jasin's page

Organized Play Member. 360 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.

What are the options for a rogue who wants to use non-traditionally-roguelike weaspons, or a cleric who wants to use a weapon other than the god's favoured weapon?

I know of the fighter multiclass:

and ancestral weapons:

but both take 2 or 3 feats to leave you behind compared to the default, so don't really seem attractive.

Is there anything else, or is that it until an archetype comes up catering to the weapon you want (like Aldori Duelist)?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Kyra is my favourite iconic design all the way back to 1E, so looking for some inspirational imagery for a cleric of Sarenrae for our first 2E game, I was delighted to discover this: g e-pf1860/lot.24.html

Obviously art will be influenced by earlier art, but these guys look like they're literally wearing the same uniform as Kyra, including the positively WAR-like amount of equipment tucked into their belts.

I love tracing D&D's (and by extension Pathfinder's) influences and sources, and I've never seen this discussed before, so this was quite a find.

During a prepared caster's morning preparations, can they leave slots empty, and then fill them later during the day, like the could in Pathfinder 1E?

A 9th-level vigilante can be renowned in two small towns.

This is the level where characters, literally, bring back the dead, and on the other hand, kill mighty beasts, or normal soldiers by the dozens.

One would expect that any character who can do these things could be renowned, beloved, or feared if they even remotely cared to be. But a vigilante, whose social identity is all about fame and connections, is renowned in two small towns. What does that say about the vigilante in fiction? Is a 9th-level vigilante truly just a local small town hero? What does it say about non-vigilante characters? If a vigilante, who gets an explicit special Renown ability, is only renowned only in two small towns, how about a 9th-level wizard or rogue? Are these people, who can travel to Heaven and Hell, and disappear while you are looking at them, even less impressive and not really famous even in two small towns?

This is a prime example of what the 3E family is being (mostly unfairly, in my opinion) criticized by the "rulings, not rules" proponents: a specific mechanical widget that does something most people assume they could do anyway, clarifying by implication that, no, they can't, they need that specific mechanical widget to do it, and then they can only do it poorly or with difficulty.

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Benefit(s): If you are wearing medium or heavy armor and are adjacent to an ally who also has this feat, as a free action, you may give your ally a circumstance bonus to her AC equal to half the armor bonus provided by your armor. This bonus lasts for 1 round. During this round, you gain no bonus to your AC from your armor.

Can two allies grant this bonus to a third?

Can a single ally grant this bonus to two different allies?

We're starting a new game, and I (as usual) am having trouble deciding what to play, and I'm hoping discussing the options might clear it out for me.

First: a priest of Aroden. Aroden being dead for several generations, this would be a lore warden fighter with lots of knowledges and Orator, a sort of monk-like figure, studying philosophy and swordsmanship in a lonely crumbling temple to Aroden until circumstances call him to adventure. I think it might be interesting to consider whether, in manifestly theistic Golarion, it might be atheism that requires the most faith. This is the most engaging option for me in terms of concept.

Next: a young noble returning home from the border wars with Qadira. A Dragon cavalier with the Helpful trait, working towards Swift Aid, and so on, going for a role like a D&D 4E warlord: a party facilitator. Again a somewhat scholarly guy, with the Improvisation feat and a decent, and hopefully, growing travelling library. This is probably the most mechanically engaging option, and most fun for the group (everyone likes being given bonuses).

Last: a divine spellcaster, because we're lacking one. The least interesting option, as is obvious from the amount of effort I'm spending to consider it, but possibly the most useful one.

What do you think?

This is an experiment with base class intended filling a similar role as the cavalier, a primary melee combatant with a bit of party-boosting capability.

It only goes to 10th level so far. A complete version would be a standard 20-level base class, but just haven't done the math beyond 10th.

Would you play this as a player? Would you allow it as a DM?

Hit dice: d8
Weapon proficiencies: simple weapons, martial weapons
Armour proficiencies: light armour, medium armour, shields (but not tower shields)

BAB: good (as paladin)
Fort: good (as paladin
Ref: weak (as paladin)
Will: good (as paladin

1st Tactical initiative, smash
2nd -
3rd Forceful rhythm +2d6
4th -
5th Forceful barrage +3d6, superior weapon training +1
6th Unavoidable strike 1/day
7th Forceful barrage +4d6, Heavy armour
8th Tough (1), words of inspiration, adaptable combatant, shielded +1, cry 'havoc!', weapon flurry
9th Forceful barrage +5d6, Superior weapon training +2, Tough (2, fortitude), far-reaching, DR 1/-
10th Tough (4), shielded +2, DR 2/-

Tactical initiative (Ex): Whenever a knight and his allies roll for initiative, the knight can grant one ally within 30 feet the ability to roll twice and take either result. This decision is made before results are revealed.

Smash (Ex): A knight's blows are extraordinarily powerful, adding 1/2 knight's level to all melee weapon damage rolls. Additionally, once per combat the knight can perform a destructive smash, a single attack which benefits from a doubled smash bonus (i.e. adds his full level to the damage roll).

Forceful rhythm (Ex): At 3rd level, once per combat, a knight can time his blows with forceful rhythm, directing and redirecting momentum like a smith striking an anvil. A swift action, the knight's weapon attacks gain a +2d6 bonus on damage rolls. This extra damage is force damage. This lasts for the knight's next three weapon attacks or until the end of combat, whichever comes first. The bonus damage increases by +1d6 for each two knight levels beyond 3rd (5th, 7th, 9th etc.).

Superior weapon training (Ex): A knight trains extensively with all weapons. Starting at 5th level, he gains a +1 bonus on weapon attack and weapon damage rolls. This bonus increases to +2 at 9th level.

Unavoidable strike (Ex): At 6th level, a knight can prepare an unavoidable strike as a standard action once per day. His next single attack roll (if it is made before the end of the next round) gains a +20 insight bonus, and is not affected by the miss chance that applies to attackers trying to strike a concealed target.

Heavy armour (Ex): A knight gains proficiency wth heavy armour at 7th level.

Tough (Ex): A knight's toughness is legendary. He gains Toughness as a bonus feat at 8th level. At 9th level, he gains Great Fortitude as a bonus feat, and another instance of Toughness (this is an exception to the general rule about taking the same feat more than once). At 10th level, the knight gains Toughness two more times, for a total of 4.

Words of inspiration (Ex): A knight's exhortations can inspire his comrades in arms to great deeds, and stir uncertainty among his enemies. As a standard action once per day, an 8th-level knight can speak words of inspiration. The knight and each of his allies within 40 ft. gain a +1 morale bonus on attack rolls, weapon damage rolls, saves, and skill checks, while each of his foes within 40 ft. takes a –1 penalty on such rolls.

Adaptable combatant (Ex): At 8th level, as a swift action, the knight gains the use of one combat feat for a number of rounds per day equal to his knight level. These rounds do not need to be consecutive and he can change the feat chosen each time you use this ability. He must meet the prerequisites to use this feat.

Shielded (Ex): Knights heavily favour weapon and shield fighting. When using a shield, a knight's shield bonus increases by +1 at 8th level. This bonus increases to +2 at 10th level.

Cry 'havoc!' (Ex): At 8th level, a knight can incite such destruction on the battlefield that all attacks made against targets within 30 ft. (including the knight) gain a morale bonus on damage equal to 1/2 his knight level and all critical threats are automatically confirmed. These rounds do not need to be consecutive.

Weapon flurry (Ex): At 8th level, a knight can make a flurry of weapon attacks as a full-attack action. When doing so, he may make one additional attack at his highest attack bonus, taking a –2 penalty on all of his attack rolls for the rest of the round.

Far-reaching (Ex): At 9th level, the knight controls the battlefield around him. This effectively increases his reach by 5 ft.

Damage reduction (Ex): At 9th level, a knight gains damage reduction. Subtract 1 from the damage the knight takes each time she is dealt damage from a weapon or a natural attack. At 10th level, this damage reduction rises by 1 point.

Studied combat and studied strike requires more planning to make the most out of it than sneak attack or flat bonuses, but that seems appropriate for the theme. But why does it only come it at 4th level?

By 3rd level, the rogue is dealing up to +2d6 sneak attack, maybe with TWF. The most similar class, the alchemist, is bombing for 2d6, targetting touch, with splash damage.

I might be overlooking something, but everyone except full (9th-level spells) spellcasters get some sort of thematic bonus to their combat ability at 1st level. The investigator fights about as well as an NPC class until 4th-level.

What does an investigator do 1st-3rd in typical adventure (let's consider adventure paths typical adventures for Pathfinder)?

I'm looking at the swashbuckler's Precise Strike deed: +level to damage against most opponents, most of the time.

I'm not sure it's too much in itself, but it sure seems a lot compared to similar (full BAB, full warrior) classes that came before:

Paladin: +level to damage against up to 7 opponents per day, with bonuses to attack and AC.

Cavalier/samurai: +level to damage against up to 7 opponents per day, with somewhat conditional bonuses.

Ranger: up to +1/2 level to damage and attack, against some opponents.

Fighter: up to +1/4 level to damage and attack, all the time.

Slayer also looks pretty attractive, with up to +1/4 level to damage and attack, most of the time, with sneak attack on top.

Obviously, all those classes have all sorts of other abilities that make direct comparison difficult, but for all of them the ability to hit and deal damage is their bread and butter, and it seems difficult to get a new player enthusiastic at a glance about something like a samurai ("challenge key foes to get bonuses!") when they could be playing a swashbuckler or a slayer ("all bonuses, all the time").

Am I correct in reading that anyone taking Amateur Swashbuckler can select the Precise Strike deed can add their level to damage against creatures vulnerable to criticals with light and one-handed piercing weapons?

For example, every rogue that uses a dagger, short sword, or rapier, every cleric with a morningstar, and every sword-and-shield fighter willing to go from 1d8 to 1d6 can spend a feat to get +level to damage?

My group just started a new 1st-level game, and character creation left me vaguely but distinctly dissatisfied. I feel a strong compulsion to minmax, partly learned from playing through an adventure path, and I know 3E/Pathfinder very well, which means vast swaths of options are glaringly not worthwhile. I kept going through stuff which by title or description or general intent fit what I wanted to play, but which would ultimately result in an incompetent version of what I wanted to play.

I tried to tell myself I should just relax and pick what fits and roleplay the character as I see him regardless of mechanical efficiency, but I can't get past the fact that if I need to disregard what's on my sheet to do my thing, I might as well pick the useful option, gloss over it when it doesn't fit, and do my own thing while keeping the efficiency when the dice hit the table. But that results in the same few options, the same best feats, the same best spells, being used over and over. There's so much stuff I'd like to see in play, but I can't get past the fact that it doesn't really work very well in play.

In our first 3E game, one player made an urgrosh-wielding dwarf fighter who multiclassed into evoker, ending up something like fighter 4/evoker X/fiery PrC Y. Over time, we learned how dumb it was to multiclass spellcasters, but until we learned, damn, a dwarf with a crazy axe in one hand and a fireball in the other was the awesomest thing ever!

How do I recapture that feeling? Would a game I don't know so well help? I keep being drawn to Fantasy Craft, largely because it gives me the same feeling 3E did when I first saw it: options options optionsoptions everywhere, and I don't know the game enough to see their faults. But most of my group is pretty set on Pathfinder, so what I'd really like is to just not be so acutely aware of how the rules work (or, for many options, how they don't work) all the tame. Or is all this just nostalgia, and I'm just asking to play the same D&D I did when I was 16?

7 people marked this as a favorite.

I saw a Bestiary rising from the sea and the number of the Bestiary was 5.

The first seal is the seal of framework, and the first seal was broken when the mythic rules gave things which are not feats and not class abilities and not skills and not spells, but other things, yet they are like feats and class abilities. When the designers must go outside the framework is the first seal broken.

The second seal is the seal of the fighter. Advanced Class Guide shall break the second seal with a hybrid between the fighter and the gunslinger but without the guns, which counted and measured is again the fighter. When there are two fighters in the same game is the second seal broken, as it was in the time of the Book of Nine Swords.

The third seal is the seal of the wizard, and again shall Advanced Class Guide breaks the seal, mixing Vancian with spontaneous, wizard with sorcerer, arcanist of arcanists. Magic is the great work which reworks reality, and when the designers make the great work which reworks magic, then is the third seal broken.

The fourth seal is the seal of the monster. The rukh in Bestiary 4 is the roc, and the roc is a monstrously large bird like unto an eagle, and like unto a vulture and monstrously large is the rukh, and they are like unto one other, for the rukh and the roc are the same. And when the time comes when the new monsters are the same as old, the old monsters will become new, and the fourth seal is broken.

The fifth seal is the seal of the V, which is 5. Monster Manual V was the last one in the 3.5 days, and it marked the final breaking, and the coming of 4. And now the 4 is upon us, that is the Bestiary, and the next Bestiary will 5, which is V, and it will be the last, and it is surely coming, for I saw a Bestiary rising from the sea and the number of the Bestiary was 5.

1 person marked this as a favorite.


Type inhaled, ingested, or injury; Addiction major, Fortitude DC 20

Price 25 gp

Effects 1 hour; +1d8 temporary hit points, +2 alchemical bonus on Fortitude saves, fatigue

Damage 1d4 Con and 1d4 Wis damage

When a character takes a drug, he immediately gains the effects, an amount of ability damage, and must make a Fortitude save to resist becoming addicted to that drug (see Addiction).

At 25 gp, opium is a very affordable way to hit someone for 1d4 Con and 1d4 Wis, no save.

Further research reveals other interesting substances.



Type injury or ingested; Addiction major, Fortitude DC 18

Price 500 gp

Effects variable; 50% chance to sleep for 1d4 hours or gain immunity to fear for 1d4 minutes

Damage 1d2 Con damage

For 500 gp, 50% chance to instantly drop any foe not immune to sleep!

We now plan to invest in injury drugs and start offering... involuntary free samples... to our enemies, and slaughtering them as they stumble around all doped up.

The feat explicitly says that the you apply the bonus to CMD. However, it's a shield bonus, and shield bonuses don't apply to CMD. Is it an intentional exception, and increases CMD? Or just an oversight, and doesn't? Or do we use the strictest and (silliest) reading, and say that the feat grants a +4 shield bonus to CMD, but since shield bonuses don't apply to CMD, it doesn't actually increase your CMD? :D

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

When you use a higher-level polymorph spell to assume a shape available with a lower-level one, do you get the bonuses specified in the higher-level spell, or the lower-level one?

An example: elemental body I lets you become a Small air elemental, and get +2 Dex and +2 natural armour. Elemental body II also lets you become a Medium air elemental, and get +4 Dex and +3 natural armour. If you use elemental body II to become a Small air elemental, do you get +2 Dex/+2 natural, or +4 Dex/+3 natural?

All the way back to 3.5, whenever someone played an archer, the melee warriors felt a bit like suckers.

In Pathfinder, the archers seem to be even more ahead.

1) archers get full attacks much more often than melee fighters
2) Point Blank Shot is another +1/+1 to attack/damage over what a melee warrior can get with a condition that's very, very commonly fulfilled
3) Rapid Shot is one of the most valuable boosts for a warrior, a whole new attack, available at 1st level
4) Manyshot doubles your base damage on your first attack, available at 6th-level
5) the greatest disadvantage of ranged combat, cover, is completely obviated by Improved Precise Shot at 11th level (or 6th level for rangers)
6) another great disadvantage, not being able to convert surplus attack bonus into damage, is solved in Pathfinder by Deadly Aim, which is as good as Power Attack for a sword & shield fighter

Imagine a feat for a sword & shield warrior that gives +1/+1 to against enemies you attacked last round, and another one that gives an extra attack with a -2 penalty to all attacks, and another that lets your first sword swing deal double damage. Would you allow this in your game? Does it sound overpowered?

And yet that's what the archers get as a matter of course, at less risk then the melee guys.

Can an alchemist with the infusion discovery (let others drink your extracts, i.e. spells) hand out normally self-only spells (like shield or true strike) to others?

Not exactly a rules question, but the rules board seems the most relevant: is there a consensus on using the alternate class features presented in the Campaign Setting book (written for 3.5) with the Pathfinder RPG?

Or are they intended to pull the core 3.5 classes up to late 3.5/Pathfinder standards, so they'd presumably be a bit too much on top of the already powered up Pathfinder classes?

In particular, the fighter and cleric alternates (swap a single fighter feat for 2 more skill points per level and more class skills, and give up domains for fighter BAB and HD, respectively) seem quite powerful.

Does cleanse have some advantage that I'm missing? At first glance it works much the same as heal, except it heals a lot less, can affect only the caster, and doesn't remove some conditions that heal does.

Why would an inquisitor ever pick cleanse over heal?

I suppose we'll find a lot more when the Tian Xia book comes out, but what do we know about the Tian religion so far?

Does a sorcerer multiclassing into a prestige class that advances his spellcasting keep getting bloodline powers? How about bonus spells known?

Does a wizard multiclassing into a prestige class that advances his spellcasting keep getting arcane school powers? How about bonus spell slots?

I'm back to not getting grapple. :(

I get the general gist, but there are a lot of specific cases where I'm not sure what the intent is.

Since a grappled creatures takes (among other things) a -4 Dex penalty, and Dex applies to CMD, does that mean that continuing a grapple is basically CMB + 5 vs. CMD - 2?

If a creature takes the -20 CMB penalty to use only a single tentacle/claw/whatever to conduct the grapple, can it grapple multiple foes simultaneously? A close reading of the rules suggests it cannot, but it's kind of weird that a kraken snatch up grab two sailors at once.

A creature grappling normally can, as a standard action, make a grapple check to move its speed and bring along a grappled victim. What are the options for a creature taking the -20 penalty, regarding moving? It's not grappled so it should be able to move normally. It'd be odd to be able to bring along grappled victims with impunity. On the other hand, it'd be odd to have to make checks to bring them along, since that's little different from a creature grappling without the -20 penalty.

When you sneak attack a human with inflict light wounds, it's 1d8+X + Yd6, right?

When you sneak attack an undead with cure light wounds, it's 1d8+X + Yd6, right?

When you sneak attack a human with cure light wounds, it's 1d8+X + Yd6, right?

A 6th-level paladin can lay on hands some 7 times per day for 3d6 hp. He can heal himself as a swift action.

This is precious little different from fast healing 10, for the whole of a fight or two, on a 6th level PC.

It seems to me that anything that can even remotely threaten a paladin will easily rip through any other PC.

Am I missing something? Is there some reason why this is not a problem?

I just browsed through my copy, and I'm not as excited about it as I was about the other Kingmaker adventures.

A bandit king and wannabe sophisticate ruling a squalid little boondocks kingdom somehow doesn't seem a fitting opponent for 12th-level PCs.

I don't question the game challenge Irovetti will present, but the concept seems way less epic than rampaging superowlbear, or cyclops lich.

What with the names and Irovetti's obsession with art, he brings to mind some deranged Renaissance Italian tyrant, but the adventure path so far had an atmosphere of rugged frontiersmanship, so Irovetti comes across feeling like a provincial wannabe, rather than than a murderous weaver of intrigue.

My perception might have something to do with the fact that the last Paizo adventure path we played was Age of Worms, whose feast in The Prince of Redhand, with it's Vertiginous Terrace, Handsome Slaughter of Curious Avians, &c. makes Irovetti's joust where his strongman will try to murder you with brute force seem really provincial.

Now, provincial is OK, and a better fit for Kingmaker than the opulence of The Prince of Redhand, but in that context, Irovetti would make more sense as some sort of manly barbarian warlord than the art-obsessed bard and thief that he is.

Help me put things into perspective, and make Irovetti seem like the badass opponent he should be!

In more practical terms, I'm worried that when my PCs learn about Pitax's attack on their kingdom after the tournament, they will attack Irovetti then and there, rather than rushing back to engage in war. After all, some of his commanders forces will be out in the field, so his defenses might actually be weaker than by the end of the adventure.

Luring enemy leaders to willingly make themselves your guest-hostages is an eminently reasonable tactic in the real world, but less so in the world of 12th-level D&D, where it means you have just placed a group of demigodlike murderers in the heart of your domain and perilously close to yourself.

How do I encourage my PCs to engage Pitax in war rather than just taking a shortcut over Irovetti's dead body?

My players have built up and stabilized their kingdom to a point where Grigori's agitation can mostly be ignored.

Even with -2 from the Unrest incited by Grigori, they only fail the initial Stability check on a 1, so Unrest is reduced to 1. Then Akiros steps in as the Royal Assassin, and reduces it to 0.

There's some loss (the initial Stability check could've yielded BP instead), but they can pretty much let Grigori rant as long as he wants and the kingdom will keep on keeping on.

I'm not sure which of these three things would be most fun:

1) reward their players for their good planning by letting them ignore Grigori as he powerlessly rails against them for as long as they want
2) escalate Grigori's Unrest generation, from 2 to 1d3+1 to 1d4+1 to 1d6+1 every month to prod the PCs into taking action
3) the trolls return! some year and a half ago, the PCs killed off most of Hargulka's trolls, several levels sooner than they were expected; Hargulka himself and the rock troll fought them to a standoff and departed to parts unknown with the Stag Helm and the paladin's ancestral sword, so they're bound to show up eventually; why not now, to give some extra weight to Grigori's rants?

What do you think? Any other ideas?

A player asked if they can replace their regular PF cleric with a priest from ToS and it seems like priests gain an awful lot for what they lose.

* d8 HD down to d6, averaging at -1 hp/level
* medium BAB down to weak, resulting in +0 to -5 to attack (this is significant)
* medium armour down to light only

* 4 skill points per level, more than double
* 1 spell per spell level more
* channeling upgraded from d6 to d8, resulting in some ~5-50 hp more healing per day for everyone in the party
* another domain (Knowledge), complete with domain abilities
* bardic knowledge

The 3.5 cloistered cleric (from Unearthed Arcana), compared to the 3.5 cleric, lost more (armour downgraded from heavy to light), and gained less (no bonus spells, no boost to healing). It ended up being a bit weaker, but could hold its own (especially considering the 3.5 cleric was too strong).

The Tome of Secrets priest seems notably stronger than the Pathfinder cleric in all arenas except straight melee.

Has anybody tried the priest? How does it measure up?

My group has recently started a Pathfinder game, and I must say I'm finding the grappling rules just as confusing as they were in 3.5, just in different ways.

These three paragraphs each seem to be saying slightly different things:

"To cast a spell with a somatic (S) component, you must gesture freely with at least one hand. You can't cast a spell of this type while bound, grappling, or with both your hands full or occupied."

"Grappled: [...] In addition, grappled creatures can take no action that requires two hands to perform. A grappled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level), or lose the spell.."

"If You Are Grappled: [...] Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that requires only one hand to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you."

So what does happen if you are grappled and want to cast a spell?

Sorry, can't do it (paragraph #1)?

Sure, since it takes only one hand, but you'll have to make a concentration check (paragraph #2)?

Sure, if you make your grapple check (paragraph #3)?

I think I prefer the second option, since it makes grappling less of a lockdown ability. It's still pretty ugly (penalties, concentration checks, no big weapons...) but at least you get to do your thing rather than being forced to beat the grappler at their own game (the third option: you know you can't beat a giant octopus at grappling so you want to try a spell or a blade? sure, you just have to beat it at grappling first!)

Is there an official clarification on this?

One thing I'd love to see in Pathfinder is a way for the monks to expand their flurrying repertoire.

In the decade of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero and The Mummy 3, I'd say that the image of the unarmoured, mobile, mystical oriental swordsman is at least as strong as that of the unarmoured, mobile, mystical oriental unarmed warrior.

Obviously, assuming you balance the monk around flurrying with monk weapons, you don't want to just give them access to anything, but if flurrying with a 1d6 20/x2 kama is OK, flurrying with a 1d8 19-20/x2 sword cannot be so inherently unbalanced as to be a completely unworkable.

Another aspect of the monk that could be improved is the lack of synergy between his primary two abilities: flurrying and mobility. Give them their flurry bonus attacks on every attack action, not just full attacks, and then compensate in other ways if needed.

I'm very disappointed that the list of monk weapons is as restricted as it has ever been.

After Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Hero, I think the archetype of the wuxia swordsman is as strong in popular culture as that of the unarmed Shaolin master.

I think some sort of ability (whether as a class ability or a feat) to expand the list of weapons that can be used in a flurry would be very welcome.

On, someone expressed a lack of interest in Pathfinder. When I asked why that was, another person responded with this post.

I think he makes some valid points. His perspective is a bit of a downer, but I think it's a valuable "outside" look at things, since we're almost all Pathfinder fanboys here. :)

"Keith Davis on wrote:

Speaking personally, I think it's probably a poor marketing decision on their part.

1. If the supplements are as good as I expect (not sarcastic here) and as large, a typical group won't get through a complete issue in one month (I understand a lot of people don't get through the *Dungeon*- sized ones in one month). This means they're going to have a backlog where they've got issues out (almost) nobody's ready for.

2. If each arc is about six issues, that's six months of 'the same thing' every month. If a group isn't interested, that's six months of not buying the material... which means six months for it to drop off their radar.

3. If everything in an issue is to do with a single campaign, there will probably be a *single* copy purchased per group that's using it. While 'one copy per group' is a pretty common result for many gaming books, with Dungeon it's at least possible for multiple DMs in a group to use the same issue, running different adventures.

4. As a result of the first three, I suspect what may happen is that they get part way into it, find that sales aren't what they wanted (which might be okay -- they're planning to charge more than twice what they did for the magazine -- but let's assume it isn't) and decide to come up with another idea... and drop the line.

All in all, I suspect this isn't going to work so well for them. I like the idea, and I'm interested in their planned delivery methods (paper and electronic, and IIRC if you subscribe to the paper you get the electronic free, faster). I think that part's great.

I can think of a couple of options that might work better for them.

1. Get at least two adventure paths going, then alternate months. If it's going to take 2-3 months to get through the content of a single issue, give the customers that time. This means less backlog, and it gives the opportunity for Paizo to keep people not running the 'current adventure' interested in the product line because they might be running one of the alternates.

In my last group at one point we had three DMs, playing one session weekly. We'd get together (just about) every week, and at times we'd be three weeks between each campaign. More often we'd have two DMs active (swapping weeks) and the third on hiatus (either recovering from burnout or working up the next scenario), with some flexibility.

. Jeff's really busy this week; he can play but can't prep, so either Ed does a couple in a row or I run a one-off.
. Ed's at a climax of the adventure, left us at a cliffhanger last week (we know we're about to charge into the Valley of Death) and we don't want the interruption, so he gets next week too.

Anyway. If you've got more than one active DM, you can swap off weeks. Or if you play more frequently (I miss university) you might keep up to the 'once a week average' in each.

In either case, you can keep customer interest in the product line because there is new content for each adventure on a regular basis.

2. Dump the Dungeon name and continue producing much the same magazine. Perhaps not the same column names (those might have trademark issues) but each month, a collection of smallish adventures.

Of course, there may have been an noncompetition clause in the contract with WotC -- Paizo may not be *allowed* to do this, which is why they went with the 'big adventure supplement on a regular basis' model.

Also, while a Dungeon-model periodical using adventures provided by outside sources may reduce the in-house design staff, it can lead to inconsistent quality, depending on the submissions received. OTOH, having content coming from the readers can increase their interest in the periodical (Jay, Jasin, Ron... care to comment? ISTR that each of you has been published in Dragon). This can also increase the variety of the content.

What are your thoughts about his points?

Naturally, I'd be particularly interested in Paizo folks' thoughts on this, but it's perfectly understandable if the choose not to share much detail of their business plans of a web forum.

An often-heard comment on Age of Worms is that it's very difficult, and it's often countered with the comment that it's easier if you have and use [PHB2/Spell Compendium/Book of Nine Swords/Libris Mortis... pick one or more], and, probably more importantly, if you're good at the character design mini-game.

This is explained by the playtesters being hardcore D&D-ers who overwhelmingly are good at it.

However, looking at the characters for Hollow's Last Hope, I can't really say I see l33t minmaxing skillz shining through. A fighter with TWF and Wis 8, a sorcerer with Dodge, a cleric with Iron Will and Martial Weapon Proficiency (scimitar), a rogue with Int 8...?

Now, I'm fine with sample characters not being twinked to the utmost in principle, but characters with included in an adventure should assume whatever difficulty level the adventure assumes. Taught by AoW experiences and comments on Shackled City, I wonder how many people will actually be able accomplish much with the pregens if Pathfinder/GameMastery adventures are as difficult. I sure wouldn't want to take a Wis 8 fighter into AoW...

How playable are the adventures going to be using the characters right out of the books? Are Paizo folks going to use these characters themselves for playtesting?

I tried adding the Pathfinder subscription to my shopping cart to see how much the shipping would cost, and I needed to enter my address.

Now I'd like to try an alternate address to see if that one would be cheaper, but I don't know how to change it! Going to the shopping cart already shows me the price with the shipping cost calculated and the next step requires me to enter a credit card number.

Can I change the address where I want the stuff shipped?

This is prehaps a bit off topic, but since this seems to effectively be a Dungeon/Dragon writers' forum as well...

Do writers get a complimentary copy of the issue in which their article is published? It's common practice for many magazines around here, and I seem to remember reading somewhere that Paizo does this too, but I can't find it now. Or was that just wishful thinking? :)

We've been talking about ideas for the cast is someone ever happens to make a movie based on our Age of Worms campaign, :) so here's what we've come up with. Any suggestions are welcome! Obviously, you don't really know our PCs, but you could base your ideas on the actors already mentioned, or you could make suggestions for NPCs.

Hugh "the Man" Mann, CN neutral human fighter. A greataxe-wielding buttkicking brute.

Russel, LN dwarf monk, a Cha 6 grappler. Not too happy with this one, since it's a bit much of a LoR rip-off.

Jumbo Picante, NG gnome cleric of Garl. Played by the resident Loony of the group.

Shimrod the Clever, N human loremaster. Modelled on Vance's weaselly characters, played by YT.

Nathaniel Howk, LN human knight. The knight in shining armour.

Sigmar the Red, LN half-orc scout. Brad Garret has the appropriate appearance, but comes off as a bit too benevolent, perhaps.


Rennida Auriga, the leader of Arcane Auriga, the team of elven archers in the arena fights.

Krinasa Auriga, Rennida's daughter.

Lashonna the Silver Sorceress.

I got my first Class Act accepted! Whee!

But how long before I can expect to it see in Dragon?

I asked Mike this in email, but then it occured to me that many newbie and wannabe Dragon writers might be interested in the answer too, so I figured I'd post the same questio here.

Those of you who have had their Class Acts published, what's the typical time from when the article's accepted to when it ends up on the pages of Dragon?

If the PCs successfully fight despair in Alhaster and drop Kyuss to divine rank 0, should he really keep his whole (extensive!) list of immunities?

The SRD at

seems to say that only deities of rank 1 or higher are immune to electricity, cold, acid, disease, poison, stunning, sleep, paralysis, death effects, and disintegration.

Kyuss might get some of that from being a worm that walks, so he'd keep it even as a divine rank 0 deity, but surely not all?

If this is an oversight, it's a pretty big one. If it's intentional and the designers wanted the PCs to fight him with these immunities on even if they did all they could to weaken him, how come he isn'he simply a rank 2 deity so that he drops to rank 1?