Can we use non-core spells in the construction of an item?
I found a spell that fits my item on the Pathfinder SRD website, but it says that the spell is published by Paizo but not part of the Pathfinder Core Rules.
Can we use non-core spells in the construction of an item?
I found a spell that fits my item on the Pathfinder SRD website, but it says that the spell is published by Paizo but not part of the Pathfinder Core Rules.
If it's published by Paizo it is fair game. OGL stuff might possibly, but I would avoid it. Anything from Spell Compendium is going to be off limits for sure.
This line in the official Round 1 Rules is pretty direct though.
[quote=] DISQUALIFICATION: Submissions may be disqualified for the following reasons:
* Submission is not a wondrous item.
* Submission exceeds 300 words.
* Submission does not conform to the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.
* Submission is copied from a previously published source.
* Submission uses rules, monsters, or copyrighted material from publishers other than Paizo.
* Submission is not anonymous.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
Like Scipion said, Paizo material is ok: http://paizo.com/rpgsuperstar/round1Rules#v5748eaic9nhd
But keep in mind if it isn't core, it may be more unfamiliar to some of the judges. Also it's more likely to have been written by one of the judges. And that judge may have specific ideas in mind about how he thinks it works or what type of items are inappropriate for that spell. So just read the context of the spell as well if you can.
I'd personally avoid any OGL stuff that isn't in the PFSRD, and I'd double-check the Pathfinder rules on anything I used just to make sure it didn't change.
Thanks ya'll.
If it is published by Paizo, it is allowed. Content from other publishers is not allowed.
with all your concerns (this thread, as well as weakening your item and running over the word count), it sounds like you've got an extremely complex item going there.
If you take a look back over previous winners, you'll notice one thing is consistant between them. They're all graceful. Their execution isn't full of ifs ands, buts, and outside references. If your item is raising so many concerns about edge cases of the rules of the competition, you need to take a look at simplifying it down.
Try seeing if just the one most core power the item does is cool, and work your way up from there. If you need four, five, or more powers to be 'cool', then your item might be an SAK, which is something we were warned about a long time ago against avoiding.
with all your concerns (this thread, as well as weakening your item and running over the word count), it sounds like you've got an extremely complex item going there.
You may be correct. I may need to tone it down a bit. I just thought it was such a cool idea that I have to do it.
The more I think about it though, it was the first idea to pop into my head so it's probably a common idea. The judges will probably be like "Geez, not another one of these!"
I had(ve?) an item with really cool powers and visuals and every time I thought about it I kept finding more cool stuff to add to it. I eventually put it down as too unwieldy (& SAK :(. Now I am thinking if I left the third-added ability be its only ability it might... just... work...
KISSD :)
Good catch Ronars :)