Pathfinder society


Rise of the Runelords


What is the purpose of the pathfinder society information? Are the players supposed to start as members or is this something that comes out later in the campaign?

Is the existence of this society common knowledge, or is it a well kept secret?

Liberty's Edge

Brian Van Wyk wrote:

What is the purpose of the pathfinder society information? Are the players supposed to start as members or is this something that comes out later in the campaign?

Is the existence of this society common knowledge, or is it a well kept secret?

I thought it was pretty well explained that the Pathfinder Chronicles published by the Pathfinder Society is often the catalyst for youngsters going off on adventures.

I don't think its necessary that anyone be affliated with them, but I think they're supposed to feel the role of the "Seekers" without being quite so plundering.


Keno wrote:
Brian Van Wyk wrote:

What is the purpose of the pathfinder society information? Are the players supposed to start as members or is this something that comes out later in the campaign?

Is the existence of this society common knowledge, or is it a well kept secret?

I thought it was pretty well explained that the Pathfinder Chronicles published by the Pathfinder Society is often the catalyst for youngsters going off on adventures.

I don't think its necessary that anyone be affliated with them, but I think they're supposed to feel the role of the "Seekers" without being quite so plundering.

I'll probably build a formal affiliation (a la PHB2) for the Pathfinder Society (didn't notice one in the PDF, but might have overlooked it.) I like the idea of using affiliations as vehicles for entry into PrCs (that is, a pc needs to have X amount of rank with Y affiliation, and then "unlocks" a PrC or two.)

I'm planning on sticking pretty close to Core/SRD for available prestige classes in my game, so I'll probably tie entry into the Loremaster, Horizon Walker and possibly Elocater to a homebrew'd Pathfinder Society affiliation.

edit: spilling and grammer (j/k)

Liberty's Edge

Affliations aren't OGL, so you won't see an Affliation for the Pathfinders like the Affliations that were in STAP.

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

Which is fine, because the official affiliation rules are fairly rotten.

--Erik


I don't disagree about the affiliation rules, though there may be some good bones to work with there. There have been several attempts by various publishers to create good system for this type of group/affiliation. Maybe Paizo could take a stab at it under the OGL.

A functional set of rules would be welcome, and an addition to the setting.

Liberty's Edge

Anced_Math wrote:

Maybe Paizo could take a stab at it under the OGL.

A functional set of rules would be welcome, and an addition to the setting.

Agreed.

Scarab Sages

Keno wrote:
Anced_Math wrote:

Maybe Paizo could take a stab at it under the OGL.

A functional set of rules would be welcome, and an addition to the setting.

Agreed.

Thirded.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Keno wrote:
Anced_Math wrote:

Maybe Paizo could take a stab at it under the OGL.

A functional set of rules would be welcome, and an addition to the setting.

Agreed.

Hey, how about this: Add. Hawk.

The rules are only necessary, really, for something like Living Greyhawk.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
Anced_Math wrote:

I don't disagree about the affiliation rules, though there may be some good bones to work with there. There have been several attempts by various publishers to create good system for this type of group/affiliation. Maybe Paizo could take a stab at it under the OGL.

A functional set of rules would be welcome, and an addition to the setting.

My group would love a Paizo version!

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

We'll get around to this eventually, but perhaps not until we've had a peek at 4th edition.

What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?

--Erik


Erik Mona wrote:


What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?

--Erik

I guess I'd like to see affiliation work kind of like the Dragonmarked houses from Eberron and the use of Favored in House feat. You spend a feat to gain the benefits of your affiliated organization and you can make a level check to get access to certain amounts of "stuff" depending on what the flavor of the affiliation is.

Perhaps a whole chain of "affiliation feats" would be kind of cool, each gaining you access to niftier stuff. (is niftier even a word???)

Dark Archive Contributor

ShadowPavement wrote:
(is niftier even a word???)

It's certainly more of a word than "funner."


I haven't looked at the PHB2 affiliation rules for a while, but as far as I can remember, some affiliations offered pretty good stuff to PCs, others were boring even right up to the higher levels. I'd like affiliations that offer some cool benefits to PCs (access to PrCs would be a great one) and make it a challenge, but not impossible, to climb the ranks throughout their careers.

Some of the affiliations were also pretty hard to work into the average adventure (one was a certain city, one was a tribe, one was an island), so I'd like ones that let adventurers do what they do, but maybe give them extra goals, some new adventure hooks, and maybe even a bit of a loose code of conduct.

For example, an affiliation dedicated to finding ancient treasures might offer the PCs special training or items focused on identifying and preserving ancient objects. They'd also give adventure hooks by telling the PCs about a few objects they're looking for, and presenting some adventuring sites. Then, even when the PCs are raiding an unrelated dungeon, a PC affiliated with this group might be able to identify an old language or runes, the value of objects in the crypt, a bit about their history, and even just how old they are. He would be able to make a kinda Knowledge check to find out some of this stuff and to see if he thinks the affiliation would be interested in this stuff, and then decide whether to take it back to them.

Anyway, most of this was just thinking while typing, but the general idea is an affiliation that grants useful and tangible powers (that are useful outside of the goals of the affiliation), has a real presence in the world, provides adventures for the PCs, new goals in other unrelated adventures, and unique opportunities and abilities such as prestige classes.

That's a bit of an idea of what I'd be looking for. I'll have to read through the affiliations in the PHB2 and think about it some more.

Scarab Sages

Erik Mona wrote:
What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?

I really like how tangible, specific character traits have defined mechanical value that is particular to an individual organization, and how the character's total score with the organization entitles them to a specific level or type of benefit. I also like that the types of benefits have a good variety, and are not just "you get free [x] every [however often]."

While I wouldn't want mechanics that are too narrowly or rigidly defined, this level of detail would allow me to just plop an affiliation into the game and get going without having to spend a lot of time on working out exactly what a character's relationship is with an organization, and what that means in the game. I just don't have nearly as much time as I'd like to play, much less to do the work of building out something like this on my own.

I've only read through the affiliation stuff in the PHB2, and haven't had a chance to run any of it in-game. I don't know how well it actually works at the table, but it's one of the things in the PHB2 that really stood out to me as something I want to work in ... sometime.

Edit: I think the reason I like the idea of affiliations so much is that it makes tying the characters to the background of the setting more accessible, so they're less likely to end up becoming eternal passersby who bash in monsters' heads and wander away with the gold.

( not that some people aren't perfectly capable of plotting out that kind of thing already )

( i'm just not one of them )

Scarab Sages

Erik Mona wrote:
Which is fine, because the official affiliation rules are fairly rotten.

How do you mean?


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Erik Mona wrote:

We'll get around to this eventually, but perhaps not until we've had a peek at 4th edition.

What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?

--Erik

Ease of use. Simplicity. I think the rules published by those other guys are unneccessarily complicated. Also: coherence, internal consistency, tangible "crunch" type benefits (even minor ones would suffice) and RP benefits. Minor drawbacks--such as occasional obligations--might be interesting as well. But with the current format whenever I start to check out various affiliations my eyes always start to glaze over and I end up just turning the page.


Don't know if this comment is off topic or on topic, but I really liked Mona's write up about the Pathfinders and swiped several of his throwaway ideas for use in my homebrew.

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

Jebadiah Utecht wrote:
Don't know if this comment is off topic or on topic, but I really liked Mona's write up about the Pathfinders and swiped several of his throwaway ideas for use in my homebrew.

Woo hoo! That makes me feel good because I know you have very high standards. Thanks!

--Erik


ShadowPavement wrote:
Perhaps a whole chain of "affiliation feats" would be kind of cool, each gaining you access to niftier stuff. (is niftier even a word???)

The only thing about using feats to gain afflilation benefits is that a lot of players will not take them. Affiliations should offer some basic abilities plus some specialized training that can be designed as feats.

I keep thinking about the guild system in the Elder Scrolls (computer game) series. You gained "faction" with certain groups, had access to different resources, and could recieve missions from them. The more missions you did for a guild, the better your reputation with them. At the same time, being a member of a set guild might anger a different guild.

A simple way to set some of this up is with a Diplomacy penalty or bonus with major NPCs of other affiliations.

Lets do a generic large theives guild as an example. Affiliation grants a +2 bonus to Diplomacy with guild allies and a -2 penalty with the City Watch (possibly more with some city officials). Membership gain the player access to the black market for fencing goods at a higher price, and gaining access to restricted goods (poisons and such). The Player can try to call on a favor from of other guild members (requiring a special Diplomacy check).


The Lovely and Talented Erik Mona wrote:
What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?

Am I the only one that has no interest in set rules for these things? All of these seem like situations which would be much better just role-played out then conformed to a series of tables.


Keno wrote:
Affliations aren't OGL, so you won't see an Affliation for the Pathfinders like the Affliations that were in STAP.

There are OGL d20 Allegiance rules in the MSRD. They allow for things like Smite Pathfinder instead of Smite Evil. :)

The Exchange

I wouldn't necessarily say set rules, but there should be some set standard maybe. The Harpers from FR was pretty wide open and left pretty much to role play, but there was no way to advance that I recall.


An Afiliation can help keep the party balanced if it gives the players an easy way to trade equipment found as treasure for the stuff they really want. It can be a drag if some folks in the party have wonky specializations and can't use most of the treaure they find - they get dinged 50% for selling it and buying something else. If there's a few players that have a more "normal" build and can use anything that falls into their hands, they start to "ramp up" quicker than the specialists. You can try to equalize things out with the gold split, but you don't always get enough gold at the right time.

Liberty's Edge

I'd like a bit of a mix-in of recognition points ala Heroes of Battle, where depending on what affiliation you're in you earn recognition points (a thieves' guild might like the theft of a valuable magic item, a military would like you to control a certain stronghold etc) and you can trade these Reputation points in for promotions, or favors from the organization, etc.


Dances With Worgs wrote:
The Lovely and Talented Erik Mona wrote:
What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?
Am I the only one that has no interest in set rules for these things? All of these seem like situations which would be much better just role-played out then conformed to a series of tables.

No. You're not the only one.

Scarab Sages

Erik Mona wrote:

We'll get around to this eventually, but perhaps not until we've had a peek at 4th edition.

What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?

--Erik

I would like to see affiliations engulf things like 'Contacts' and the use of 'favors' from those contacts. In addition, perhaps connecting affiliations with the leadership feat in some way as well.

There is a certain niche in D&D that could use filling with some crunchy bits. That niche being the social network that people find themselves in. While Diplomacy checks handle influencing people one-on-one, some sort of mechanic to account for the individual influencing society as a whole and for society to provide benefits to the individual (the player) would be welcome mechanic IMHO.


Erik Mona wrote:
What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?

I'm involved in a shared campaign where we use the Guildcraft rules from Bastion Press. They work well.

Dark Archive

Erik Mona wrote:

We'll get around to this eventually, but perhaps not until we've had a peek at 4th edition.

What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?

--Erik

I would not expect crunch, no point system. What I'd rather see is fluff. What's the motives of said organization, how does one become a member usually. How does contacting agents work. Where do they have contacts, what kind of missions does one send their members on. What can one learn and have access too. Spells, magical items, what does one contribute to said organization, does the character pay a monthly fee, does one hand over magical items. How does one advance. Who are noteworthy persons.

For example a mage guild. This mage guild, let us call it, the Fire Lances, are an evocation guild. All members start as novice, entrance is done by paying the tuition? fee and showing arcane capability. Once into the guild a novice has access to all first & second level mage spells. By gaining level 5 a mage can take the mage exam in which he presses his will on a summoned a fire salamander and extracting it's legiance. From then on he has access to the full guild spells and receive a certificate. This certificate is highly respected in Varisia and a lot of cities want these fire mages for their military. The leader of the guild is an Arch Mage selected by a council of 5 evokers. These council members each take one apprentice under it's wing etc.

I hope you catch my drift, this would be something I'd like to see in Runelords, noteworthy organizations, magician schools, thieves guilds, etc.


After thinking about my original post some, I am moving toward less crunch and more fluff. As a DM, I can handle NPC reactions and such.

Instead, I would rather affiliation write-ups be rules light. Provide info on how to join, any potential allies/enemies, what is expect of a member, and basic benefits of membership (access to the black market, chapter house with free room and board, special tools or training offered, etc.).


Erik Mona wrote:
Jebadiah Utecht wrote:
Don't know if this comment is off topic or on topic, but I really liked Mona's write up about the Pathfinders and swiped several of his throwaway ideas for use in my homebrew.

Woo hoo! That makes me feel good because I know you have very high standards. Thanks!

--Erik

I've always had a soft spot for you, Erik. Seriously, it was good stuff. Loved the Field of Maidens.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Erik Mona wrote:

We'll get around to this eventually, but perhaps not until we've had a peek at 4th edition.

What would people be looking for in a robust set of affiliation rules?

--Erik

A simple sort of "just how much can you ask of these people" system would be good. It occurs to me the D20 Modern Wealth system format would work pretty well in this regard.. you increase your "Affiliate score" through actions, use it for minor things, and lose it for major expenditures.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Rise of the Runelords / Pathfinder society All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rise of the Runelords