masterslate's page

Chris_Fougere wrote:

Thanks!

I still need to map the zone borders to my map at some point but once I do this is an awesome resource rather than scouring the book.

I originally made it as a check list in google docs that I can mark off as they enter each area. I eventually plan on going through and add page numbers and extra details like: not available until after staglord's death.

You should share it as a google doc/sheet

Has anything been said about a street date for the players guide? Since the product page is nonexistent (publicly, at least), I wasn’t sure where to ask or to look.

Keldin wrote:

I am a Kickstarter backer who got screwed over by Ninja Division in the first place. Now you want additional money for something I already paid for, and it's for ones I have to put together now?

How about offering the option of canceling the order and returning my money instead for a campaign that's over four years old at this point? I've *tried* doing the same on Kickstarter proper (or at least CHANGING the order to compensate for buying things that I had ordered but not gotten), but *shock* got no response whatsoever.

Yo dude, I get your anger, but you're misguiding it at the moment. Archon didn't take you're money and they're doing this out of kindness to those that go screwed over. They're in Europe and shipping overseas is expensive so check your immaturity a little alright? If you don't want to pay the shipping to curb the immense cost they are taking on to do this, then by all means, don't. Cut your losses and keep on blaming Ninja Division.

Jonathan Morgantini wrote:

Thank you all for your patience as we troubleshoot the Archon launch. Paizo is unable to issue refunds on behalf of Ninja Division. If you have questions for Ninja Division, please contact them directly at info@ninjadivision.com

A little insensitive to the issue at hand don't ya think? Oh yeah, contact the guys you tried to 4 years ago that high tailed it out of here with you money. They guys we at Paizo endorsed and said you can trust after all the skepticism.

Hate to say it, but I think you need to follow your own advice here. I get the frustration, but anyone who backed anything on Kickstarter agreed to the T&Cs that state you're never guaranteed anything and you take on all the risk. Kickstarter is not a preorder platform (even if some companies use it that way.) Additionally, Paizo still can't do anything about Ninja Division. ND was just a licensed partner, and as with any licensed partner, they can only be held responsible under whatever license agreement they signed. And if ND filed for bankruptcy or whatever happened to them, Paizo can't really do anything to help you. The answer is correct -- contact ND with any issues related to the original Kickstarter, as it was their Kickstarter, not Paizos.

Is that a Leshy talking with a DEMI-LICH in the background? o_o

That's Rain-in-Cloudy-Day!

under wraps

I see what you did there

I'm confused about the actions taken by the seugathi researcher in C8.

A seugathi researcher observes the destrachan in the testing grounds and takes notes on a writing slate. Upon noticing the intruders, the seugathi
becomes eager to see how the destrachan performs in combat; they retreat as soon as possible to the east end of the gallery to turn the wall ethereal. Once the wall is no longer solid stone, the destrachan’s echolocation allows it to recognize the heroes’ presence and join in combat as the seugathi directs, together presenting a severe-threat encounter for 6th-level characters.

I'm not sure what wall is turning ethereal and where the researcher is supposed to be moving from and to. Does he start in the area by the table with the stairs to B21? Does he start by where C8 is labeled on the map?

Nathan Schwalm wrote:

Ted Leon Guerrero wrote:

I noticed the chronicle sheet has no items listed, not even the wand of widening (burning hands) given at the end. Was that intentional or were they missed due to an error?

The lack of items isn’t an error. Only few chronicles actually have items. The widening wands are common items of level 4 and 6, so normally available to half the characters playing and perhaps considered not appropriate to be made available earlier than those levels by being on the chronicle sheet.

While this is true the fact that you get this at the end of the scenario makes it a bit pointless.

So confused about the rewards mentioned at the end. Are we supposed to give players those items for free? If not, what are they there for?

I was just looking at creature types and creating them in Foundry in the dungeon. My workflow is usually can the pages for creatures/traps, place them on the map, read the details later. This just makes it easier for me/my brain to prep things.

But anyway, thanks for the clarification James and Nicolas, I appreciate it! Now I can go back to prepping :D

In the Abomination Vaults book 1, there is a creature that doesn't exist in Second Edition yet. The book points to the Bestiary page but it's wrong.

What do we do?

To have the 15% cost on top of the AcP cost seems a bit much to me. But not enough that I'll rally against it if it's what Leadership thinks is best.

There's no AcP cost -- it's free.

I agree with that interpretation, but expect table variation.

Since Leshy companion is marked as an ally boon, slotting it (and taking the feat) provides you with the leshy companion only when the boon is slotted.since ally's, by default, are considered non-combatants, I think they're requiring you to spend the feat and boon slot to get the extra benefits of a combatant.

Cannot find the Skinstitch in the bestiaries 2E... Anyone know the book/page? Thanks!

Did see it in 1E Bestiary 4

Maybe it's a derivative of the Flesh Golem?

Wow that's a lot of spoilers :/

we decided to possibly cancel games until this has blown over

I was thinking more for just the end of this month and see how things are looking early April. From the various news sources I've been reading and watching over the past few days, I think we're going to see the numbers jump over the next 2-4 weeks before it begins to decline. But here's hoping that never happens and the worst has already occurred...

Ok can see the flow concept. I like doing that as well when I can.

But I don't see a problem with the tiles being used for a second encounter.

What is a bigger problem is using 20+ tiles on two different encounters when only 6 of the tiles are actually used. That must be avoided in the future.

That is precisely what happened in 1-06 though. They use a bunch of the same tiles, and since the tiles need to be oriented in certain directions, you can certainly save time by pre-laying out your first map in your box, but that second map is still a pain to lay out. When we ran this again last night, I let the GM borrow my stuff (he stepped up to GM last minute after the previous GM had to cancel). I didn't bring him my flip tiles, just a blank flipmat. He drew a rough approximation in about 30 seconds. If he had used the tiles, even pre-arranged, it would have taken quite a bit more time.

"This service is free"

Uh, that is ambiguous. Presumably we still have to pay the 10%?

It says "apply or swap out." I believe "swap out" is what you're referring to, and that is free

Zach Armstrong wrote:

2) GM gets the same boons the players got, which could potentially "punish" the GM for "negative" boons
.

I don't think that they'll EVER do this. It gives the GM a MASSIVE incentive to cheat (or, if you prefer, to subconsciously alter things).

It was (I believe) NEVER done in PFS1 for exactly that reason

For sure -- you wouldn't want players to ever miss anything in cases like that.

I think you're going to see this played out one of two ways:

1) GM chooses which boons they get (particularly in scenarios where you get either boon a or b, depending on certain outcomes)

2) GM gets the same boons the players got, which could potentially "punish" the GM for "negative" boons

I agree with Christian and abide by option 1 when I GM.

It appeared in 1-12 without much fanfare. But there are posts drawing attention to it in this forum, as soon as it came out, and M. Sayre talks about it in several places, e.g. here.

Awesome, thanks!

The low subtier 4-player table ran a little bit more than 3 hours...

The barely-high subtier 7-player table ran 5 hours...

How!? Were the social bits super short? It's a mystery scenario, and I ran it with a lot of investigation, conversations and discovery as they search the inn. Also the poltergeist encounter took a long time, both times. That thing hits hard and hits for a lot of damage. The boss fight also takes forever because she has the advantage of high ground. It took most players over 1 round just to climb up to her, just to get smacked really hard, or hit by some wings or spells.

Zach Armstrong wrote:

1) Why does the low subtier adjustments for C. contain 16-18 Challenge Points?

This is the new scaling that is easier on large parties of low-level characters. When the party is only hitting the high tier CP due to number of players, they should play down. This approach was started in #1-12.

Thanks -- was this new scaling mentioned somewhere and I just missed it?

At our convention this weekend, I noticed that at least 2 slots of this ran over time there as well.

Same here. I GM'd it twice. Once went for 5 hours and I had to trim it because the next slot was about to start. The other was the last day of the con and I still had to trim it since we were at 6 hours.

1) Why does the low subtier adjustments for C. contain 16-18 Challenge Points?
2) The creature shows "small" in it's tags, yet it is described as "Their shared body warps into a 7-foot-tall infernal monster with black, feathery wings, gnarled horns, and cloven hooves. " I think this is safe to assume should have been medium, not small.
3) Encounter C -- I believe the map itself should be a lot bigger, since the dais is 20 feet high and there's no way the party and all the enemies could easily fit on that map. I'll be putting it on top of a 20x20 ish square area.
4) The last treasure bundle listed in the treasure bundle list says B9, page 15. Should read B11, page 15.

#1 -- I think it might mean they're sicked 1 for 1 hour, or they can just sit there are try to wretch for a few rolls til it goes away... *shrug*

#2:

Linneus’s malevolent will haunts the kitchen and continues to cause any plate or piece of cutlery that a creature interacts with to attempt to injure that creature until the PCs either destroy or contain the artifact

#3 -- This makes use of the new rules for visibility conditions:

While invisible, you can’t be seen. You’re undetected to everyone. Creatures can Seek to attempt to detect you; if a creature succeeds at its Perception check against your Stealth DC, you become hidden to that creature until you Sneak to become undetected again. If you become invisible while someone can already see you, you start out hidden to the observer (instead of undetected) until you successfully Sneak. You can’t become observed while invisible except via special abilities or magic.

#4 I think that is in error, 16-18 should be high tier, no exceptions as far as I know.

#5 They're not robbing, they're "recovering" items :)

I'll have my GM Cheat Sheet up on http://www.pfsprep.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewforum.php?541 soon

Captain Punka wrote:

masterslate wrote:

... it can only be used once per day on each PC. In PFS, that usually means once per scenario...

This is not true I think. It can be used once per day on each PC per character with Battle Medicine, right? So, if a party had 6 characters, each with Battle Medicine, then each PC could benefit 6 times per day.

Or am I missing something?

(PS - This seems weird to me that a character can benefit multiple times from different healers.)

This is correct.

CRB PG. 453 "Temporary Immunity" wrote:

Some effects grant you immunity to the same effect for a set

amount of time. If an effect grants you temporary immunity,
repeated applications of that effect don’t affect you for as
long as the temporary immunity lasts. Unless the effect says
it applies only to a certain creature’s ability, it doesn’t matter
who created the effect. For example, the blindness spell
says, “The target is temporarily immune to blindness for
1 minute.” If anyone casts blindness on that creature again
before 1 minute passes, the spell has no effect.

Battle Medicine does make this distinction.

CRB PG. 258 "Battle Medicine" wrote:

The target is then temporarily immune to your Battle Medicine

for 1 day.

So a party with multiple characters who all have Battle Medicine could apply that battle medicine to every other character and themselves once per day each.

An yes, you guys are correct. I misread/misremembered that one. Niiice

lots of words

Well said. My main reason for following this thread and commenting is due to my heavy involvement in PFS. It is vital that this feat is played the same at every table because of how much of a different game it can be depending on how this feat is handled. Additionally, with the removal of CLW wand spamming and the increased difficulty of enemies, broadening the variety of healing in game matters.

My own opinion should be clear. I went to research the 100+ occurrences of manipulate in the CRB - summarized them and came to for myself to the conclusion that:

Healer tools: questionable if they are used - I would suggest to have them in a bandolier for RP purpose and as you need some anyhow if you use medicine in downtime or for stop bleeding. But I have no basis to enforce them via RAW.

Free Hand: In my view manipulate indicates at least one free hand is needed. The only alternative with precedent without hands (or similar appendages) would be some 'somatic' uses which are not supported by the traits that battle medicine has.

Number of free Hands: As manipulate = yes it means at least 1. But as medicine tools = maybe and as I mentioned bandolier I only can ask to have at least one hand free.

Enforcement in real games: I try to tell players that is how I do it. Did I miss some 'no free...

You mentioned RAW only in your first point. The “somatic” manipulate for battle medicine could be thought of as the battle medic pointing to the recipient and saying “chin up!” or “it’s just a flesh wound!” Hell, they can even give the recipient a slap on the back while wielding a sword. Additionally, if a PC has taken mental damage only, healers tools aren’t going to do anything there.

Taking other uses of manipulate is great for theory arguments and home games, but RAW should mean don’t connect dots that aren’t there.

While Battle medicine is seemingly pretty powerful, it can only be used once per day on each PC. In PFS, that usually means once per scenario, and with 2-4 encounters on average, it’s pretty insignificant and could prevent many PC deaths. In my experience with PFS so far, I have had my first TPK in under 20 tables, while I’ve never come close in around 80 1E tables (from the GM side). I feel like 2E is a more deadly game, so hero points and things like battle medicine are very important to keeping things hard and tactical.

masterslate wrote:

Malk_Content wrote:

We can want it errata because folks come up with silly narratives for it to prove a point. That's fine, but that isnt an arguement for how it works now by the book. The book is fairly clear on how it mechanically operates.

Which is how?

It’s a medicine check that has manipulate. Medicine itself does not require any healers tools. Battle Medic does not mention requiring healers tools. Manipulate trait says nothing about free hand(s), just that you must have a hand (or suitable appendage).

You answered the question. Doesn't need Healers Tools, doesn't need a free hand. People only argue that it cant be that because you can use that for silly interpretations, not because the rules are in any way shape or form ambiguous.

And I'm fine with people wanting errata to change the feat (or make it a universal change to medicine, although I think it would be bad) but that is different than arguing against very simple to parse rules logic.

Then we’re on the same page :)

We can want it errata because folks come up with silly narratives for it to prove a point. That's fine, but that isnt an arguement for how it works now by the book. The book is fairly clear on how it mechanically operates.

Which is how?

It’s a medicine check that has manipulate. Medicine itself does not require any healers tools. Battle Medic does not mention requiring healers tools. Manipulate trait says nothing about free hand(s), just that you must have a hand (or suitable appendage).

And yes, this only applies to PFS; home rule however you want. But in PFS, there is nothing in the book (or in the blog posts) that say you need healers tools or free hand(s).

Per today’s blog post of additional resources, we can now accept that battle medicine does not require healers tools, because it is not using treat wounds, only a straight medicine check. Additionally, it does not require two hands.

As Mortal Healing (page 105) requires you to specifically use the Treat Wounds action, it does not apply when used with other actions related to medicine or healing, such as Battle Medicine.

So to sum up, only requires a single action with the manipulate trait.

Yep I did all the reporting for hexacon. Email me your info and I’ll get it fixed for ya. Zach the dm at gmail

Pg. 19 has a typo:

(3d6 bludgeoning damage and 3d6 cold damage in Subtier 5–6 due to the chunks of floating ice at the bottom of the cascade)

It should be tier 3-4

Additionally, Frozen Sites is erroneously titled as "Flip-Mat," when it should be "Map Pack"

While I appreciate the hard work that some of the VOs have put into creating a printable version, it is still rife with errors and artifacts of having been lifted from the website. These are errors that would (hopefully) not exist in an official pdf version, having gone through an extensive developer overlook before passing.

Let me know what's broken/missing and I'll fix it. No one has submitted anything for me to fix, so I can't fix what I don't know is broken. My email is in the PDF on the very first page where it says: "If you find any errors or have suggestions, feel free to contact me at"

Nicely done. I have run it four times and every time rolled insanely low for the Dreg's initiative. He's only lasted long enough to attack back twice. Dice can be so fickle. I like your story-based answer to the TPK.

Thanks! It made reporting a bit... difficult. I crossed off the Killed/Pacified part on the chronicle sheet, since neither ended up happening. Wasn't sure how else to handle that part, especially since we don't yet know what role that might have in a future scenario. In hindsight, I probably should have noted on the chronicle that the monster killed them, so the GM that runs whatever scenario that ties in to knows, but alas, too late. Shouldn't be too significant, hopefully.

That dreg just hits so hard, and they got the reach tentacle variant, so I was able to just hulk smash the people next to him and reach out to the others just out of reach. They were 6 HP away from killing it, too!

Got my first TPK tonight running this. They ran into the Dreg and between some bad tactics, bad rolls, and lucky GM rolls, I got them all to dying 1 or 2. At this point, if they stabilized, by rolls or hero points, I wasn't going to kill them permanently. Fortunately, they all stabilized, so I had the creature stop attacking once they went down, being that it's pretty unintelligent and probably thinks that the threat is gone.

The PCs awoke in the Grand Lodge in hospital beds, discovering that the smugglers recognized them as Society members, and not wanting to draw the ire of the Society, decided to drop their unconscious bodies at the local "fire department" unwanted baby drop-off. They left a note in the PC's pockets explaining that "we could have killed you, but we don't want problems with the society." Basically, don't hunt us down and kill us please. The PCs wanted to venture back to the ship, but I told them the smugglers, having been discovered, have already moved their operations leaving no trace.

The PCs had already finished the other 3 parts, so they got 8 treasure bundles, failed primary, succeeded secondary.

All in all, it was a satisfactory ending for everyone, with no real player deaths, the real fear of death, and hopefully some lessons learned.

Spell on Harsus: Illusionary Disguise is actually called Illusory Disguise.

Are there any clarifications on how to properly implement rules changes in 2E? The organized play guide doesn't clarify and the post in this forum was written with 1e in mind.

I am 1 glyph :)

Mine is shared on pfsprep Lau

I work hard to maintain the PDF -- I have automation in place to notify me and create the PDF any time they update the website. Once I notice the notification, I do a quick sanity/formatting check of the PDF then upload it to pfsprep. So far, I've had updates out within about 4 hours from published changes.

As the PF2 guild guide is a living document, I think that there's some understanding that there will be some instances where the guide is updated while tables are being played or are close to starting where no one at the table will check the guide for updates, so using the latest version should be done ASAP, but won't always happen.

Thanks Tineke, that helps a lot with my GM cheat sheet for this scenario!

There are only 9 treasure bundles from what I saw in the scenario. Was the noble's staff at the end supposed to be one too?

Here's what I found:

• A
• Orcs 1
• Orcs 2
• Orc Camp
• E1
• E3
• E4 Ogre
• E4 Refuse
• E4 Refuse

For the travel section:

If the group collectively succeeds at a number of checks equal to or greater than the number of players, they make good time and the PCs earn 1 Discovery Point.

Is that 1 DP per encounter's travel checks or is it 1 DP at the end of the scenario?

No worries! Happy to help where I can.

Thanks for the table format updates on the Faction Boons! I no longer need to do really terrible one-off parsing of different items on that table to make the PDF nice and shiney!

The guild guide has been updated! You can check it out here: http://www.organizedplayfoundation.org/encyclopedia/pfs2guide/

Additionally, I've updated my unofficial PDF version of the guide! You can grab that here: http://pfsprep.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?3138.0

Seconding since this doesn't seem to be mentioned elsewhere. GM credit seems wrong in general, not just for special events.

It’s created enough confusion for people that I’ve been sent this thread to cite grab as being free. So a lot more than me are confused by the wording used.

The only time it's free is if the creature has improved grab (pg 343)

Improved Grab, Improved Knockdown, or Improved Push[free-action] The
monster can use Grab, Knockdown, or Push (as appropriate)
as a free action triggered by a hit with its initial attack. A
monster with Improved Grab still needs to spend an action
to extend the duration for creatures it already has grabbed.

For example, a snapping flytrap has improved grab: (pg 160)

Melee [one-action] leaf +11 (reach 10 feet), Damage 1d8+2 piercing plus 1d6 acid and Improved Grab

if the grab is part of the monster attack, they don't need to waste an action simply to grapple.

I've seen it played that way twice and I must say, this is EXTREMELY WRONG and is making people continue to play it incorrectly.

The bestiary states, page 343:

Grab [one-action] Requirements The monster’s last action was a

success with a Strike that lists Grab in its damage entry,
or it has a creature grabbed using this action. Effect The
monster automatically Grabs the target until the end of the
monster’s next turn. The creature is grabbed by whichever
body part the monster attacked with, and that body part
can’t be used to Strike creatures until the grab is ended.
Using Grab extends the duration of the monster’s Grab
until the end of its next turn for all creatures grabbed by it.
A grabbed creature can use the Escape action to get out of
the grab, and the Grab ends for a grabbed creatures if the
monster moves away from it.

Edit: When played incorrectly, it is extremely overpowered. You're giving every creature with that ability (which is a lot of creatures) an extra action per turn. Not cool.

Regarding the research work section -- at 6 successes, they "are aware
they have exhausted all their research avenues in the Orrery Archive."

Yet there are 3 more successes. Is that a typo? or are players supposed to assume that there must be more?