Being how both gold and PA are a precious commodity, shouldn't you automatically succeed when you spend either after a scenario to cure something? Especially when spending PA.Look at it this way -- vendors can easily guarantee success...they'll just have to charge 3x as much to do so.
Economics aside, though, I think you have a point. Might not PA purchases automatically succeed? I get that gold costs need to scale to remain relevant, but PA matters to everyone. Plus, since PA exists only in PFS, no rules exceptions would be needed.
This is something that Hyrum and Mark will have to change, since as I remember it, Josh had posted multiple times that the rolls could fail and there was the chance you would have to buy the service multiple times before you were cured. Why this never made it into the Guide I am not sure, but I am pretty sure Josh said on the forums that a chance of failure was the official way it worked.
|
Hey, if we're changing things...
I'd like to see something where Wizards get to buy wizard scrolls for half price, as if they were scribing them.
[minor rant]It is frustrating that at least half the time, if not more often, any spellcaster who prepares ahead of time is unable to prep spells for what may be coming. This would be fine, except instead of scribing scrolls of the spells I would rarely memorize before sitting down, I now have to pay for them at full price. IMHO, I believe that this takes away from the "power" of the wizard class. As scribe scroll is built into the core class, and Spell Focus is hardly equivalent. Not only do I have to pay for putting a spell into my spellbook (above and beyond what I get from leveling), but I now also have to pay full price to get a scroll of that same spell. Why would I ever put new spells into my spellbook that weren't given to me from leveling? It would be a waste of money, and instead I would be better off "learning" the most commonly used spells when I level and just buying scrolls of the more uncommon spells. If nothing else, I would be ahead in gold and be able to spend it on other items instead. [/rant]
Just saying.
|
It is frustrating that at least half the time, if not more often, any spellcaster who prepares ahead of time is unable to prep spells for what may be coming.
Ah. But you could just leave the slots open. It is very rare that you couldn't quickly prepare the spells after you have been given your missions.
|
|
It is frustrating that at least half the time, if not more often, any spellcaster who prepares ahead of time is unable to prep spells for what may be coming.Ah. But you could just leave the slots open. It is very rare that you couldn't quickly prepare the spells after you have been given your missions.
Okay, so how much time do I need to fill each slot? And as a GM, wouldn't you get sick of this happening every scenario?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Okay, so how much time do I need to fill each slot? And as a GM, wouldn't you get sick of this happening every scenario?
In character, an hour. It's likely to take more time than that, to find your secret faction leader, arrange a rendezvous, and learn what your secret masters demand from you on this mission.
Around the table, it would take as much time as you normally need to write down the spells that your PC is preparing and hand me a copy. The same as you would when you wake up in the morning during the adventure.
|
|
Okay, so how much time do I need to fill each slot? And as a GM, wouldn't you get sick of this happening every scenario?It is frustrating that at least half the time, if not more often, any spellcaster who prepares ahead of time is unable to prep spells for what may be coming.Ah. But you could just leave the slots open. It is very rare that you couldn't quickly prepare the spells after you have been given your missions.
Page 218 of the Core Rules:
"When preparing spells for the day, a wizard can leavesome of these spell slots open. Later during that day, he
can repeat the preparation process as often as he likes,
time and circumstances permitting. During these extra
sessions of preparation, the wizard can fill these unused
spell slots. He cannot, however, abandon a previously
prepared spell to replace it with another one or fill a slot
that is empty because he has cast a spell in the meantime.
That sort of preparation requires a mind fresh from rest.
Like the first session of the day, this preparation takes at
least 15 minutes, and it takes longer if the wizard prepares
more than one-quarter of his spells."
As a GM this doesn't make me sick, it tells me I have a savvy player at the table.
|
|
Okay, so how much time do I need to fill each slot? And as a GM, wouldn't you get sick of this happening every scenario?It is frustrating that at least half the time, if not more often, any spellcaster who prepares ahead of time is unable to prep spells for what may be coming.Ah. But you could just leave the slots open. It is very rare that you couldn't quickly prepare the spells after you have been given your missions.Page 218 of the Core Rules:
"When preparing spells for the day, a wizard can leave some of these spell slots open. Later during that day, he can repeat the preparation process as often as he likes, time and circumstances permitting. During these extra sessions of preparation, the wizard can fill these unused spell slots. He cannot, however, abandon a previously prepared spell to replace it with another one or fill a slot that is empty because he has cast a spell in the meantime. That sort of preparation requires a mind fresh from rest. Like the first session of the day, this preparation takes at least 15 minutes, and it takes longer if the wizard prepares more than one-quarter of his spells."As a GM this doesn't make me sick, it tells me I have a savvy player at the table.
Is there anything like this for clerics or other divine casters? If so then I really need to know, but I'm not aware of anything.
Okay, so how much time do I need to fill each slot? And as a GM, wouldn't you get sick of this happening every scenario?It is frustrating that at least half the time, if not more often, any spellcaster who prepares ahead of time is unable to prep spells for what may be coming.Ah. But you could just leave the slots open. It is very rare that you couldn't quickly prepare the spells after you have been given your missions.
Well, if you are not on a time-sensitive mission, in other words not kicked out the door and right into things, then there is nothing that says your group cannot say "we take today to check in with our factions and make sure all our gear and spells are properly prepared, and then set out tomorrow on the job."
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
I'd like to see a ruling from the new PFS GM's on what a cavalier can take as a mount.
One of the gms in our group is thinking of starting to run PFS for us, and I started checking what I could play. I got really excited that all the animal companions in the bestiary were allowed for play and that cavaliers could with gm permission take a more exotic mount. I never played Eberron, but I loved the idea of halflings riding dinos, and started fleshing out a halfling cavalier riding a T-rex for my first PFS character, going order of the dragon, but saying his tribe was the order of the tyrannosaurus, etc. I even ordered the Clawfoot Rider mini from DDM.
Now, I see there was a ruling for paladins mounts that they had to be 4 legged and "must be viewed from a commonsense perspective as being suitable as a mount.". What's the point of that, since a druid can take any of the 2 legged animal companions and ride them, Roc, dire bat, T-rex, etc. They all make good mounts and a druid could ride them, why not a paladin or cavalier (or ranger or barb for that matter since some of their archetypes gain mounts too)? It also leaves it open for a triceratops mount, but not a raptor?
There's already dinos in the world, but I'd like a ruling on all character mounts, maybe a list of acceptable mounts instead of a vague answer currently for paladins, "must be viewed from a commonsense perspective as being suitable as a mount." That's WAY open to interpretation to GM's. Even if I end up not being able to play the concept I'd like, I think there's enough out there especially with the new cavalier class that we need a solid ruling on this.
|
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
Venture Captains and GMs can't over rule Paizo's rulings in PFS. That said, here is my opinion.
Common sense mounts seem to be horses, riding dogs, donkeys, camels, elephants and the like. Basically animals that have been domesticated here on earth for riding plus the riding dog.
I know that, that's why I wasn't asking you. Joshua Frost in a thread on mounts said that in a normal game gm's could allow other mounts, and since he was basically the GM for PFS it was really his decision which he made for paladin mounts. So, since he's not here any more I was asking the new "GM's" aka Mark and Hyrum (if I understand what's happening in the PFS).
And those animals are normal for regions such as Varasia and Andoran, but what about the Mwangi Expanse, or Sargava, checking the encounter tables there's a 0% chance to encounter a horse, pony, or wolf yet 1-3% chance of a dino and between 1 and 1-6 for those.
Now, one might argue that mwangi is a long way from absolom, but with as many ruins are in mwangi I know the PFS is interested in exploring them, so why wouldn't they have found possible initiates there and sent them to the Grand Lodge for training if they were interested? And I can bet that they wouldn't be bringing no riding dog or camel with them. MAYBE an elephant, but since they're banned from PFS, that's not going to happen.
|
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
Then the term your looking for is not GM. PFS Organizers maybe, but not GM.
Anyways, encounter tables don't have anything to do with what is allowed as for mounts.
I fail to understand why riding dogs would not be brought to the Mwangi expanse, dogs where brought to Africa and so were horses.
Mounts aren't described in Heart of the Jungle, but I can easily see Chelexians bringing horses in to help them with plantations. (Actually Sargava, The Lost Colony, does mention non-native mounts, I presume they mean horses, ponies and riding dogs)
Here is a quote from Sargava, the lost colony.
"Prince Haliad I visits Eleder to check on colony’s progress; misunderstanding the name the colonists have given to their land, the confused prince dubs the colony “Sargava,” after his favorite horse. When he returns to Cheliax, he leaves several horses behind to encourage the colonists to breed the animals."
So you can find horses there.
Sure, but Halfings have been living there LONG before chelaxians came, so why would they be forced to use the mounts of the colonists when they could have mounts that have been around for centuries before?
And you yourself said it, Non-Native Mounts, so I'm wondering why we can't use Native mounts?
Director of Brand Strategy
|
And you yourself said it, Non-Native Mounts, so I'm wondering why we can't use Native mounts?
On page 33 of the APG, the list of available mounts is clearly listed:
A Medium cavalier can select a camel or a horse. A Small cavalier can select a pony or wolf, but can also select a boar or dog if he is at least 4th level. The GM might approve other animals as suitable mounts.
These are the legal options for a cavalier, which, as a class, does not consider your PC's background. The same way a ranger from a nation that shoots tridents out of their bows can't do that within the rules, even if his backstory says he should be able to, a cavalier who comes from a nation of ostrich riders will have to pick one of the listed animals and come up with a reason why he's different.
If you are set on riding a dinosaur or other non-standard mount, I suggest a druid or ranger, who can take one as an animal companion and train it for riding.
If you are set on riding a dinosaur or other non-standard mount, I suggest a druid or ranger, who can take one as an animal companion and train it for riding.
A ranger can't have a dinosaur animal companion, either.
And you yourself said it, Non-Native Mounts, so I'm wondering why we can't use Native mounts?On page 33 of the APG, the list of available mounts is clearly listed:
A Medium cavalier can select a camel or a horse. A Small cavalier can select a pony or wolf, but can also select a boar or dog if he is at least 4th level. The GM might approve other animals as suitable mounts.These are the legal options for a cavalier, which, as a class, does not consider your PC's background. The same way a ranger from a nation that shoots tridents out of their bows can't do that within the rules, even if his backstory says he should be able to, a cavalier who comes from a nation of ostrich riders will have to pick one of the listed animals and come up with a reason why he's different.
If you are set on riding a dinosaur or other non-standard mount, I suggest a druid or ranger, who can take one as an animal companion and train it for riding.
Mark,
The APG is also setting neutral. When the revised Inner Sea book comes out in February, if it includes Golarion-specific options as mounts for classes, will they at least be considered for inclusion in PFS play?
|
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
I apologize if my posts seemed rude, I was having a bad couple of days.
But you do have to admit that it feels a bit silly that a class that is based around mounts and excels at training them (except of course that PFS took part of that away by switching expert trainer for skill focus) should only have 2 options of mounts to choose from at first level. Especially when you admit that a druid can ride its T-rex companion all he wants... Seems something wiggy there to me.
But alas, if I do end up playing PFS (which right now is looking like a big IF) guess I'll just play a plains druid riding around on his T-Rex at first level and laughing at the cavalier on his pony.
I apologize if my posts seemed rude, I was having a bad couple of days.
But you do have to admit that it feels a bit silly that a class that is based around mounts and excels at training them (except of course that PFS took part of that away by switching expert trainer for skill focus) should only have 2 options of mounts to choose from at first level. Especially when you admit that a druid can ride its T-rex companion all he wants... Seems something wiggy there to me.
But alas, if I do end up playing PFS (which right now is looking like a big IF) guess I'll just play a plains druid riding around on his T-Rex at first level and laughing at the cavalier on his pony.
As as added bonus, your t-rex will have a nice snack when everyone has to leave their mounts behind and enter the dungeon. ;)
|
|
I have a fairly simple question and if it has been addressed already and I missed it somewhere I appologize (I did look). It states in the society play guide that you cannot purchase items valuled above 500gp until you have earned 9 TPA, which increases this to 1,500gp.
However, in an earlier paragraph the guide states, "You may always purchase the following items or equipment so long as you’re in an appropriately-sized settlement (see above).
All basic armor, gear, items, and weapons from Chapter 6 (the equipment chapter) of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook."So, my question is does the gp value limit given in table 11-2 of the guide include basic armor, gear, items, and weapons from Chapter 6 in the Core Rules? Or is it only for magical equipment.
I am thinking that it applies to all items purchases but I am hopeful that maybe I am wrong. I am playing a Cavalier who is 3rd level and I have the gold to buy full plate but I think I am going to have to wait a scenario or three to have the appropriate TPA.
Thank you
The limit in 11-2 are for items beyond the list of always available items (standard gear, special materials (mithril, adamantine, etc.), +1 weapons and armor, 1st level potions/scrolls, etc.). The always available items can be bought anytime you have the gold and are in an appropriately-sized city regardless of your TPA.
|
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
Ok, got a question.
Step 2: Day Job
Not every Pathfinder works for the Society full time.
Some are trained artisans, professionals, or performers
and earn extra gold on the side. If your character has any
ranks in a Craft, Perform, or Profession skill, she may
choose one of those skills and make one roll at the end
of every scenario. This roll represents days or weeks of
work done between scenarios. You may only include the
following modifiers: Skill Ranks + Ability Score modifier
+ any applicable feat or trait bonuses. After rolling, consult
the table above and add this amount of gold to your total
earned for the scenario. You may not roll for a skill in
which you have purchased no ranks. You may legally
exceed the maximum gold amount for the scenario as a
result of this roll.
In addition, each class has a
number of favored skills, called class skills. It is easier for
your character to become more prof icient in these skills, as
they represent part of his professional training and constant
practice. You gain a +3 bonus on all class skills that you put
ranks into. If you have more than one class and both grant
you a class skill bonus, these bonuses do not stack.
My question: Do you include your class skill training bonus to your profession/craft/perform check? Its not skill ranks or ability score modifier, nor is it from a feat or trait. And since we have to go by-the-book and it the Guide specifies what modifiers you can use for these checks but doesn't say training bonus I had to ask...
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
That is probably just language left over from 3.5, when there was no training bonus. You should be using your full bonus for the skill.
Yea
I think the language is trying to prohibit things like Heart of the Field ( 1/day bonus to a skill) from working. Despite the fact Heart of the Field is already banned in the Additional Resources, my point stands because there may be similar non-banned abilities.
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
That is probably just language left over from 3.5, when there was no training bonus. You should be using your full bonus for the skill.Neil, may I ask where you're getting that? At my table, it's skill ranks, not skill bonus, as per the rules.
Treat the +3 bonus for trained class skills as ranks. The whole day job mechanic will be simplified when we rework the Guide and get the FAQs up and running.
|
|
Treat the +3 bonus for trained class skills as ranks. The whole day job mechanic will be simplified when we rework the Guide and get the FAQs up and running.
Please be sure to identify if a player can use a masterwork tool to aid his Day Job roll, if there are significant changes made to the current rule. Thanks!
|
|
Treat the +3 bonus for trained class skills as ranks. The whole day job mechanic will be simplified when we rework the Guide and get the FAQs up and running.That is probably just language left over from 3.5, when there was no training bonus. You should be using your full bonus for the skill.Neil, may I ask where you're getting that? At my table, it's skill ranks, not skill bonus, as per the rules.
Phew, thanks Mark.
I guess that I just assumed that the training bonus would apply as it is the spiritual successor to the x4 skill ranks at 1st level in 3.5
|
|
Can a level 1 chaotic good Barbarian, upon leveling up to level 2 , choose to change his alignment and then choose to multiclass as a monk?
Unless Mark chimes in otherwise and changes the ruling, you can. It was addressed by Josh in this thread.
He also addresses the possible problems with such a build, which are pretty serious.
Can a level 1 chaotic good Barbarian, upon leveling up to level 2 , choose to change his alignment and then choose to multiclass as a monk?Alignment is chosen at level 1 and cannot be changed (as far as my understanding goes.)
Alignment generally only changes if your character does something major, or several somethings, that is contrary to his current alignment which can force a shift. And even then, it is normally only a single step, such as going from Chaotic to Neutral. With PFS play, since there is not enough time to properly role-play all that out and because there is no tracking of the passage of time between scenarios, I think if you wrote up an appropriate addition to the character's background/history that explains why his alignment shifted so drastically from Chaotic Good to Lawful "whatever", then it would be allowed.
|
|
Can a level 1 chaotic good Barbarian, upon leveling up to level 2 , choose to change his alignment and then choose to multiclass as a monk?
Also don't forget that per the newly revised barbarian errata, they lose their class abilities upon becoming lawful (in the case of turning Monk).
(Fixed it)
Edit: The specific reference is...
A barbarian who becomes lawful loses the ability to rage and cannot gain more levels as a barbarian. She retains all other benefits of the class.
Also don't forget that per the newly revised barbarian errata, they lose their class abilities upon becoming non-chaotic.
Whoa, whoa, whoa -- barbarians have to be CHAOTIC, not just non-lawful? Who's the bozo who changed that rule?
|
|
Also don't forget that per the newly revised barbarian errata, they lose their class abilities upon becoming non-chaotic.Whoa, whoa, whoa -- barbarians have to be CHAOTIC, not just non-lawful? Who's the bozo who changed that rule?
My oops, I meant to say "becoming lawful". I fixed my post. Ignore hogarth. ;-)
Venture-Agent, United Kingdom—England—Sheffield
|
Could I request a general clarification on Traits?
What counts as a separate category for the purposes of organised play? Specifically, are equipment traits considered a subcategory of basic trait (and therefore not legal alongside another basic [e.g. Combat, Social] trait)?
|
Could I request a general clarification on Traits?
What counts as a separate category for the purposes of organised play? Specifically, are equipment traits considered a subcategory of basic trait (and therefore not legal alongside another basic [e.g. Combat, Social] trait)?
There are currently 9 categories:
Basic (Combat)
Basic (Faith)
Basic (Magic)
Basic (Social)
Equipment
Faction
Race
Regional
Religion
You cannot have two traits from the same category, but multiple basic traits from different subcategories is possible!
|
|
There are four in the original free web download plus the Faction one. This is where the number five originates from.
Since then more traits have emerged. So the number five is outdated. All of the other ones are in additional books (Companions or Cronicles - not sure if they are also in the APG).
The additinal ones are valid (with a few exemptions that should be at the end of the rules) - but you would need the book where they are described to use them.
Thod
edit: did the post just disappear to which I wrote the answer?
|
Can a Player who played a scenario but did not receive player credit due to a character death play that scenario again to get the player credit?They should have received a chronicle stating the character had died. Thus not allowing them to play the scenario again for credit.
Yes but they never received their 1 Player credit, So they should be able to still play it for credit. IMO
|
|
Yes but they never received their 1 Player credit, So they should be able to still play it for credit. IMOCan a Player who played a scenario but did not receive player credit due to a character death play that scenario again to get the player credit?They should have received a chronicle stating the character had died. Thus not allowing them to play the scenario again for credit.
But by receiving the chronicle, it signifies that you have "played" the scenario, and thus cannot replay it for credit. Receiving the chronicle is the same as receiving 1 Player credit. It should be reported as "Played" by that character. They just don't get to play on with that character because the character died.
It's the same as if you played a scenario, but didn't finish the required 3 encounters for the experience. You still get the chronicle, you don't get experience, but you do received 1 Player credit and it gets reported as such. You would also most likely receive less gold than the max, and probably 0 PA, though this can be different depending on what you actually did accomplish in the scenario.
|
|
Yes but they never received their 1 Player credit, So they should be able to still play it for credit. IMOCan a Player who played a scenario but did not receive player credit due to a character death play that scenario again to get the player credit?They should have received a chronicle stating the character had died. Thus not allowing them to play the scenario again for credit.But by receiving the chronicle, it signifies that you have "played" the scenario, and thus cannot replay it for credit. Receiving the chronicle is the same as receiving 1 Player credit. It should be reported as "Played" by that character. They just don't get to play on with that character because the character died.
It's the same as if you played a scenario, but didn't finish the required 3 encounters for the experience. You still get the chronicle, you don't get experience, but you do received 1 Player credit and it gets reported as such. You would also most likely receive less gold than the max, and probably 0 PA, though this can be different depending on what you actually did accomplish in the scenario.
Further question.
If one plays a pregen (intending to use it as the start of a new character) in a scenario, and the pregen dies. Player receives no chronicle. Can the player replay this scenario for credit? Or should the GM have issued a chronicle for an as-yet-unmade character, indicating that if that character ever exists, he already died?
Yes this happened to me. Recently.
And yes, I can see myself spending a few hours working on creating the dead character, including giving him a tragic backstory about how he had worked his entire childhood as a slave in the mines, escaped, trained himself as a rogue on the streets of Absalom so that one day he could join the Society. Once joined, he embarked on his very first mission, only to be eaten by a giant assassin vine and never seen again. Never mourned. Never remembered.
Sad.
|
|
Once joined, he embarked on his very first mission, only to be eaten by a giant assassin vine and never seen...
My own interpretation would be just apply the 'credit' logic, the death is semi-irrelevant (with respect to replay).
If the dead character played 1-2 acts and died, then yes replay for credit with another character is possible.
If the dead character played 3+ acts and died, then no replay for credit with another character is not possible.
|
|
Once joined, he embarked on his very first mission, only to be eaten by a giant assassin vine and never seen...My own interpretation would be just apply the 'credit' logic, the death is semi-irrelevant (with respect to replay).
If the dead character played 1-2 acts and died, then yes replay for credit with another character is possible.
If the dead character played 3+ acts and died, then no replay for credit with another character is not possible.
Why the last part though?.. That makes little sense to me.
The way I see it with the new rule you can get 1 player credit and 1 GM credit, since he never got any credit for this scenario because he died, no matter when he died, he should still be able to play it for credit still to get his 1 player credit.
|
|
Why the last part though?.. That makes little sense to me.
The way I see it with the new rule you can get 1 player credit and 1 GM credit, since he never got any credit for this scenario because he died, no matter when he died, he should still be able to play it for credit still to get his 1 player credit.
It's the 'spirit' of the credit line. The player who died in act 1 or 2 still has some mystery left in the game. The player who died at the feet of the BBG doesn't.
Again, just my opinion. Never run into this situation before. I have been wrong before and reserve the right to be wrong again in the future.
|
|
I would like a confirmation on something by one of the powers that be.
I was coordinating an event this weekend and my fellow GM had a player who needed to leave early. At what point does a player receive a chronicle? I made the call that since this player had not played through three encounters, he would not receive anything. Was I wrong? What is the "cutoff" for giving somebody credit if they have to leave early?