pluvia33's page

While reading through the classes, the Monk's Flying Kick feat seemed rather odd to me. For a Feat 4, you can spend 2 actions to either do something that any character can do already (Leap and Strike), or you can save one action on a very situational and/or potentially risky Long Jump and Strike.

It really seems like a pretty pointless feat with the 2-action cost (furthermore being limited to once per round), so I have to wonder, should this instead be 1 action?? That would make it much closer to the purpose of the UC Monk's Flying Kick Style Strike.

So is the action cost a typo? Is it just a very situational feat? Or am I missing something? Thanks! Really enjoying the book so far!

Hello,
Please cancel my subscription to the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game. Thank you very much and have a great day.

With Adventure Deck 6 of the Wrath of the Righteous set shipped/shipping for most subscribers, it is now that time for many of us to request to have our subscriptions cancelled and wait for the option to restart our subscriptions with the next Character Add-On Deck. This is typically done to avoid higher shipping fees for the much heavier Base Sets and/or to be able to buy the Base Sets at our local game stores to support them, while in either case still having access to all PFACG promo cards.

However, although getting the subscription cancelled is usually a pretty simple process, around the time when Wrath was getting ready to come out Vic was mentioning that Paizo was working on some kind of new "subscription management" feature that would make excluding the Base Set from our subscriptions easier. I was just wondering if this feature was still in the works and if it will be out in time for Mummy's Mask, or should we go ahead and request our subscription cancellations for now?

The owner of my local store had this card as it was included in the most recent issue of GTM. The first power the card has is this:

"If the current scenario lists cohorts, treat this cohort as if it were on that list."

So I'm assuming this means the cohort is an extra cohort in addition to the ones listed and you don't have to replace any of the existing cohorts.

My main question is, is Valais Durant legal in organized play? That would be a rather nice promo to have if that's the case. Since the scenarios don't usually offer very many cohorts, adding an extra one to the pool can be huge. If it is legal, I'm also assuming that the "only one copy of each promo" restriction still applies? Regardless, it seems like it would be a good card for players to keep handy if they can: "Hey, organizer, do you have the Valais Durant promo? No? Well, I have a copy. Please let us use it. Thanks!"

Hello, the title pretty much says it. I currently do not have the option to report sessions of the card game organized play for scenario 1-2A. Instead, I currently show an option to report 1-2E. Thank you.

I'm surprised that no one else has seemed to mention this yet (at least not in its own thread in the Card Guild sections), but I just tried to report on a session for scenario 1-2A: The Frogs, and it wasn't part of the list for Season 1 scenarios in the reporting tool. Instead, it had 1-2E: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum available a little early. Just wanted to make sure this issue was known so it could be fixed. Thanks!

Hello,
Like a number of other people, I am a Card Game Subscriber and did not receive the promo that should have been included in my most recent shipment with Adventure Deck 2. Thank you.

As we play in Organized Play at higher and higher level Adventures, banes start to get rather nasty. Some of them end up forcing you to Banish cards if things don't go too well. Such a bad thing happened today in my group during Scenario 0-6B. Our Seoni player ended up on the receiving end of Crawling Cyclops Hands. He was lucky enough to only roll a single 1 on the dice and ended up banishing the Wand of Shield, a set indicator 1 item card in the Sorcerer deck. The character also ended up taking a weapon as his Card Feat for the scenario.

Now from what I remembered from the OP rules, I was pretty sure that you could only fill holes in your deck with Basic B cards in between scenarios. However, having just finished playing my solo home game run of the Skull & Shackles Adventure Path I remembered having to utilize this rule near the end of the game:

If you can’t construct a valid deck from the cards your group has available because you don’t have enough of certain card types, choose the extra cards you need from the box, choosing only cards with the Basic trait. After you begin the adventure Tempest Rising, you may ignore the Basic trait restriction; instead, you may use any cards in the box from the base set and the Character Add-On Deck, as well as any cards from an adventure whose adventure deck number is at least 2 lower than the adventure you’re currently playing.

This made me wonder if Organized Play has a similar rule, but this was all I found:

Regardless of the method used, after upgrading decks, each player must ensure that the cards in his character deck conform to the quantities specified in the Cards List on the back of his character card, filling any missing spots from his Class Deck box with appropriate cards that have the Basic trait.

Based on this it seems like no matter what, if you have an empty spot that you need to fill with a card in between scenarios, you have to fill the spot with a Basic card. Now, I notice that it just says "cards that have the Basic trait" and does not indicate them having to have the B set indicator. With the Sorcerer deck, there are no Basic cards that have a set indicator of anything but B. However, other class decks do, such as the Bard having a second Cure spell which is a set indicator 1 card with the Basic trait and the Cleric deck has a Conch Shell and an extra Blessing of the Gods which have set indicators of 1 and the Basic trait. So yeah, I think it should probably include that the set indicator also has to be a B for the card.

Anyway, that's a bit of a sidetrack. I am also curious as to what "appropriate cards" mean in the context of that line, but unless I missed something it pretty much seems like in Organized Play you do indeed have to fill any holes in your deck with Basic cards, which usually also means set indicator B cards. In the framework of Organized Play, this seems to be very punishing. You can typically only gain one chosen card upgrade at the end of each scenario. If you have to banish one or two cards at high adventure levels, or when you gain a new card feat at such a level, it seems a bit crummy to have to fill the spots with Basic cards. My sorcerer player already had his heart set on gaining a Spell 6 upgrade from a card he acquired during the scenario, but now he has a Dagger and Bracers of Protection in his deck at Adventure 6 and was pretty disappointed about that. I kind of agree. It seems really odd to me that characters are forced to take such low level cards at such high level Adventures.

I don't know if using the base set rules of filling slots with any card at least 2 set indicators lower than that of the scenario you just played is too overpowered for Organized Play since having empty slots is much more common in OP, but having to go all the way down to a Basic card, again, sounds way too punishing at higher levels. Would getting rid of the Basic restriction at Adventure 3 and being able to pick cards at least 3 set indicators lower during higher adventures be reasonable? Just throwing the idea out there.

So with the latest scenario, the "During This Scenario" rules are:

"Cut the prophecy handout into a number of pieces equal to the number of Cryptic Runes henchmen.

When you defeat a Cryptic Runes henchman, put that card in a henchman pile next to this scenario and get a piece of the prophecy handout.

When you encounter the villain Brinebones, you may shuffle it and a henchman from the henchman pile into a random open location to evade Brinebones."

--------

So we can collect the pieces of the prophecy handout, but it looks like it has no real baring on actually winning the scenario. Is this correct? Is it just the standard "corner the villain" scenario, or should there be another line saying something like, "To win this scenario, collect all pieces of the prophecy handout"? Something like that would definitely make the scenario more interesting, but as it is it seems like a pretty easy scenario other than having to eventually beat Brinebones. As long you beat one Cryptic Rune first, you can avoid him and know what location he goes into, prepare, close any locations you need to close, then beat him.

Hello,

Please cancel my Pathfinder Card Game Subscription. I will resubscribe once the option to start with the Wrath of the Righteous Character Add-On Deck is made available. Thank you very much and have a great day.

=Aaron Rabold (pluvia33)

The Guide to Pathfinder Society Adventure Card Guild Organized Play puts some restrictions on what scenarios a character can replay. However, as far as I can tell it doesn't explicitly describe what a "replay" is. I could see three possible definitions of a Replay as far as Organized Play is concerned:

1. The most basic definition would be a play of any scenario which the character has played before. The big problem I see with this definition is that if a character fails a scenario, but decides to go on with the rest of the group, they could eventually be locked out of ever being able to complete the earlier failed scenario. For example, my wife has been playing sporadically. She has currently played and completed two Adventure 2 scenarios and played and failed an Adventure 1 scenario. My group is currently getting ready to run through Adventure 3. If she were to jump in and gain a set 3 deck upgrade, she would never be able to finish Adventure 1 unless she played a scenario and "upgraded" down to a lower set number card to replace the set 3 card.

2. A Replay is when a character plays a scenario which they have already played and gained a Success in. This could potentially lock a character out of being able to take a scenario's reward if they decided to not take it the first time.

3. A Replay is when a character plays a scenario which they have already played and gained a Success in and from which they taken the reward. The problem with this definition is that it could be abused to let a character always be able to replay a scenario, such as Ghosts of the Deep, by just choosing to never take the reward so they can be available to help other characters through the scenario.

So which definition is proper for Organized Play and can it be spelled out better in future versions of the guide?

I love how Loot works in Organized Play. The temporarily replacing mechanic makes the cards very versatile and kind of makes more sense to the party. I mean, why would the party just ditch that weird artifact or say good-bye to that ally they just saved and never call upon them again?

In particular, I really like how the Adventure 2 Loot reward works in Organized play. With a whopping 7 Loot cards, there are plenty for everyone to pick on of them, even in a 6-character game, all under one reward. Unfortunately, this is the only Adventure in Skull & Shackles with 6 or more OP appropriate Loot cards. Adventures 4 and 5 come close with 5 Loot cards, but even then not all of them may be appropriate with the "temporarily replace" mechanic, such as the Immortal Dreamstone and Vailea, since they have powerful Banish powers.

So I was thinking, might it be possible to have more Adventure Decks in
Wrath of the Righteous and future Adventure Paths which have at least 6 Loot cards that are appropriate for Organized Play? I think that'd be a very nice thing to consider, as long as it wasn't forced, still felt organic to the game. Any thoughts?

This is something that I posted in the VO forums. However, my post there never had a single reply. I’m assuming that either my suggestion was both not bad and also not really something anyone cared for, or simply no one noticed or felt like braving my wall of text.

Anyway, some of us on the forums have expressed a desire for more customization and flexibility within the Class Deck system. There are a number of class characters with too broad or too specific focuses and concepts to be fully supported by the cards within the deck: Melindra of the Wizard deck who can use more ranged weapons and items, Zarlova of the Cleric deck who can use Arcane spells, as could Flenta of the Fighter deck. There has been talk about wanting boon expansion decks to support such characters, but there are a number of issues with this desire. Although it would be nice to have boon expansions to help these characters, that would involve creating a new type of product which may have limited marketability. With Class Decks already providing a wide variety of boons to players, decks with nothing but boons might not have the same multifunction appeal that the Class Decks already have and there would be some overlap between the two product lines. With there already being the possibility of over 30 Class Decks to eventually be released, will we really need an additional way of getting more boons added to our game boxes? Honestly, probably not.

Because of this thought, I think adding a system of combining two Class Decks for your organized play character would be a much better solution to supporting these characters. So I would like to make a formal proposal to have a system of Class Deck Multiclassing added to Pathfinder Card Game Organized Play:

--------------------

Organized Play: Multiclassing or Bonus Upgrade Reward

Once your character completes all Adventure 1 and Adventure 2 scenarios of an Adventure Path, you may Multiclass your character. If you do this, choose a second Class Deck to add to your character’s Class Deck box. For the rest of the Adventure Path, your character’s Class Deck box now includes all cards from both the character’s original Class Deck and the one which is added at this time. You cannot Multiclass with two copies of the same Class Deck.

If a character does not wish to Multiclass into a second Class Deck, the character may instead gain a powerful Bonus Upgrade. Select any single card from your Class Deck box with a set indicator of 3 or lower to gain as a reward once the character completes all Adventure 1 and Adventure 2 scenarios of an Adventure Path.

Whichever reward is chosen, be sure to record it on the character’s chronicle sheet in the entry of the final scenario needed to complete both Adventures 1 and 2. If Multiclassing was chosen, record the second Class Deck of the character in the Notes section. If the Bonus Upgrade was selected, record it in the Deck Upgrades section as normal.

--------------------

These rules can be added to the Guide on page 8 in between the “Upgrading Your Deck” and “Chronicle Sheets” sections.

As I said, I think this is a good idea because it helps characters with different kinds of mechanics to be more playable and it can bring a larger variety of characters into Organized Play. It could also help encourage sales of Class Decks among OP players as they can try out different combinations of classes. It can even increase longevity of the existing class decks as more class decks are released. For example, when a Druid Class Deck may eventually be released, someone who loves Druids may look at the Ranger characters and think playing Arabundi multiclassed into Druid could be pretty awesome and go out to buy the Ranger Class Deck in addition to the new Druid deck.

I feel that after Adventure 2 is the perfect place to allow the addition of a second deck to characters as they will still have to use just their normal character deck to get through the first 1/3 of the Adventure Path, but it is before Roles come into play and gives plenty of time to make an effective mixed character. Since some people may not be interested in mixing Class Decks or would rather just spend the $20 on one Class Deck without feeling obligated to buy more in order to have a good character, I wrote in the Bonus Upgrade for people who stick to just one Class Deck. This, I think, will also cut down on characters that multiclass for the sake of a small benefit. For example, Vika will have to weigh the benefits of Multiclassing with the Cleric Class Deck for some more bludgeoning cards versus being able to snatch up a Belt of Giant Strength as soon as she starts Adventure 3. The ability to take this Bonus Upgrade comes at a time in the Adventure Path that will likely be one of the hardest times to get a deck upgrade of a number equal to the current Adventure as you still have all of the base set cards and two other Adventure Decks with no Basic/Elite cards being purged from the box yet.

There are a number of concerns that have been brought up previously in discussions about doing things like this. I’m going to try to answer some of those concerns in a preemptive fashion here:

-This will make it harder for players to keep track of what cards are theirs! This is one of the most common rebuttals to having any cards other than those from a character’s single Class Deck in a characters deck. If Melindra Multiclasses into Rogue and is playing in a scenario with a Rogue character, what if one of her Rogue cards gets mixed into a location or is given to the Rogue player? How are we going to know whose cards are whose? My counter to this is that this issue already exists. There is nothing in the Guide against having a 6-player game with nothing but Cleric Class Deck characters. Also, how often do you really mix up cards from your character deck? Is it that hard to remember that you were the one who shuffled a card into a location deck? Or that you gave a card to another character? Personally, I think that players should be able to keep track of their own cards. As an event coordinator, I would insure that anyone with cards from the same Class Deck would have their decks recorded on a Deck List before starting the scenario.

-This will make characters too powerful! I don’t think this is the case. I whole heartedly believe that this will only increase the ability of character to work within a wider variety of builds and be more effective in their focuses. I do not think any multiclassed character can be any more powerful than the most optimal build available to a single Class Deck. For example, I don’t think any Multiclass build of Flenta, Tontelizi, or Vika will be any more powerful than Valeros using just the Fighter Class Deck can be. Multiclassing can also be a double edged sword. Although this increases the versatility of your deck, it can also delude your pool of cards. When you gain a reward of a random card of a specific type, you could now have more than double the cards with a set indicator of B than you did before. You could also end up with unwanted cards to deal with such as having Agna multiclassing into whatever deck has the most Offhand cards, but now her pool of allies will have a much higher percentage of non-animal cards to deal with. Also, while multiclassing into Sorcerer or Wizard will give Flenta many more spells to choose from, she will no longer be able to max out her Spell Card Feats to let her gain up to set indicator 2 spells in the Fighter Class Deck. If she casts any of her spells after multiclassing, she would have to replace them with B type spells with the Basic trait.

-This will force players to spend more than $20 on OP to stay competitive! Some have said that one of the things they like about the OP system is that all you need is a $20 deck and you’re good to go. They say that doing this sort of thing gives people who buy more products the ability to build a “better” character and that this would be unfair to those who only buy one deck. As I said already, I don’t think multiclassing will make characters any more powerful than the best single-deck build of their class. Not to mention, this is a cooperative game, so why be worried about people having “better” characters anyway? Beyond that point, rewarding players who buy more products with more options is the exact same thing that the PFS RPG already does. You can participate in PFS just fine with nothing but the Core Rulebook, but if you want to use any other classes, feats, spells, etc., you have to own the books that those other options come from. Shouldn’t we want to give card game OP players a reason to want to buy more products?

And that’s all I can really think of. I’m sorry for the ridiculous wall of text. If you got through all of that, thank you for your time. Are there any reasons that anyone can think of that something like this shouldn’t be implemented? I think we should give it a shot. This is a test season after all.

The Guide says the following on Dying:

"If your character is dead at the end of a scenario, your character does not gain the scenario reward, even if the rest of the party does, but you are allowed to upgrade your new character deck (see Upgrading Your Deck). Build your new character before the party begins upgrading.

When your character dies but your party wins the scenario, the party may use the cards you gained during the scenario when they advance their characters, but they may not use any cards from your class deck."

So last night someone's character died. The Guide says that he could take an upgrade for a new character. I was wondering what the proper way of recording this upgrade would be? I ended up just putting an entry on his new chronicle sheet for the upgrade, writing in the notes that this was from his dead character, XXXXXX-1001.

I was also wondering about the second paragraph I quoted. It notes that if "your party wins the scenario" they get to use the cards the dead character gained. Does this really matter? It talks about this like it's a specific situation, but is there a reason that the characters, including the new character of the player whose character died, cannot use the cards of the dead character for upgrades even if they lost the scenario? In the base rules it says:

"The other characters may use the dead character’s cards when they rebuild their decks after the scenario; any cards they don’t keep are then banished."

It doesn't make any stipulations about it being only if the rest of the characters win the scenario.

I know that we still have 6 weeks until this comes into play, but since the Guild has been updated a couple of times and the Scenario files just got an update, both without any change for this issue, I thought I'd bring it up again.

In this thread, confusion was brought up about when exactly cards with the Basic and Elite traits should be removed from the game box and which specific card set identifiers should be removed. Tanis clerified:

My intention with the alternate box-purge rules was to get rid of cards at least two lower than the current adventure. So when you add AD 4, remove the appropriate B, C, and 1 cards, and leave 2 and 3 in there. The next version of the Guide will clarify this.

However, most people would read that "at least two lower" than 4 would include set identifier 2, as it is two less than 4. Again, the Guild and the Adventure Path card for organized play have not yet been updated to clarify what is actually intended.

Also, an issue that was brought up but didn't get an official word is if the Basic purge should include Blessings of the Gods. Should an exception be made for Blessings of the Gods or will we need to get rid of them with the rest of the Basic cards?

So I've been playing a lot of solo OP scenarios with Olenjack lately (yes, sometimes I'm a glutton for pain). I recently got my first vile of poison with Centipede Venom. Now, with a d8 Disable: Dexterity +1, using the poison is a little risky, but in the last scenario I played I had my Masterwork Tools in my hand. 3d8+1 is pretty good odds to get a seven, although I did fail it once (of course!).

Anyway, after the scenario I had a thought and wanted to confirm, is this legal? I'm playing an item to help with a check that is triggered by an item. Does this violate the "only one card of each type per step or check" rule? Or, since this is a new check, am I okay?

To me, this is similar to doing something like playing the Aid spell to help with the recharge check of a spell you played, which I think was confirmed as okay in this thread. I just wanted to make sure that I was doing things right. Thanks!

I'm not sure if this question has been brought up before. If it has, I couldn't find talk about it.

So by the rules for the base game, you typically don't add promo cards to the game box until you have started Adventure 1. Therefore, I would think that promo cards would be on the same level of power as Adventure 1 cards. So is there a reason that in organized play they are instead treated as "zero" type, or the same as a B set indicator?

I really like the Character Sheet PDFs for the Pathfinder Card Game. It makes things a lot easier to manage, especially with OP and being able to play many different characters at the same time. Another nice thing about them is that they can be edited and updated for mistakes and errata.

If it is any help, I’ve made a list of edits that might need to be made to the character sheet PDFs. This includes minor mistakes, changes to characters based on updated rules, and errata that have been made.

Has anyone noticed any more edits that they think should be made?

I picked up my copy of the Ranger Class Deck today along with the Sorcerer and Wizard decks to complete my set of seven (yay!). I originally wanted my first Ranger character to be the Class Deck version of Harsk, but I've gotten more and more interested in Agna the more I read the Ranger character sheets. Now one of Agna's starting abilities is:

"You may recharge a card that has the Offhand trait to add 1d6 (□+1) and that weapon’s traits to your combat check." (emphasis mine)

So I assembled my starting Agna deck and realized that she starts with 4 weapons and there are only 4 Basic B weapons in the Ranger deck. And sadly, none of them have the Offhand trait. But then I later realized that shields (non-buckler types) have the Offhand trait! And Wooden Shield in the Ranger deck is a Basic B card!!

I re-read the ability to make sure it wasn't restricted to just weapons. I see it say "a card that has the Offhand trait" but then I also see the part of ability that it adds "that weapon's traits to your combat check."

So now I'm a little confused. Can Anga recharge shields to use this ability? If so, can she add the shield's traits to the combat check (such as if the shield is magical)? Right now, as it is written, it looks like yes, she can recharge a shield to get the d6, but no, since it's not a weapon it doesn't add the shield's traits to the check. Is this the intent?

So due to my wife and friends not having enough time/desire to play through both the basic AP that comes with the game and the organized play scenarios, I've decided to just play through the home version solo (currently with Damiel as a one-man wrecking crew). I'll just play the OP scenarios with everyone else whenever they have time, which is a pretty nice option to have.

This does, however, bring up a bit of a problem. I use my copy of the game to run the OP scenarios. The base home game and OP have two different methods of removing Basic and Elite cards from play. In OP, you just remove all Basic/Elite cards of a specific Adventure number when instructed while in home games you remove the specified type of card individually when you would banish them from play. If, when the time comes, I try to use both different methods in the two types of games I'll be playing then I would potentially have to do a very large amount of book keeping for my home game (keeping notes on which Basic and Elite cards I've removed from that game) and a lot of extra card swapping whenever I'd switch over.

So the simplest solution I can think of is to just use the OP method of Basic/Elite card removal for my home and OP games. That way I'll only need to record what Damiel's deck list is and if each card belongs in the box or out of the box during OP. I'd have minimal switching between game types. Does anyone have any thoughts on this style of play? Any positive or negative impact that it could have on my solo game at home?

As a general rule, promo cards shouldn't be used until you start the first chapter of an Adventure Path. Ranzak has an exception due to him being a character. The rules also say this about ships:

"If you have a ship promo card, as soon as you have checked off any ships of the same class on your fleet card, you may treat the promo card as if it has been checked off as well."

This makes me believe that if you have the Goblin Weidling promo ship, it would only be available to you for your fleet when you check off a Class 0 ship feat. Promo ships still shouldn't be added to the pool to be possible encounters as random enemy ships based on this rule, or at least I wouldn't think so.

However, this FAQ was posted. Riptide Grindylow henchmen are only used if you encounter the Goblin Weidling as an enemy ship. When you "treat the promo card as if it has been checked off" does that mean that it should also be available as a possible enemy when you are not using at as your ship?

The release of the Class Deck character sheets has made me think a lot about the future of the OP/Class Deck system. The main thing that has really been on my mind is the relatively low number of cards a OP character has to work with, considering the ~100 cards have to be split between seven different power levels (base plus adventures 1-6).

My first thought was: Will there ever perhaps be Class Deck expansions to add to your class deck? Like a pack of 50 or so Bard Class cards to add as options for your Bard Class Deck?

Then the talk of the ability to play the new Swashbuckler character in S&S (Jirelle), but using the current Rogue deck gave me another thought. What if future Class Decks don't have their own card types (such as having cards with "Barbarian Class Deck" on the top), but instead use one or two card types from the existing Class Decks? Consider this list:

Alchemist - Bard & Rogue
Arcanist - Sorcerer & Wizard
Barbarian - Fighter
Bloodrager - Fighter & Sorcerer
Brawler - Fighter
Cavalier - Fighter
Druid - Cleric & Ranger
Gunslinger - Fighter & Ranger
Hunter - Cleric & Ranger
Inquisitor - Cleric & Rogue
Investigator - Bard & Rogue
Magus - Fighter & Wizard
Monk - Fighter
Ninja - Rogue
Oracle - Cleric & Sorcerer
Paladin - Cleric & Fighter
Samurai - Fighter
Shaman - Ranger & Sorcerer
Skald - Bard & Fighter
Slayer - Ranger & Rogue
Summoner - Ranger & Sorcerer
Swashbuckler - Rogue
Warpriest - Cleric & Fighter
Witch - Ranger & Wizard

I made this list in a bit of a hurry, so some of the deck composition may be off, but the idea is that the new Class Decks would be able to use one or two card types introduced in the 7 debut Class Decks. For example, the Alchemist Class Deck would come with ~100 new cards that would be a combination of cards, half marked as "Bard" cards and the other half as "Rogue" cards. Of course, since the deck is for alchemist characters, there would be a lot of potions and other alchemical items included (likely mostly under the "Rogue Class Deck" label). The deck will be playable on its own like the current Class Decks, but it would then also be OP legal to mix and match cards from different class deck cards. An Alchemist can use cards from the old Rogue and Bard class decks to build his deck and a Rogue or Bard can pull in appropriate cards from the Alchemist Class Deck to build their OP decks.

Now this idea could cause issues. It would eventually be a lot of cards to keep track of and, at least based on my best-guess list above, some classes would end up with a lot of new cards while others don't get much. For example, Fighter would get at least double the amount of new cards compared to any other classes while the Bard and Wizard kind of get shafted. It would also be a little more complicated to keep track of everything.

But I also think that eventually having 31 or more different card types would be a little crazy and this would provide more variety to OP decks without having to release expansions for each individual class deck.

I'm currently building a Captain America-style character for a campaign set on Earth during World War II in which a plainer rift brings the races and creatures of fantasy into our world. As part of my character's story, he actually becomes the inspiration for the Captain America comics. He'll be using a Light Mithral Quickdraw Throwing Shield and a Blinkback Belt to pull off being a good shield thrower.

The question that I'm coming up with while putting together the build is this: What is my weapon's type when interacting with feats like Weapon Focus and abilities that rely specific weapon types or weapon groups?

If I take Weapon Focus (throwing shield), will that also give a +1 to attack with my shield bash with the throwing shield? If I take Weapon Focus (light shield), will that give a +1 to attack when I'm throwing the shield? If the answer to these questions is No, can I take Weapon Focus (light throwing shield) to get the bonus to both?

Similarly, if I get benefits from weapons in the Close weapon group which includes light shields, would those benefits also apply when I'm throwing the shield? If I get benefits from weapons in the Thrown weapon group which includes throwing shields, would those benefits also apply to shield bash attacks?

I can see this ruled either way. On one hand, throwing shield is an add-on feature, adding +50 gp to the cost of whatever shield you're adding it to, so it is essentially the same weapon. On the other hand, it has its own proficiency level and the text specifically calls out that shield spikes do not apply to thrown attacks, supporting that the throw and the bash are separate weapons, almost like a strange double weapon that isn't quite a double weapon. I'm really hoping the shield bash and the throw would not need to be enchanted separately....

Any thoughts or rules support one way or the other on this issue?

I'm currently playing in a Pathfinder game in a World of Warcraft setting. My wife and I are hosting the weekly game sessions at our home every Friday and last week no one brought over any minis (it was the first time having it at our place, we just moved into our new house). It wasn't a big deal for our GM and most of the players, most of the time. I used to play with my GM in another game and we never used a combat mat for that. But this is a large group (6 PCs and 2 minions) so there is a lot to keep track of. So to make sure we always have tokens to use, and so I have them for future use with other games, I'm planning to pick up some Pathfinder Pawn collections.

I want to get most of my stuff from my local game store, but the owner will have to special order them and they will take longer than a week to come in. For now, the Hastings in my town has some pawns in stock so I'm going to pick some up after work today. I've already decided on getting the Bestiary 2 Box (Bestiary 3 was the only other with-bases set they had), but they also had three Adventure Path collections in stock last time I checked:

Shattered Star
Skull & Shackles
Reign of Winter

In addition to the Bestiary 2 Box, I only want to get one of these from Hastings and want to make sure they will be helpful in the current game. We are playing during Cataclysm, but the Adventure Path pawns are mainly going to hopefully give the PCs some good choices to represent their characters (I really wish they still had the NPC Codex Pawns). Here is what the party is made up of right now:

Goblin (male) Alchemist, specializing in bombs, traps, and magic items
Blood Elf (female) Summoner with large devil-like eidolon
Blood Elf (female) Fighter, finesse scimitar free hand
Blood Elf (male) Oracle of Life
Jungle Troll (male) Spell-less Ranger with wolf companion

The 6th PC was killed last week and the player hasn't decided what to make to replace his tauren fighter with yet. Anyone have any recommendations? It would be greatly appreciated. If anyone wants to recommend any other pawn collections (other than Bestiary 1 and NPC Codex) that I should have special ordered that would also be welcomed. Thank you!

The other night after our weekly Pathfinder game, my friend and GM for the current campain was listening to music on his phone. A song called "The Preacher" by Jamie N. Commons came on and he said that it makes him want to be a cleric/gunslinger who has rejected his god the next time he's able to play as a player. So below is my attempt at making that concept work as a cleric archetype. Most of it is pretty simple, just removing the cleric domains and replacing them with gunslinger abilities. Please let me know what you think. Is it too much for what is given up? Or is it too little? Are there any more flavorful abilities that can be be added or switched out? Thanks for reading.

----------

Forsaken Gun (Cleric Archetype)
Once in the service of a god, something in this cleric’s past has caused him to become disillusioned with his deity or even with divinity as a whole. His hardened nature has turned him towards the art of the gun to defend himself and others in this unjust world. Although he has lost the domains associated with his former patron, his convention lets him retain much of his divine power.

Alignment: A forsaken gun may be of any alignment.

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Forsaken guns are proficient with all simple weapons, firearms, and light armor.

Aura: A forsaken gun does not produce a powerful aura.

Domains: A forsaken gun does not gain the abilities associated with any domains. This includes never getting access to the one domain spell slot at each spell level.

Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: A forsaken gun has no restrictions on the spells he can cast based on alignment.

Divine Focus: A forsaken gun must present a firearm in place of a holy (or unholy) symbol when channeling energy or when casting spells which require a divine focus.

Gunsmith: At 1st level, a forsaken gun gains Gunsmithing as a bonus feat. He also gains a battered gun identical to the one gained by the gunslinger.

Grit (Ex): At the start of each day, a forsaken gun gains a number of grit points equal to his Wisdom modifier (minimum 1). These grit points function just as those gained by the gunslinger and can be spent to perform deeds selected from the gunslinger class feature and any other deed gained through feats or magic items.

Ghost Shot (Su): At 1st level, as long as a forsaken gun has at least 1 grit point, any firearm he is touching gains the ghost touch magic weapon special ability. This ability is immediately lost if the forsaken gun lets go of the weapon or if he spends his last point of grit.

Deeds: At 1st level, the forsaken gun selects a single 1st-level deed from the gunslinger deed class feature. At 3rd level and every 4 levels thereafter, a forsaken gun selects an additional deed available to a gunslinger of equal or lower level, or he may select a bonus combat or grit feat.

Bonus Feats: At 3rd level and every 4 levels thereafter, a forsaken gun may select a bonus feat instead of the deed gained at that level. These bonus feats must be combat or grit feats.

Gun Training (Ex): Starting at 5th level, a forsaken gun gains this feature just as a gunslinger of his level.

Special: Just as a gunslinger, a forsaken gun in a Guns Everywhere setting loses gunsmith and instead gains the gun training class feature at 1st level. A forsaken gun may also qualify for the Musket Master or Pistolero gunslinger archetype, requiring the forsaken gun to take the indicated deeds at the appropriate levels.

I'm currently working on a setting to run with my wife and a friend in which the PCs will eventually be traveling between different universes based on various fantasy, sci-fi, video game, and anime worlds. One such world is going to be a mess of merged worlds from various different modern anime series (actually part of the story with different characters and influences from different shows forcefully get pulled into one of the universes). While they are there, they will likely meet a character named Misaka from a series called Toaru no Majutsu no Index (or A Certain Magical Index). She is a young girl and a very powerful electromacer type esper. Now, having recently purchased the Ultimate Psionics PDF, I figured it would be a good time to play around with the book. Sadly, I couldn't find any option to really make a character that focused almost exclusively on the use of a single elemental energy. Maybe I missed something in the book, but from what I could see just about all characters that could use psionics of one energy type can also use it for all other types. With how common such a power is in the fantasy/sci-fi genres, it seemed like a bit of an oversite to me to not have such an option.

TLDR: So basically, I made an archetype for a psionic using character that focuses on one energy type. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! (oh, and does anyone know a good name for someone focused on using sonic energy, like pyromancer is for fire?)

Focused Kineticist (Wilder Archetype)

Some wilders are gifted with an affinity for a specific energy. Similar to a Kineticist Psion, they can wield the power of their energy with ease, but they do so forsaking the use of other energy types. Often these focused kineticists have specific names associated with their gifted energy type such as pyromancer (fire), electromancer (electricity), cryomancer (cold).

Powers Known: At 1st level, a focused kineticist must choose one energy type: cold, electricity, fire, or sonic. Any power that has an energy type in its descriptor must match your chosen energy type or you cannot learn it. Any power that gives a choice for the energy type must always use your chosen energy type. A focused kineticist can always learn powers which include his selected energy type in the descriptor even if it the power does not appear on the wilder power list. Such powers are treated as having power levels equal to the lowest power level it is available for any particular class. The talent and 1st-level power chosen at level 1 must have the focused kineticist’s chosen energy type in its descriptor (most commonly Energy Splash and Energy Ray). This modifies the Powers Known and Talent abilities.

Wild Surge: Whenever a focused kineticist uses his wild surge for abilities using his chosen energy type, the chance for enervation is reduced by 15%. Whenever using wild surge for any other powers, the chance of enervation is increased by 5%. Wild Surge otherwise functions as the standard ability.

Favored Energy: At 1st level, a focused kineticist gains Favored Energy as a bonus feat without needing to meet the prerequisites. This feat must be taken for the focused kineticist’s chosen energy type.

Elemental Blast: At 1st level, a focused kineticist gains Elemental Blast as a bonus feat without needing to meet the prerequisites. This feat must always use the focused kineticist’s chosen energy type and the focused kineticist is not normally able to deal force damage with his Surge Blast. This ability modifies the Surge Blast ability.

Force of Energy (Su): Starting at 4th level, whenever a focused kineticist is dealing damage of his chosen type he may as a free action spend 1 power point or expend his psionic focus to do half of that damage as force damage instead of the normal energy type. This ability may be applied to the focused kineticist’s Elemental Blast at no cost. This ability replaces Surging Euphoria +1.

Energy Force Push (Su): Starting at 12th level, whenever a focused kineticist uses his Force of Energy ability, he may attempt a bull rush or trip combat maneuver against all creatures who took force damage from the attack as a free action. A single combat maneuver check is made using the focused kineticist’s manifester level in place of his base attack bonus and Charisma modifier in place of his Strength modifier. The result is applied to each creature’s CMD to determine success. Successful bull rush maneuvers move creatures away from the focused kineticist’s location. This ability replaces Surging Euphoria +2.

Greater Energy Force Push (Su): At 20th level, whenever a focused kineticist uses his Energy Force Push ability, he may attempt both a bull rush and a trip combat maneuver. He first rolls a single bull rush attempt and then a single trip attempt in the same manner as when using Energy Force Push. This ability replaces Surging Euphoria +3.

I recently played in my first Mythic campaign. Although it was a little short lived, I enjoyed what I did play and had most of my characters mythic tiers planned out. I like Mythic. I think it's a very fun and flavorful system. However, for some characters, the system may cause a problem: So many abilities, so little space to take them. If, for example, you wanted to play as living gods. To truly be on par with what most people consider to be a god, you would need to take Longevity, Mythic Sustenance, Sleepless and Divine Source three times. That doesn't leave much room for other cool abilities. To rectify this, I propose a simple house rule for the system to open up more opportunities to take mythic path abilities and mythic feats in high level games.

Mythic Flexibility: Once characters reach their 5th mythic tier, they can take mythic path abilities and mythic feats in place of normal feats gained through class levels. They must treat their mythic tier as 4 tiers lower when meeting the minimum mythic tier requirements to take abilities and feats in this way. Mythic path abilities and unique mythic feats (such as Dual Path) may only be taken in place of feats gained from normal advancement. Mythic enhancement feats can be taken in place of bonus feats as long as the original feat was one that the character could take as a bonus feat and as long the character meets all other prerequisites, even if members of the class don’t typically have to meet the prerequisites for their bonus feats. For example, a 10th level ranger with the two-weapon combat style and at least 5 mythic tiers can take Two-Weapon Fighting (Mythic) as a combat style feat as long as he already has the regular Two-Weapon Fighting feat.

With all of the custom content being made for the Pathfinder ACG, the idea came to me to try to adapt We Be Goblins! into the ACG format. This would include the four pregens as playable characters (maybe also two more for 5-6 player games, either based on other pregen goblins or making my own) and a custom scenario or two representing the module with new henchmen and villain cards. If we can, I'd like to discuss the concept of adapting official Paizo works from the Pathfinder RPG into the Pathfinder ACG, just to clarify any copyright issues that might arise from free fan-made material and the distribution of such. Basically, what can we get away with and what can't we?

I've read over the Community Use Policy (after Vic linked it in another thread) and I think I understand most of it pretty well. But with the new situation of trying to adapt the RPG into the ACG format, I'm not sure how certain parts of the policy apply to this situation. Here are a few questions that I'd like to bring up:

1) First, something related to my particular project: We Be Goblins Too! is listed on the Community Use Approved Product List, but the original We Be Goblins! is not. Is this an error or was the first module intentionally left off the list for some reason? If there are any other products that might not appear on the list (under Section 1 or Section 2), what is the best way to ask if it should have actually been included or not?

2) To make sure I fully understand how the Community Use Policy might apply to custom character creation, it looks like I can base a custom character off of any character listed in any of the books under Section 1 of the product list. This includes using the characters names and maybe a short little bio (an original summery, not a direct copy) and basing the stats, powers and cards of the characters off of the original characters' abilities. I would NOT be able to use any character artwork from the products that isn't in the Community Use Package or posted on the blog somewhere, but I could draw my own fanart of the characters to use as long as it isn't basically a direct trace of the original art. I could then use the ACG character sheets as templates to make my own character sheets for the custom characters since those are part of the Community Use Package. Is all of this accurate or am I way off base on some (or all) of this?

3) Another question related to my project: One of the We Be Goblins! characters is an alchemist. This class hasn't been used in the ACG yet, but it will be part of the new set and its playtest is approaching. I have some ideas on how I might make an alchemist, but if I see the playtest alchemist would it be okay to use it for inspiration for a custom character as long as it is different enough? This could also apply to possible custom characters based on the Magus, Swashbuckler, and other new classes. I would think this would be a no (or at least a "please don't"), but I figured I'd ask anyway.

4) As far as adapting scenarios from existing Pathfinder RPG products (like trying to adapt We Be Goblins!), what is okay? The only time the Policy talks about the plots of the products is for use in "campaign journals and play-by-post or play-by-email games" and doesn't mention anything about adaptions for other fan-made creations. Would trying to turn Pathfinder RPG modules and adventure paths into ACG scenarios be okay through the Policy or would it require a license?

Those are all of the questions I have right now. Anyone else have any thoughts?

Okay, so this is a little early since it won't really come into play until Adventure 4, but I just wanted to make sure that I understand some of the Blessing based power feats on the character role cards. Some of the characters prefer a specific god's blessing and have power feats that provide a boosted effect when using them. The ones I'm talking about are like Lem's: "When you play Blessing of Shelyn, add d12 instead of the normal die."

So I just want to make sure I'm reading this right and not missing some extra "you" speak. If Lem takes this power, whenever he uses a Blessing of Shelyn, no matter if he's using it on himself or another character, that player will add a d12 instead of the normal die for the check. Is this correct or is it intended that he only be able to use a d12 instead of the normal die when he is using the blessing on his own checks? It is worded differently from stat specific blessing boosts like Lini's: "When you play a blessing to add to your Wisdom check, add d12 instead of the normal die." (the your check stipulation is not included in the god based blessing boosts)

Our group has been seeking out the preferred blessings for the characters who like specific gods in preparation of eventually getting their role cards and I already have two or three Blessings of Shelyn in my Lem deck. If I'm interpreting the power correctly, I will be taking it as my second power after getting the role card, the first being the ability to use his inspiration on himself (Virtuoso). Otherwise, it might go down on the priority list.

And on a side note, Lini's and Valeros' (Weapon Master) skill based blessing boosts seem extremely weak as they only bring the die up from a d10 to a d12 for the extra blessing dice.

I had an idea for a new Role for Merisiel, everyone's favorite Elf Rogue. Here are a new set of Powers to reflect a rogue who specializes in dabbling in magic and using magic devices. I don't know if Tinkerer is the best name for it, but it's the best name I could come up with. There wasn't an existing archetype that I could find in the RPG line of rule books (the stuff on the PRD) that fit, so I just made up my own name for it.... Actually, just looked again and there is the Eldritch Raider racial archetype for the Gillmen, but I don't know if the name really fits (not to mention being an archetype from a non-elf race). Anyway, here is what I came up with. What do you think?

MERISIEL (TINKERER)

HAND SIZE 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

PROFICIENT WITH Light Armors [ ] Weapons

You may evade your encounter.

If you are the only character at your location, you may recharge a card to add 1d6 ([ ] +1) ([ ] +2) ([ ] +3) to your combat check or discard it to add an additional 1d6.

[ ] Add 2 ([ ] 4) to your check to acquire ([ ] or recharge) a boon with the Magic trait.

[ ] When you would banish a boon with the Magic trait from your hand, bury it instead.

[ ] You gain the skill Arcane: Charisma +1.

[ ] When you play a blessing to add to your Charisma check, add d12 instead of the normal die.

I am currently playing as Lem who is also the character I primarily used during the playtest. I love his flexibility. Recently I've been salivating over his Role card (Virtuoso). Letting him use his inspiration ability on himself is something that I pushed for during playtest and I'm really happy that it made it into the final cut. I just wish I didn't have to wait until February to get it! Ahh, the wait is killing me.

Anyway, to the actual question in the subject line, I really don't care much about armor and I don't know if I'll ever use a card feat to get the one armor slot he has access to. I'm worried that by the end of Chapter 3, I may be forced to take Proficient With Light Armors as a power feat which will probably be a complete waste. So I was wondering, if characters gain access to all four of their basic power feats in the first 3 chapters, is it okay to just not use one of those power feats and save it until you get your role card?

I do see that on page 19, it says that if you have no unchecked feats of the type you're gaining, you don't gain a feat. So I'm thinking that by the current rules as written, saving a power feat for your role card isn't allowed. But is there anything wrong with it? Either as a house rule or even changing the rules to allow it, is there anything wrong with being a power feat behind for a few scenarios until you can actually get one you'd like to have?

What does everyone think? And is anyone else out there just itching to get their role cards, too?

PS: Or maybe I'm worrying about nothing. Would a developer be willing to chime in and let us know if we do gain 4 power feats within the first three chapters? Or if anyone out there might have a copy of chapter 3 already somehow?

When I started playing the game I interpreted the rules as saying that whenever you use a blessing you always add a die or dice to the check of the same type as the associated skill for the check you are making. However, with the new rewording in an FAQ entry about wands, it becomes a little less clear:

Resolution: On page 16 of the rulebook, change the following:

"The die or dice added are of the type defined by the situation and the skill that the character is using..."

to

"The die or dice added are of the type defined by the situation and/or the skill that the character is using..."

I'm thinking, based on logic, that the rule still defaults to always adding dice of the same type as the base skill die, if applicable. Meaning if you are using a skill for your check, you add whatever your die is for that skill, but if you aren't using a skill, such as with some wands, you add whatever die the wand uses. But the new wording can also be taken out of context, disregarding the original wording, and interpreted so that you can use whatever die is applicable to the situation. This would include adding the die of a higher type such as the die a weapon adds if it is higher.

I did look through other threads and it seems like we should still always default to the skill die type first, if possible. So, for example, I am currently playing with Lem and the weapon he has is a heavy crossbow. He gets 1d8 +1 for Dexterity and the weapon adds 1d10. If a blessing is played on him, he must add a second d8 and cannot choose to add a d10 instead. Is this correct? I just want to make sure since our group is currently just adding whatever the highest die is for the check. I'm not the owner of the game and everyone thinks being about to add extras of your best die makes sense. And again, the new wording makes me re-think it. If you should always use your skill die when possible, I'd like to suggest a new rewording for the rule:

"The die or dice added are the same type as the base skill that the character is using for the check; the character must already have an appropriate skill to make the check. If the character is not using a skill for the check, such as a character using certain wands which use a flat set of dice, the die or dice added are of the same type as what is used on the card."

Personally, I find the "defined by the situation" verbiage to be kind of confusing. What is the reason for it being in there? Does my wording work just as well?

But also, this kind of brings up the question, is it really that bad or overpowered to just add dice of the highest value which is already part of the roll? It would definitely simplify the rule and eliminate a lot of confusion, but maybe that's just me.