|
As far as I know a monk isn't proficient with a temple sword by default, so the trait won't give temple sword proficiency either.
Sure they are - as per APG.
Temple Sword: Heavy blades typically used by guardians
of religious sites, temple swords have distinctive crescentshaped
blades, appearing as an amalgam of a sickle and
sword. Many have holes drilled into the blade or places on the
pommel where charms, bells, or other holy trinkets might be
attached. Monks are proficient with the temple sword.
The APG basically made monks proficient with every weapon with the "monk" descriptor.
[EDIT - except the Bich'hwa and Hanbo]
|
Seriously?
I only bought Seekers of Secrets because it was part of the core assumption and haven't used that (apart from putting one piece of gear on my PC's character sheet that he has never used) and now I have to buy and read another book?
I held said Seekers of Secrets in my hands and ultimately decided not to buy it. This was about 2 weeks ago.
Personally that sort of core assumption change is the one I despise. Really doesn't encourage to be a loyal customer if you are "forced" into buying new books constantly as older books go 'out of phase'.
|
|
Personally that sort of core assumption change is the one I despise. Really doesn't encourage to be a loyal customer if you are "forced" into buying new books constantly as older books go 'out of phase'.
+1
Stopped playing LFR/4th ed for basically these reasons, although WOTC was much more extreme then Paizo. I would prefer more new content, rather then having to repurchase old content (ISWG, PFG).
Personally that sort of core assumption change is the one I despise. Really doesn't encourage to be a loyal customer if you are "forced" into buying new books constantly as older books go 'out of phase'.
I have to admit that I wasn't impressed when my "all Core" character suddenly lost that status and now I have to lug another book around with me.
Personally that sort of core assumption change is the one I despise. Really doesn't encourage to be a loyal customer if you are "forced" into buying new books constantly as older books go 'out of phase'.I have to admit that I wasn't impressed when my "all Core" character suddenly lost that status and now I have to lug another book around with me.
Since Seekers of Secrets is not even listed in Additional Resources, doesn't this make every piece of gear in it unusable?
Can't. I'm a DRUID.
Honeslty just say you are CG, which is one step. If you are a die hard devotee of Gorum and not just someone who prays to him before battle but someone who really lives his life by Gorum's teaching. well then you most likely were not every really NG anyhow.
Well to be blunt then it was a poor choice of a god. You chose one that was at odds with your very nature.
Personally that sort of core assumption change is the one I despise. Really doesn't encourage to be a loyal customer if you are "forced" into buying new books constantly as older books go 'out of phase'.I have to admit that I wasn't impressed when my "all Core" character suddenly lost that status and now I have to lug another book around with me.Since Seekers of Secrets is not even listed in Additional Resources, doesn't this make every piece of gear in it unusable?
Seekers of Secrets is in the additional resources list I downloaded last night on p. 3:
Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Seekers of Secrets Everything in this book is legal for play with the following notes. Equipment:
ioun stones use method 1 for resonance and never use method 2. Additionally,
only normal ioun stones have resonance—inferior ioun stones never do. Prestige
Class: Pathfinder Savants replace the item creation feat prerequisite with Spell
Focus
Thanks. Couldn't find it on the web page. (Firefox Find didn't find the word Seeker anywhere on the page. Still doesn't. Weird.)
Yes,but if she is so far removed from his core values ( and NG clearly is) she simply gives him lip service and is not a true devote of the god. She gives him the same worship as every other warrior, a fast prayer for victory and such. She clearly does not live and breath his teachings or she could not be so far removed from them.
No, it's really not. The god was, in fact, a choice I made because it specifically fit the flavor of my character. My character is a half-orc, druid/fighter. Most half-orcs, especially half-orc fighters, do worship Gorum. This is mentioned over and over in the orc book and all of the descriptions of Gorum in every gods/inner sea book where he's listed. My character is all about smashing things with her Earthbreaker and smashing things with her dinosaur animal companion. So worshipping the half-orc god of battle isn't really a "poor character choice".
She does, however, have a sense of honor and will attempt to "smash things" for the purpose of helping people and not necessarily require payment which says "good aligned" to me.
I'm not sure what the problem is. Instead of saying she's a "worshipper" of Gorum, you can say she's a "follower" of Gorum (or some other synonym of your choice). There's no in-game effect of it, is there? Unless you have a trait that says "you must be a worshipper of Gorum", I suppose.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Personally that sort of core assumption change is the one I despise. Really doesn't encourage to be a loyal customer if you are "forced" into buying new books constantly as older books go 'out of phase'.I have to admit that I wasn't impressed when my "all Core" character suddenly lost that status and now I have to lug another book around with me.
This didn't thrill me either. On the brighter side, the Field Guide is more useful for actually playing PFS. Seeker of Secrets never really feel like a organized play resource to me.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
The Silver Crusade Trait: A Sure Thing states it grants a +2 on an attack vs evil aligned creatures.
Is that a +2 on the attack roll, the damage roll or both?
This trait gives a +2 on an attack roll. This clarification is being added to v4.01 of the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play.
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
I am glad they have made the Tier rules clearer. My GM can no longer ban playing down to make a table.
However, it seems that they removed the one sub-tier up or down limit. This is understandable with the new lvls for tiers, but we are still playing older scenarios in which there are three sub-tiers per tier. This means that a lvl 1 player can play in the sub-tier 6-7 of a tier 1-7 scenario as long as the APL is correct.
This clarification has been added to version 4.01 of the Guide, which is currently in the editing queue.
|
|
Paladins are lawful good. They can still be Hellknights, because not all Hellknights worship Asmodeus. In fact, I'd say most Hellknights do NOT worship Asmodeus. Paladin Hellknights would generally probably worship Iomedae, Torag, or Abadar, I would venture.
Also it seems plausible that they could be part of the Godclaw order and work things out that way. I'm not entirely sure what those implications are entirely yet but I'm exploring them as I go with my low level drill sergeant (err I mean Fighter/Paladin) soon to be Hellknight.
Though it is nice to see someone from paizo state that most hell knights do not worship Asmodeus.
|
I noticed someone else posed the question, but I didn't see a response from anyone. Has the Ranger Hit Die been changed to d8 in PFS or is this a typo? I have players rolling up new characters for this weekend and they're bugging me to find out whats up.
Just a typo that will be fixed in the next update.
Venture-Agent, Utah
|
this wording change is even more ambiguous now
Average Party Level
In order to determine which subtier a mixed-level group
of PCs should play in, you must determine the group’s
average party level (APL). You should always round
this number down. In addition, because encounters
are designed with four players in mind, if there are
six or more players at the table, add +1 to the APL. For
example, if a table consists of six players, two of whom
have 4th-level characters and four of whom have 5th-level
characters, the group’s APL is 6th (divide 28 total levels by
six players, round up, and add +1 to the final result).
Did this ever get addressed in another thread. Am I correct in assuming the always round down is correct and the example just failed to get updated?
Funny, this exact same error is in version 3 of the Guide also. But anyway, Mark has noted it and it is supposed to be on the list of things fixed when the update to version 4 comes out eventually.