Statue

mogmismo's page

***** Pathfinder Society GM. 119 posts (120 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. 1 wishlist. 46 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Being followed? Cast it behind you and feed it a potion of invisibility.

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I personally love delay: it helps make my players feel like they are a real team. I will sometimes suggest that, when they delay, they say something quick in character, like 'cover me, I'm going in', or, 'Some haste so I can get past thier lines?' They are the heroes, and if I it helps with group cohesion, I'm happy. I can always adjust the opposition to an appropriatly fun difficulty level.

For your homegame, why dont you try dropping it and playing the way you want, or even try something exotic and new like popcorn inititive?

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Sayre wrote:
We're still looking at creating a framework for an event mode and Linda has written up a proposal of what that will entail that we need to review as a team before we can take any further steps, but it is still under consideration and something that we're looking to continue working on as we're able, with as much priority as we can give it.

Thanks so much for the update, I look forward to seeing what you all come up with.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Xathos of Varisia wrote:
I organize two events every month. It's called planning. We have an abundance of communication tools at our fingertips that I would have killed for back in 1979. Why are they not being used? There is no excuse in the 21st century for a lack of communications in organizing events.

I'm glad that Campaign Mode would still work for your two events, and you have many tools and platforms that you, your players and your GMs all use. Most organizers have to fall back on the lowest common denominator: email. A single player, who you may not know personally or have other contact information for, not responding promptly to an email may tank a table.

Having a PFS Mode alongside Campaign mode makes these kind of issues non-existent. It also allows you to sign up for any module table at any public venue anywhere that OP is offered and know you'll have a (relatively) consistent experience.

Is your fear that doing a PFS Mode, even with all the suggestions on this thread for making it easier on Paizo staff, will slow down sanctioning for your gaming group? If PFS Mode chronicle sheets and rules could be streamlined as to not delay release, would you have any further complaints?

I believe people here have asked you to step into their shoes as players, GMs and Organizers and see how this would affect their gaming communities. I've tried to do the same for you and your desire for fast sanctioning. Is there any room for a compromise Xathos?

EDIT Ninja's by Michael Sayre! Thanks for popping in and letting us know Paizo is reading this.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Xathos of Varisia wrote:
We can't favor one style of play over another, but we can make it to where everybody can choose what style of play that want and that's through campaign mode.

I don't think anyone is favoring one mode over another. I *like* campaign mode for a homegroup, and have personally done it multiple times. It just doesn't work in public spaces, especially with strangers. We are asking for both modes, in as simple of a way as possible to not slow down sanctioning.

I feel we've enumerated the reasons that Campaign Mode doesn't work in public spaces well, especially in larger events, but if you feel that it would help to have us explain our reasoning concisely again, please let me know here, or even private message me.

We want this to work for everyone, in every setting, and with just a little more work, I believe it could.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jib916 wrote:
Do people run AP's and 32+ Page longer adventures at conventions?

Yes. We've run individual books of APs, not a whole AP at a convention, and we've run 64 page modules. Just this Memorial Day Weekend (May for non-US readers), we had a table do all of "Wardens of the Reborn Forge" in 4 days of epic gaming. I prefer scheduling the 32 page modules, for sure. We run *many* of those locally.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Steven Lau wrote:
Either they don't finish because they don't work well in the time slots or they don't get the players.

I can imagine that problem, but haven't seen it locally. We regularly plan and run modules, but never rarely in regular game slots. We have a whole convention (10+ tables per slot) that is nothing but high-level modules and seeker scenarios, but we know what we are getting in for; We schedule multiple day long slots for the big ones.

As an organizer, I can tell you it is much harder to organize a table that is in Campaign Mode than PFS Mode. After a player signs up, I have to contact them asking if I can share their contact info with the GM to start creating a character. The players have to reply to me with permission, then the GM has to contact the party and begin to settle on what everyone is going to play. A single player ignoring a pre-planning email (or escalating to a text or even phone-call) can set up frustration table-side when the game starts. It is quite a bit of overhead, and honestly, I avoid scheduling anything in Campaign Mode if I can help it.

For home-groups, Campaign Mode is just fine. I've enjoyed it when I've done it. But that is not all that Society Play is.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

6 people marked this as a favorite.

For your home-game group, Campaign Mode may work just fine. For FLGS / convention play this is could be a real mess.

Most players do not read the full game descriptions on Warhorn (or other signup system), and will show up at a table not knowing the highly detailed rules the GM has set up for their Campaign Mode, even if those highly detailed rules say, "I'm pretending this is PFS, you should have a PFS character of X level", or perhaps "I allow all standard PFS rules, and I also allow Leshies, but not Tieflings!"

It would be really helpful to have a PFS Mode that is standardly understood by all parties, GMs, Organizers, and Players. Otherwise scheduling a module at a convention or gamestore will take up everyone's time with custom rules and disagreements.

We need a baseline for convention/gamestore play so that when attending an event where you know noone, you don't have to come to a consensus on what rules you are playing under. Traditionally, that's been PFS mode.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Xathos of Varisia wrote:
You want to run it in PFS mode? You can!

As far as I can tell, this is not true, but I may be mistaken. If you mean that a GM can act like it's PFS mode and "clone" characters, expendables and danger still don't matter. It's just "Campaign Mode" with the exterior trappings of "PFS Mode".

As I've stated above, Many People play this game to Play Their Character, not a pregen or a temporary character. If the threat of death isn't on the line, it's not heroic, and they really aren't playing their character.

Another big problem is that mimicking "PFS mode" voluntarily is a table-wide decision by a GM. It isn't a convention-wide decision, as all content is "Campaign Mode". It leaves much fear, uncertainty and doubt for people signing up for games as they don't know if it's home-brew'd "PFS Mimic Mode" or "GM's Choice" campaign mode. Trying to put a convention together with any AP and Module content will lead to an incredible amount of Table Sudoku for the organizers as GMs will all have their own house rules (see "I don't run for Goblins!" above), as well as confused and angry players.

I would really like to see some kind of PFS mode, or at least some kind of hybrid mode in the guide and sanctioning docs that the convention/gameday organizers can use to express that PFS characters (not clones) can join a table.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Ferious Thune wrote:
It seems odd to me that we’d be worried about a GM making a decision about removing small bits of content to fit a game into a standard length game session, but we’re ok with them changing any rules they want about the game, adding creatures, and essentially doing anything they want as long as the module is still recognizable.

Indeed! We are trusting them more with Campaign mode. Of course, if death is irrelevant to a PFS character and consumables aren't used up in campaign mode, trust isn't really required. It is a one-off experience that you get to apply basically a boon to your PFS character for doing.

I've spoken to multiple people locally about this, and I think the real problem is that Many People play this game to Play Their Character, not a pregen or a temporary character. We have people who don't sign up for games if we don't have anything for their tier for their character. They've built a backstory, and invested. They play to continue the story of their hero. If we can't sanction modules for the hero they care about, they will not play.

If we let GMs cut content, the GM forums for those scenarios will be very important to crowd-source what the best things to chop are.

I've personally always appreciated the amount of creativity and ingenuity of PF1 GMs introducing PF1 modules to society play. What Venture Captain they choose to give the PCs the mission and how they "reskin" the intro to make it make sense for PFS mode with Society agents.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.
NightTrace wrote:
Um, are people with legal PFS characters being denied seating because the GM doesn't like their legally selected ancestry?!?

In Campaign Mode, the GM has greater leeway. This has been discussed previously in numerous places. The general consensus is that "Campaign Mode" is up to GM discretion.

The old guides had entries like this:

PF1 Guide to Organized Play wrote:
Campaign Mode: For sanctioned modules and Adventure Paths, GMs are allowed to use their own rules for character creation and running the presented content (the entire book or series). Credit is applied to an appropriate Roleplaying Guild character as if the character created were a pregenerated character.

which seems to me to indicate that (if we don't change the definition of Campaign Mode), a GM could certainly ban goblins from their tables for AP segments or goblins. Which is why I was suggesting a Hybrid Mode, that requires the GM to accept PFS characters.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to round back to what Campaign Mode currently is, and perhaps present a possible middle ground by altering what Campaign Mode is in the new PF2 world. More like a "Hybrid Mode" Currently the guide has just this:

Guide wrote:
Adventure Paths often offer the opportunity to experience them in Campaign Mode, which does not use Pathfinder Society rules, allows the GM to freely modify the encounters and story, and still awards a Chronicle sheet afterward.

We would be in better shape if we went ahead and offered full XP for the experience, much as we do now. Don't care if it's on a single sheet or three, but the important part is that you get credit for the sections you play. GMs would be required to accept PFS characters, but could, much like current campaign mode, allow people to roll up characters to suit. This way, in a convention setting, there isn't a situation where a GM denies a valid PFS character to the table because "I don't run for Gunslingers", or the new "I don't run for Goblins" and the modules work for conventions / long blocks at gamedays.

As long as those players are seated, people without characters could work out what to play (PFS pregens or crazy Campaign Mode characters the GM accepts).

For anyone going through the adventure in this mode, but choosing to bring a PFS character would loose resources as normal, and get credit for all the levels played (checkboxes on a single sheet if three sheets is too much). Non-PFS characters could still get the less experience as shown in the Plaguestone sheet to entice them to play in the campaign, but not start with an over-powered PFS character.

I'm just brainstorming here, I'm sure there are plenty of issues I haven't thought through yet. Trying to find some middle-ground where it all works. Anyone, feel free to riff on this idea any way you like and point out where I may be misguided.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bartram wrote:

What is stopping people from playing their PFS characters in Campaign mode? Just make an identical copy of your PFS character, call it your campaign character, and play that? Then assign credit to your identical PFS character after the game is over?

Is that not identical to playing it in PFS mode?

That would work until your GM at the convention you are attending says it doesn't. They are bound by the campaign mode rules, not PFS rules, so may say something like, "I don't like goblins, they can't be played at my table". You, the player with the PFS legal character, may be out-of-luck, even though you signed up weeks ago for the event on warhorn (or other system).

Campaign mode has always had more leeway for the GM running content the way they want to run it, which is sometimes nice (Hey, roll up strange races or try these awesome pregens I made that fit right into the scenario!), but in this context could cause convention organizers mountains of trouble managing different GM expectations.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

6 people marked this as a favorite.
superhorse wrote:
However, considering the level of effort it would take to make this feasible, I understand why the developers took this route; it seems we're lucky to get a sanctioning model at all this go-around.

In my opinion, no sanctioning is better than bad sanctioning. I can still run unsanctioned content at my conventions and have a note on our signup system that this is a home-game. This method of sanctioning will come with a bunch of rules, guidelines and tips that don't have it dovetail into PFS, but PFS organizers will still have to follow. It adds to the overall bureaucracy, but with very little value to the GM and Players; Just a single chronicle sheet to represent what they did as a home-game.

We are not lucky to get a sanctioning model at all this go-around. We get a partial system that's easier to implement for Paizo. Switching over to the Organized Play Foundation should theoretically provide volunteer help in sanctioning, if Paizo wants it. The passion in this thread on this issue shows me that people care, perhaps enough to help out on the sanctioning front. A new system at the same time as PFS moves more to the volunteer OPF model may offer solutions that are better than just settling for so-so sanctioning that we feel lucky to get.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Ferious Thune wrote:
If modules and APs can’t be played in PFS mode, then they aren’t additional content for PFS. The biggest benefit of sanctioned content was that it made more things available to play with your PFS characters.

As an organizer for a convention (Seekerpalooza) dedicated to long-form content, with full-day slots only, and some games lasting 2, 3 or even 4 days, I agree entirely. This isn't PFS, this is a way for a home-group to claim a small amount of PFS credit for some post-game bureaucracy.

This change makes my event unappealing for most PFS players, as well as much more work for the GMs. Players will have to roll up new characters based on the desires and restrictions of every GM they plan to sit with on the long weekend. That's a lot of work for a convention organizer, connecting 80+ players with 15+ GMs before the convention weekend to roll up characters, as well as quite a bit of game-time verifying that the characters are created up to the GM's standards. Basically an untenable situation for convention play.

Michael Sayre wrote:
...but we also don’t want those of you who enjoy those convention marathon playthroughs to feel like you got the short end of the stick. Our potential solution involves adding a section to the organized play guide discussing convention play and providing tips to GMs and organizers on how to run these adventures in a way that fits into your slots and would still allow you to receive and issue Chronicle sheets for completing the playthrough.

People who like playing modules at conventions are choosing to play them at conventions. They choose which way to play, and fully know the consequences. As far as adding some guidelines and tips for convention play, I would have to see this section to adequately discuss this topic further. But I feel it is premature to ask the community's input on a direction without fully fleshing out the convention play section first.

Please reconsider your stance on this form of sanctioning, and give us both a PFS mode and a home-game mode.

Shadow Lodge

16 people marked this as a favorite.
MerlinCross wrote:
I don't know what the difference is of "This is rare - Says the DM" and "This is Rare - says a Tag supplied by the DM".

Because the GM can say, "Talk to me about anything marked uncommon", or "You've just arrived in a city of ____ size, you can buy anything that costs less than X gold that is common, and there are these few uncommon items." It preempts players assuming they can purchase anything in a magic shop, which is a way I've seen some groups play.

Also, I suspect it'll work very nicely in PFS. I'm hoping for a system where you can buy anything common, and Fame helps you get into uncommon items. Rare items are for Chronicle sheets alone!

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think we really need boons to transfer, if there is an occasional easter-egg in PF2 for players that played in PF1. If there are a few 2e boons that say, "If you played _____ in 1e and the have the chronicle applied to any 1e character, this bonus is increased", I suspect that older players would cherish those moments, and because they would just be minor additions to existing boons new players would not really be penalized.

Also, I'd love to finally see something done about those that Gnoll Boon in "Slave Pits of Absalom", and I don't care if it's in season 10, or PF2 society.

Shadow Lodge

24 people marked this as a favorite.

In 1e, Summon Monster / Summon Nature's Ally was a mess because the initial list was released when there wasn't much content to add to it. We got strange additions to the list as books came out. Could we just solve this from the beginning by writing the summoning rules saying that you can summon anything with a "Summonable" entry/tag in the bestiaries and other books? That entry could list what lists they are added to, and at what level (Summonable III, as a tag in the monster block for instance). It could also list if they require a specific class feat to do it. I imagine there will be class feats to extend the list. The entry could be then "Summonable: Expanding Summoning III"

This is much simpler than trying to maintain a coherent list via additional sourcebook updates and splatbook feats. It avoids the problem that exists in 1e that when you buy a player companion, and it has a feat in it to extend the list. Then no future bestiary or supplement will ever add to that feat's list of choices, even if the new monster would thematically be a fitting monster for the list.

Getting this correct and simplified from the beginning will make the system steamlined and probably sell more bestiaries later as people (particularly in PFS) get them to extend their lists.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Lawful Evil characters can work well in an hierarchy, follow commands and generally be skilled and diligent pathfinder agents. Conceptually, I would love to allow LE agents. Realistically, I'm just very aware that a small percentage of players can't handle it, so unfortunately I'm also very opposed to this idea.

Allowing worshipping of LE evil gods by LN characters is a good compromise at the moment. It allows GMs to remind the players of their true alignment and reign in disruptive behavior, while allowing some of the flavor.

Perhaps we'll see a few NPC agents who are LE in Season 10.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Wealth also varies based on what the party does in the scenario, so if you are looking for clean math on audits, you would have to drop that feature as well.

I personally like the "if the party fails to _____, remove X gold" but lots of GMs seem to ignore it.

Shadow Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Please add some CSS to internal, body links (a tags) so they are visibly different than regular body text. It's very hard to tell what is clickable. If you must go with black for both regular body text and links, please at least use text decoration of underline so we know what is clickable. It's particularly bad in the forums and the product listings.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
At Magic the Gathering events, the judges are required to remove their judge shirts while on break. It something that should be done for GMing, as it cuts down on questions and it also doesn't let customers see us "goofing off" when we should be "working". In other words, it looks like you are wasting Paizo time when getting food, or chatting with friends.

GMs would then need to make a required trip to their room before and after running, with no stops chatting or "goofing off". Someone who has to get food between two slots would have to go to their room, change shirts, go out and get food, then go back to their room and put the shirt back on before their next game. I don't see that working at all.

They may be able to change quickly in a bathroom stall, but then we have a mad dash between slots to the bathroom stalls creating queues. Some people may also not feel comfortable changing anywhere besides their rooms, as well and we should respect that.

Leave it like it is, please.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Great work, appreciate the faq updates. I understand the reasoning behind the paragraph about paladins and poison due to thier code of conduct, but i would appreciate a futher clarification for some of the oaths, such as oath of vengence that replaces the code of conduct class feature, expecically if the paladin's race gives them a natural poison. Oath of vengence's Code of Conduct reads, "Never let lesser evils distract you from your pursuit of just vengeance" so may allow at least the racial poison.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GreySector wrote:
A list of campaign service award recipients.

Why are you not on the list, Eshleman? I would like to nominate you for a campaign service award. You have travelled 1/2 the state over and over to support PFS in Western NC at every public event we have had in the past couple years. Players turn to you for rule advice regularly, and you run a mean game of Pathfinder... Not to mention, you've just clocked over 450 games as a GM.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey Simon,

If I wrote a Tampermonkey / Greasemonkey script to create and download a json file of games from the "My Pathfinder Society -> Sessions" tab when logged in, would you be willing to write an importer for the same format? That would cut out a lot of the initial work people would have to do to get started.

I don't think that will break any guidelines, as it's no more requests to the Paizo server, and there are already some well-used Greasemonkey scripts that are promoted in the forums.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Having run this 6 times (gencon and after), my VC asked for notes and advice on running it for a local con. Here is what I came up with in case it is helpful to others. Also, some of these suggestions are from Caedmon Tracey, my son and 4 star gm who has also run this 5 times.

Wall of Text:

1. If you feel the table is comfortable enough with each other, have everyone hold hands (including you) during the seance. Put the scenario in your lap, ask everyone to bow their heads and read the box text looking down. Release your hands at the pause. Most of the time someone will actually touch/poke you (they -will- now be in the moment and you can give them a jump when you go into "hag mode"). Note: Play this one this way only if it would not be uncomfortable for the players to hold hands. Some people have different levels of personal space. You can alter it just holding hands up and out without players actually touching. If you hold your hands up, indicating the seance, the players will generally follow your lead and do the same.

2. The first transition in the mindscape is the hardest. They don't yet know they need to look for differences. I pushed the no wind in katapesh as much as I could prior to the scene. I even let the characters introduce and describe themselves to each other on a boat heading into katheer, with a pre-introduction something like this, "The strong inner sea winds push you on your vessel to katapesh, but stall as you approach the city itself. Your yet unknown mission awaits you at the pathfinder lodge in Farseer tower within the city. The crew resorts to rowing, much slower, but gives you ample time to get to know the other agents. Please introduce yourselves to each other". Any chance to reenforce the lack of wind will pay off. The div fight on the roof can be described as sticky hot with no wind, and the gnolls can even add a complaint about having to wait for the 'late as usual' shipment in the ruins with the heat of the day still lingering with no wind to ruffle their fur.

3. Plan what you are going to say when someone tries the door in the first mindscape scene. Does their hand go through the door knob? Does it turn but fall off in their hand revealing no door when they look up? It is "merged with the wall" according to the text, but it is the first moment out of combat that you get to shock the characters they aren't in Kansas anymore, so deserves a good dreamy description.

4. Bring poker chips in two colors for the game with the alchemist. It will make the game more tactile. Also, you can then use the chips later as simple "I disbelieve' tokens to put in front of players every combat in the mindscape after they make their will saves. Helps when you are computing damage. You'll have two colors of chips and there is not a combat with more than two creatures, so that works out nicely.

5. Talking visually with the archivist is hard, and can go wonky quickly. There is no box text for this, so actually say this scene out loud a couple times to yourself or a friend first. Thinking over your visual metaphors before the game is crucial. Paizo gm forum has lots of examples on this (rats in a house, with a broom shooing them out, and then later when it gets dangerous, maybe with dead rats with x's on their eyes is just one example).

6. Be very clear in the key/scroll trade scene that they are actually about to trade. Make obvious gestures even if you feel you are overacting. It is sometimes hard for the players to realize what is going on here. Also for fun, I always describe the sleeping form of the heavy as drooling, but that's just me.

7. When I describe the archivist coming out of the mist in the final scene, at the end, if the pc's consider negotiation or do not immediately pick up dice for initiative, I describe one of the arms holding forth a box, like a gift to the pc's and gently releasing it in the air. You can give them a sense motive here, if you want them to realize it's activating a defensive magic item, but honestly, the players are usually a little awestruck with the description and 4 out of the six times I've run this, the archivist gets the box out before combat. As an added bit of flair if that works, I describe the spear arm bracing into a combat position, while one hand whipes it's (crystal) lips and the final hand beacons the forward (ala Bruce lee in enter the dragon)

8. These are personal flavor, but you may find some value: A) I describe reflections of ancient combat manuals, scrolls and patterns appearing in the archivist crystals as it uses it's reflection evolution to gain new abilities. If they insist on looking into the chest to see the scrolls (no on trusts Murqual), B) I describe it almost like the briefcase in pulp fiction, with a golden glow that illuminates the face of the viewer. If that character persists beyond an initial look (wants to read the scrolls) I describe double copies of that pc's face getting sucked/pulled into the scrolls. That keeps them from getting too curious before the next scene.

9. If you run the gnolls, the donkey never lives.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Intro of Overflow Archives:
"So, let me get this straight, we are to plumb Zartas' moist vault?"
--warning innuendo ahead

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.

None of my five tables took the deal either... As a GM, you need to work hard to convey what is going on with the archivist.

I do appreciate whoever brought up the idea of showing the rats running around, then putting the players faces on the rat bodies. I did the rats, but without the faces for my first table, and the idea didn't carry off as well as it could have (I made up with it with other symbols). Following that up with flipping the rats over dead, with x's on their eyes in the Terra-Cotta Statue room was just brilliant. I showed the rats being stepped on, then flipped over with the x's on the eyes, asked for a perception check to notice the moving statue, and then made the first slam attack a "boot" kick to reinforce the idea.

I thought I'd never want to run this one again after doing it over and over at GenCon, but I'm very excited to run it for local players now. Off to give it a 5 star review. Here's hoping the rest of season 7 is so well put together.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Fantastic time for my first GenCon. I was the person in the GM meeting that discussed hearing people say, "What is going on in that room?" and mentioned signage changes. Thanks to whoever brought up the solution of the flippable easels, that was a very smart idea. I'd also like to suggest that Paizo inquires at costs for purchasing the step sign (between the escalators) that is on each step and viewable on the bottom, that had the Settlers of Caton advertisement on it, with a sign that has a huge arrow pointing up to Sagamore and some compelling Pathfinder art. It may be price prohibitive, but getting more people knowing what is going on upstairs would be great.

Secondly, I remember seeing some card game in the Paizo section downstairs. How about two tables of quests (one quest/person only) on the vendor floor, and then they could direct the players upstairs to finish them?

I don't know how feasible any of these suggestions are budgets and GenCon rules in consideration, but thought that I'd bring them up, just in case.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:

Looks good, but needs one more "goal"... otherwise you can't make 7 total goal without filling out the GM set.

(the other factions have 7 goals or a capstone boon that is granted at 6+)

Good point! I never considered that people would proof these for details like this (and the typos...) as it is absolutely not legal to play. Nonetheless, I'll fix these details tonight just for completeness sake.... Let me know if anyone has ideas for a final goal

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dennis Gregg wrote:
Thank you, this made my day, one of my players HATES Torch almost as much as he HATES Temel Passad, and I am going to print this and hand it to him tomorrow when I hand out the other faction cards just to see his reaction.

Just uploaded a new version with lots of typo fixes and slight rewording to make things more coherent. Make sure to get the latest version.

Just for fun: Shadow Lodge Faction Journal Card

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I thought it might be fun to imagine what a Shadow Lodge version of this card would look like. This is an example (obviously not legal for play) card with some ideas of how the Shadow Lodge could work in Pathfinder Society. I’m pleased with the idea that it is an additional card, as you are a secret agent and a "cover faction"

Just for fun: Shadow Lodge Faction Journal Card

1 to 50 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>