alchemist who looks just oh so fragile with all those glass beakers strapped to his trenchcoat.

I haven't yet had a chance to try out the new classes in the Advanced Player's Guide, but just flipping through I couldn't help but think in what a precarious position the alchemist must be in - one stray push down the stairs and either boom he explodes with a flash or if he's lucky all his precious potions just shatter and he's SOL. Looks like a fun character to play but still I have to wonder how viable this class would be. As a DM I like things to be as realistic as possible and I'm sure I'd have to house-rule a chance of everything shattering and spilling and even perhaps exploding in case of a rough shove.

Just curious what others think on this!

Good point but monster cards wouldn't have to contain ALL the stats, but just the most important ones, kind of like the info you find on initiative cards.

I'm mostly interested in speeding up combat. I do have an iPad, but even then I find myself flipping around to find what I need and cards would be oh so much niftier and aesthetic IMHO. The solution I've found now is using the game mechanic monster initiative cards - that works great, but it would be so much more fun and immersive (and prettier) with cards.

recently started a subscription (Necropolis on the way) and VERY excited to see this. I really love inns and taverns and this one looks fantastic. Hope the trend of maps like this continues!!!

Wow, thank you so much, I wasn't expecting that really I wasn't. I think this is a good place to say how much I really love Paizo and it's excellent customer service and the wonderful community here. I'm a new convert to Pathfinder having skipped all versions since 1st edition AD&D. I really hated how TSR was bought out by WOTC and became a huge dispersonalized company and what that represented and now,for me, Paizo is like the old TSR back in the good old days and what it could have become. Thanks again, you've made me a very happy customer!

I think you should not allow your daughter to read the Beastiary....well just two small reasons why I think you should think about.

1)The Bestiary is for the DM...a player should not just read thur it. I know I might be old fashion in this...and it was the 1st ed MMs that got me into gaming...but I believe there should be a divide between Player info and the GM's info.

2) While yoiur daughter might be able to handle things like nercophilia...can you saay the same about her friends? I mean...do you really want a phone call from the school or a class mates parent about your daughter using the word necrophilia? Or if a friend's parent does not want to explain to their child what necrophillia is.
I mean sure raise you daughter how you like...but remember your child does not live in a vacuum.

Now if you daughter is mature enough to censor herself in public...than it might not be a big deal.

Well that's the thing, she GMs now. I'm originally from the states but live in Moscow where I teach English. Amongst my students are some triplets, age 11 and my daugter helps me teach them - I teach each of them one on one for 45 minutes and while I'm doing that she plays with the other two. Bored of teaching grammar and and not having any progress I started playing AD&D and now Pathfinder and they went from hating English to loving it and now they ask my daughter to GM when I'm teaching the others, and she does a hell of a good job I must say and is much more creative then I am.

Actually, I agree with some of the other posters that's she's not likely to even notice the parts she doesn't understand - fortunately I haven't noticed any other entries as graphic as the Ogre.

She is 10 years old, playing RPGs, and interested in reading the books. Something you have to remember, is from what information you have given us, she seems to be pretty mature for her age.

I have always been more mature than my age. Something my mother did, was when I questioned something, she would answer me truthfully, and like I was an adult she was talking to.

This made me respect her because I was not just getting "kiddie" answers from her. Which in turn laid the groundwork for me to go to her with more questions. Our dialog grew quickly, until it reached a point where she was no longer having to hold back with how detailed she answered me, because she fostered maturity in me by our conversations.

Protecting your children is your number one concern, and only you can judge how much detail to give her. However, do not throw away this opportunity to open that dialog with her. Answer her questions with a maturity level she deserves, and you will be able to instill in her a maturity level that will save you from countless problems in her future.

Just my two cp worth.

Actually I've always considered myself very liberal in this regard - I don't try to censor stuff and let her pretty much read or watch what she wants. Still you have to admit the entry on the ogre pushes the limit.

I've been playing AD&D 1st edition with my 10 year old daughter and we recently switched to Pathfinder. It's been going great, but now she's expressed the desire to read the books herself, and a part of me cringes everytime she picks up the Bestiary. I keep waiting for her to read about the Ogre and ask me, Daddy, what's necrophilia? It hasn't happened yet, but I'm sure it's only a matter of time.

BTW, I personally love the adult themes in Pathfinder, stuff like the temple to Calistria in Absalom with elven prostitutes - it's something you'd never find in mainstream Hasbro owned WOTC - I'm just wondering if I should keep the books away from my kids or not. I don't mind the sex stuff so much, it's just the necrophilic cannabilistic incestuous ogres that bother me a bit.

they have said they would like to. but there are basically security issues they cannot solve I'n ebook format that PDF can. it's a shame given how slow PDF can be on tablets. but makes sense fir control of their product.

No kidding - I bought the Inner City PDF which was around 150MB and slow as molasses on my iPad so as to be practically unusable. It would be nice at least to have reduced quality PDFs as an option for download which would probably speed up things significantly.

I ordered Game Mastery Guide from Amazon.co.uk and was a bit dismayed to find that pages 33-48 were COMPLETELY MISSING. I was wondering if anybody else has had this issue, or if it was just a strange printing fluke.

Of course, I could have returned it, but it's a bit of a hassle since I live in Moscow, Russia and my local neighborhood post office has it's delivery section shut down due to lack of workers - so I just use the PDF for the missing pages. Mainly I'm just curious if I was the only one or not with this problem.

I was really surprised that you don't publish monster cards. I've just started GM-ing Pathfinder and one thing that slows down the game is having to flip through the Bestiary for monster stats. So it would be great to have cards for stats, plus the pictures could be shown to the party.

I would be all over any monster cards published as I imagine many others would be. I still have very fond memories of the AD&D monster decks published by TSR in the 80s.

So please, Paizo, please, publish monster cards!!!

My understanding of the rules is that you can use a ranged attack against a foe you are in melee with, but you provoke an attack of opportunity (Table 8-2, page 183 of the core rulebook).

Indeed, yes, thanks - I hadn't noticed that. So I guess if you really wanted to use a ranged attack, you would have to take a 5-foot step back before firing to avoid the AoO.

My initial common sense and experience playing AD&D is to say no, you can not use your missle weapon to someone you are engaged with in melee, i.e. an adjacent foe.

However, there is the point-blank feat which would seem to allow this, and I don't see anything in the rules to say you can't, and this feat seems to reward players to run up and shoot the monster in the head with their bow.

I would like this explained though, because if somebody was adjacent to you and hacking at you with a battleaxe, it would seem impossible and even silly to able to parry and block blows and still be able to get a bow shot in.

wow, thanks for the super-fast answers! I suspected as such, but I wanted to make sure - thanks again, that clears up a lot!

This may sound like a silly question, but I come from AD&D 1st edition background where there are no feats, so I wanted to clarify.

The Ogre in the Bestiary has a +3 Will save in the stats. Further down I see that it has the iron will feat, which gives a +2 to will saves. Is this +2 already calculated into the +3 stat or do I add it, giving +5 if say my cleric wants to cast a sleep spell at it.

So in general to all bonuses from stats, feats or whatever get included in basic monster stats in the Bestiary?