Being the only character who can use a wand of CLW...


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West aka JohnF

Tagion wrote:
These responces are all fine but I have another perspective for you. You dont heal me , I dont try to stop those big bad monster from tearing your head off , and when they do I have a nice new wand to use.

No you don't. You can't take items from other party members.


Tagion wrote:
These responces are all fine but I have another perspective for you. You dont heal me , I dont try to stop those big bad monster from tearing your head off , and when they do I have a nice new wand to use.

Wow. So because a Druid is a caster, they must be all meek and defenseless and need a big bad Fighter to stand in front of them to take the hits, huh? Aside from the fact that in PFS, you don't get to loot the equipment off of dead teammates, I still had the highest AC at 20. I didn't need to use the wand on myself except maybe once or twice. So really, it's more likely for me to say, if you don't want to die, at which point I will return to the Pathfinder Lodge and try to find a more competent group of adventurers to team up with, you had better bring your own healing.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tagion wrote:
These responces are all fine but I have another perspective for you. You dont heal me , I dont try to stop those big bad monster from tearing your head off , and when they do I have a nice new wand to use.

This would be a valid argument... if you had to pay 15gp each time you swung your sword.

Grand Lodge 4/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Tagion wrote:
These responces are all fine but I have another perspective for you. You dont heal me , I dont try to stop those big bad monster from tearing your head off , and when they do I have a nice new wand to use.

Oh, I'll heal you. I have channels and spells I can use for that if it comes down to it. Like I said earlier, the cleric will keep you from dying -- but if you're not willing to invest a few gold or PA in your own health and safety, I don't see why I should do so.

Torag helps those that help themselves, after all! :)

(Also, my cleric is primarily a tank with healing on the side so I'm not really worried about you taking those hits for me, but that doesn't apply to everyone.)

I should note that this is an organized play specific attitude, as in a home game we could all just chip in on a wand and hand it to whoever is best suited to using it. Since you can't chip in on the wand in PFS, then the only way to share the cost burden is for you to provide your own. Add that to the fact that I may only play with your character once a year at a convention, and you'll see where the inequalities lie.

It's really an issue of being respectful of your fellow players and not using up their limited resources for your own benefit.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
Tagion wrote:
These responces are all fine but I have another perspective for you. You dont heal me , I dont try to stop those big bad monster from tearing your head off , and when they do I have a nice new wand to use.
This would be a valid argument... if you had to pay 15gp each time you swung your sword.

Or if anyone else was responsible for your healing other than you.

Even if you are too injured to fight (and refuse to contribute to your own healing), you're still expected to contribute in some way. Pull out a bow, toss some alchemist fires, whatever...

-Pain


Maggiethecat wrote:
Tagion wrote:
These responces are all fine but I have another perspective for you. You dont heal me , I dont try to stop those big bad monster from tearing your head off , and when they do I have a nice new wand to use.
Wow. So because a Druid is a caster, they must be all meek and defenseless and need a big bad Fighter to stand in front of them to take the hits, huh? Aside from the fact that in PFS, you don't get to loot the equipment off of dead teammates, I still had the highest AC at 20. I didn't need to use the wand on myself except maybe once or twice. So really, it's more likely for me to say, if you don't want to die, at which point I will return to the Pathfinder Lodge and try to find a more competent group of adventurers to team up with, you had better bring your own healing.

glad you had the highest ac. If I am taking most of the hit for the party ( lets say 75% of the attacks through my placement on the battlefield or feats like antaganize), I dont think its unreasonable to expect some healingfor the service im providing.

Edit - I think im mostly a little ticked because the cleric in my last party refused to channel or use prepared curing. All he would use on me was my wand.... I let him die 3 encounters in. If hes not helping me , im not helping him.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Painlord wrote:
Even if you are too injured to fight (and refuse to contribute to your own healing), you're still expected to contribute in some way. Pull out a bow, toss some alchemist fires, whatever...

...Run into the middle of the bad guys and throw your entire necklace of fireballs straight down...

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Maggiethecat wrote:
In a game I played in recently, we had a very small group. Only 4 people including the GM, so the GM was running an NPC. It was a 1-2 game and I was playing a level 2 Druid. The other players were a level 2 Magus and a level 2 Ninja, and the GM played the [/b]NPC level 1 Fighter.[/b]

As a GM I always use Kyra as the NPC. She is a solid support character and in small parties healing can be very important and there is often a shortage of it. Putting a support character in as the NPC allows the players to be the focus of the adventure. Valeros is likely my last choice for GM NPC (and in fact NPCs in general) because his TWF is a bit more complicated to run.

2/5

Jonathan Cary wrote:
It's really an issue of being respectful of your fellow players and not using up their limited resources for your own benefit.

Big Plus One.


Okay, I can see how a small party, some bad saves and a lack of coordination could cause some problems. That just sounded like a lot of healing at such a low level!

I would definitely promote using Kyra as a pregen as well.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

Yeah, I usually seem to use Kyra as the 4th, though depending on the composition of the party, Ezran and Mersiel are pretty good too. I don't know that I've ever even ran Valeros, most would prefer Kyra or Mersiel for back-up.

Shadow Lodge

I can sort of see where Tagion is coming from, where his character is up front taking the majority of the damage. He can't be expected to pay for all his healing when he did so to prevent someone else from taking all that damage.

Of course, something like: everyone has a wand, divide the total number of charges used equally among all wands, would work pretty well.

Everyone would still need to have a wand to contribute, though.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

Kyra is my default as a fourth-filler as well.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West aka JohnF

The healer *will* contribute to healing you. They'll sometimes decide to cast a healing spell during combat rather than buffing the party, attacking one of the opponents, or any number of useful things they'd rather be doing. They'll let you get cures at 15gp a time (from a wand), rather than 50gp a time from a potion. But at the end of the day you're still responsible for providing the potions or wands.

Scarab Sages

Maggiethecat wrote:


So what's a "healer" to do? Suck it up and have to buy a new wand every few sessions?

You're not willing to heal me, that is fine.

I'll reserve spells so I can cast infernal healing on myself instead of mage armor + enlarge on your companion.

2/5

What I find interesting is that it is the opposite case in MMOs where the tanking character often has to pay *through the nose* for the damage to their equipment sustained while tanking... they are the ones who rely on donations from the other players who have received the benefit of the tank's role in the party.

Meanwhile, the MMO healers tend to have unlimited, "free" healing- akin to a Fighter not having to pay money each time he swings his sword in a paper & pencil game.

Just pointing out it is an interesting comparison.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West aka JohnF

Serum wrote:

Of course, something like: everyone has a wand, divide the total number of charges used equally among all wands, would work pretty well.

Everyone would still need to have a wand to contribute, though.

That sounds like a pretty good way of handling things.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Artanthos wrote:
Maggiethecat wrote:


So what's a "healer" to do? Suck it up and have to buy a new wand every few sessions?

You're not willing to heal me, that is fine.

I'll reserve spells so I can cast infernal healing on myself instead of mage armor + enlarge on your companion.

Funny how every time someone says this, they stubbornly ignore the money issue, even when it's already been pointed out.

If you wanted to say "if you won't use wand charges on me, then I won't spend scrolls of mage armor/enlarge on your companion", then that would be a valid comparison.

But responding to a withholding of 15gp a pop healing with "then I won't use my zero-cost spells to help" just shows how little thought goes into your position.


Not to mention that not only does Enlarge PERSON not work on an ANIMAL companion...some druids don't even have a companion.


Anyway , for the record , I do have a wand on my character.

Lets say the group is fighting a single strong bad guy. I use antaganize to get him in to melee and step up and stand still to keep him on me. As a result I get tore up preaty bad , lets say i've only got 2 hp left by the end but no one else is put into danger or even swung at. Are you saying that isnt worth a charge or 2 from a wand assuming that mine is empty because of my character design?


Tagion, if you read my OP, I did suggest that I would give everyone a free charge from my wand.

In a situation like that, then sure, there is a good chance I would give you more than 1. Especially if no one else is really hurt.

But when it gets to the point that I am using MORE THAN A DOZEN CHARGES mostly on people who are not me, then I start getting concerned.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Also, the mere act of simply activating your wand for you after you give it to her is a service. Just because she's not the one shelling out the gold doesn't mean she's being stingy.

She'll activate your wand, you can "activate" your weapons/spells/abilities.

You don't expect her to pay for your healing, and she won't expect you to pay for her various scrolls that she wants to use.


What did they spend thier money on instead? Aynway to address your question , I would never refuse healing to a party member on a mission if I have the ability to heal him. I would expect an explanation after words and maybe some cash though.

The Exchange 5/5

Tagion wrote:
What did they spend thier money on instead? Aynway to address your question , I would never refuse healing to a party member on a mission if I have the ability to heal him. I would expect an explanation after words and maybe some cash though.

explanation afterwords: "Cause I'm selfish"

Cash?: "sorry dude, no money may exchange hands in PFSOP - oh! and I'm off to my next game. Bye!"

Grand Lodge

Tagion wrote:
I would expect an explanation after words and maybe some cash though.

The context of this conversation is for Pathfinder Society Organized Play, in which giving another player gold is only ever allowed in one circumstance, being that they need help affording being brought back from the dead.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Tagion wrote:
What did they spend thier money on instead? Aynway to address your question , I would never refuse healing to a party member on a mission if I have the ability to heal him. I would expect an explanation after words and maybe some cash though.

Wait a second, did you miss that you're in the PFS Organized Play forum? Because that really changes the dynamics. You can't give anything to a party member. No reimbursing. The only way to foot even PART of the bill for your healing is to bring the whole wand yourself.

So when Maggiethecat is at a table with a party who invested in no healing whatsoever, she pays for every single point, and no one can ever reimburse her for it. Ever. Can't even have the GM drop in a replacement wand in the loot. She's permanently set behind.

Does that change your perspective a bit?


ah , sorry only 2 games in. A friend dragged me with him and I havent read most of the rules for it. He hit the highlight , you can only use this stuff for a character , no pvp , stuff like that. Even so I would still want them to pay me back some how. Free charges from there wands after they get one?

Edit - did you talk to any of them out of game about helping you out?

Grand Lodge 4/5

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Tagion wrote:

Anyway , for the record , I do have a wand on my character.

Lets say the group is fighting a single strong bad guy. I use antaganize to get him in to melee and step up and stand still to keep him on me. As a result I get tore up preaty bad , lets say i've only got 2 hp left by the end but no one else is put into danger or even swung at. Are you saying that isnt worth a charge or 2 from a wand assuming that mine is empty because of my character design?

I'd be willing to split the total charges used among everyone in the party, like Serum suggested. It's a fair and equitable way to handle it, IMO, as long as everyone at the table agrees.

I'm not sure how your wand being empty has any relation to character design, though. And the issue is with people who feel a healing-capable class "owes" them healing of the wand the healer purchased out of their own cash (or PA) reserves.

The Exchange 5/5

it's like the Druid expecting the Sorcerer to Mage Armor his companion...
"You have the spell right? AND you have a wand, so why not just cast it on my animal. Oh! and we'll be adventureing all day so I'll need it cast from the wand each hour, just to be sure it's on him before the fight starts. What's the problem? that's only 12 charges off your wand!"


Jonathan Cary wrote:
Tagion wrote:

Anyway , for the record , I do have a wand on my character.

Lets say the group is fighting a single strong bad guy. I use antaganize to get him in to melee and step up and stand still to keep him on me. As a result I get tore up preaty bad , lets say i've only got 2 hp left by the end but no one else is put into danger or even swung at. Are you saying that isnt worth a charge or 2 from a wand assuming that mine is empty because of my character design?

I'd be willing to split the total charges used among everyone in the party, like Serum suggested. It's a fair and equitable way to handle it, IMO, as long as everyone at the table agrees.

I'm not sure how your wand being empty has any relation to character design, though. And the issue is with people who feel a healing-capable class "owes" them healing of the wand the healer purchased out of their own cash (or PA) reserves.

Ya you dont "owe" me healing. My wand being emepty would be assuming i've used it all up becuase my character is designed to keep things in melee and hitting only him.

Grand Lodge

I really wish people would quit using the word "tanking". This isn't an MMO. If you're fighting anything with greater than animal intelligence, and they're concentrating their attacks on the most heavily armored/highest AC character, then something is really wrong (unless some kind of spell or feat is being used). The truth is, any intelligent opponent will use the same tactics we all use and focus fire on the squishiest opponent to remove them from the combat quickly (especially if that person is a caster who's doing a lot of damage or other annoying things like CC, buffing/debuffing, etc.).

An animal, on the other hand, will attack the person who's hurting it, not necessarily the closest person (assuming the animal is aware of who's hurting it). And animal is going to consider that attacking the wizard in the back will draw an AoO from the fighter beside it.

Shadow Lodge

Unless, of course, the person "tanking" is preventing them from doing so by way of threatening with AoOs, feats that provide consequences for not attacking him, tripping, grappling, dealing massive damage in his own right etc.


Serum wrote:
Unless, of course, the person "tanking" is preventing them from doing so by way of threatening with AoOs, feats that provide consequences for not attacking him, tripping, grappling, dealing massive damage in his own right etc.

Or using the Stand still Feat to prevent them from moving away at all.


I have not talked to the other players yet, but we are playing again this weekend and it looks like I will be playing with at least one of the two other guys from the last game. And I will probably be playing my Druid again, so I will be bringing it up to everyone at the table before we start.

The Exchange 5/5

Lex Starwalker wrote:
I really wish people would quit using the word "tanking". This isn't an MMO. If you're fighting anything with greater than animal intelligence, and they're concentrating their attacks on the most heavily armored/highest AC character, then something is really wrong (unless some kind of spell or feat is being used). The truth is, any intelligent opponent will use the same tactics we all use and focus fire on the squishiest opponent to remove them from the combat quickly (especially if that person is a caster who's doing a lot of damage or other annoying things like CC, buffing/debuffing, etc.).

My combat casting cleric uses a hat of disguise (should be good for at least one attack) to appear lightly armored. He moves thru threatened spaces to "soak off" AOOs. Casts spells without concentration. Etc.

Oh! and moves to provide a flank (the party rogue really likes this). While having at least one Shield Other spell up. and healing the "Glass Cannon" character in combat. I've had one player comment after a fight that he had taken - and my "combat medic" had healed - more than 2 times his total HP (something like 150 HP.) - in that one fight alone.

If a PC is designed as a combat support, he should consider all aspects of his role. Even how he appears. This means putting the Wizard in the party in a Hat of Disguise too... so he can look like the Tank, while the Tank looks like "the squishiest opponent".

(side note on language)
I am sorry you are upset by the term "Tank". It's been in the game longer then MMOs though - they got it from us. Really. I remember using it in the 1980's in ADD 1st ed., but I think it was older than that (and I was in the Army at the time - so that may have influenced it). The term "the squishiest" though I think may be from MMOs - I don't recall that being used before 2005 (mid LG days).


Maggiethecat wrote:
I have not talked to the other players yet, but we are playing again this weekend and it looks like I will be playing with at least one of the two other guys from the last game. And I will probably be playing my Druid again, so I will be bringing it up to everyone at the table before we start.

Ya , even though they cant "give you money back" , you can still say some thing like. "Hey guys , last time I had to use up a lot of my wand because you forgot to bring one. This time can I use one of your wands to cover healing." Seems like the easiest way to even everything up if they arent total D-bags about it.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tagion wrote:
These responces are all fine but I have another perspective for you. You dont heal me , I dont try to stop those big bad monster from tearing your head off , and when they do I have a nice new wand to use.

In a difficult scenario (playing up, or the scenario is just difficult all on its own) you could easily blow a third of a wand, especially at higher levels when it takes more than one or two charges to heal up to a respectable hit point total.

”Mists of Mwangi”:
I blew 16 charges of my wand in the 1st encounter because the PCs ended up fighting one another after several failed their save against the mists

But in same said fight, that lasted lets say 8 rounds:
Fighter swings 8 times.

  • 1st level = Longsword, 20gp, equals 2gp, 1sp per swing
  • 1st or 2nd level = Masterwork Longsword, 320gp, equals 40gp per swing
  • 5th level = +1 Longsword, 1,320gp, equals 165gp per swing
  • same combat, 16 charges at 15gp a pop equals 240gp.
  • same combat, I also am spending gold on the longsword, masterwork longsword, and +1 longsword.

So essentially, with that logic, the expectation is that the cleric doesn’t need a magic weapon?

Does that really make sense?


thats a crap load of charges man! I'm saying if you have the ability to do something for the party , like healing as one example , you should. If I can ill "pay you back" later by letting you use a wand or potion that I have purchased then I will. We could also come to some other arragnements out side of game.

Edit - This is assuming I dont currently have a wand to use of my own. You can take a running total and I will get you back with an equal total value.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Tagion wrote:
I'm saying if you have the ability to do something for the party , like healing as one example , you should. If I can ill "pay you back" later by letting you use a wand or potion that I have purchased.

That's all anyone here is asking for, except that you "pay them back" in advance instead of after the fact.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tagion wrote:
thats a crap load of charges man! I'm saying if you have the ability to do something for the party , like healing as one example , you should. If I can ill "pay you back" later by letting you use a wand or potion that I have purchased. We could also come to some other arragnements out side of game.

Well it just so happened that they were all brand new 1st level and my guy had 1 scenario under his belt. So yeah, I used my charges. The next time we played at the same table, I used their charges for myself as well as them. It was a mutual agreement that I was happy to make.

I would have healed them even if they didn’t make the offer.

If, on the other hand, it was a 5th level table, I would not have spent 16 charges. I would have got them conscious, but that’s it.

Liberty's Edge

Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?

If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.

I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

No, Atrius, you can let another character at the table use items during the session. The rule is that it can't leave the game on anyone's chronicles but the person who paid for it.

Grand Lodge

You cant give someone anything they can keep after the scenario, so actually you've flipped that around, Atrius.

You can pass around wands/potions/scrolls for anyone to use in the scenario, and it's prefectly fine.
You cannot buy one of them later to replace the one you used, thought from previous threads on the subject it looks like there are GMs who may or may not be willing to allow you to do it anyway.
You cannot give someone gold/items and have them keep it after the end of the scenario.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was recently playing a level 1 rogue, with only 2 chronicles who had a brand new wand of cure light. (I didn't get full PA the first game) The rest of the party were also level 1 - about half had brand new characters. None of them had any wands. I used 25 charges in one game AT FIRST LVL- and I was asking the druid to be stingy with it after the first 10.

If you have at least one chronicle sheet and have earned 2 PA, you should have a wand of cure light. In PFS, where players and characters aren't always the same, it is not the responsibility of the rest of the party to pay for your healing.

The Exchange 5/5

Atrius wrote:

Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?

If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.

I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?

The rule is that you CAN'T replace it - but most Judges will turn a blind eye to someone who does it this way:

Encounter: I hand you my Anti-Toxen to use - and your PC drinks it.
Post-Encounter: the party is in town and your PC goes and buys an anti-toxin ang gives my PC "his original" anti-toxin back. He could NOT give me the 50GP it costs, or give me a Potion of CLW (also 50gp) or anything like that... but if my PC loans you something and it isn't consumed or distroyed in the adventure your PC has to return it at the end of the adventure.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Atrius wrote:

Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?

If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.

I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?

No, as a matter of fact you can't replace it if its used during a scenario.

Liberty's Edge

nosig wrote:
Atrius wrote:

Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?

If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.

I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?

The rule is that you CAN'T replace it - but most Judges will turn a blind eye to someone who does it this way:

Encounter: I hand you my Anti-Toxen to use - and your PC drinks it.
Post-Encounter: the party is in town and your PC goes and buys an anti-toxin ang gives my PC "his original" anti-toxin back. He could NOT give me the 50GP it costs, or give me a Potion of CLW (also 50gp) or anything like that... but if my PC loans you something and it isn't consumed or distroyed in the adventure your PC has to return it at the end of the adventure.

So to go along with this, I could create a character who his whole function is to get to a certain level and never spend money but stockpile it for potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario and then just let the character die off and start again?

Not sure I like it, but that seems to be what you are telling me.


If the rest of the party are too cheap to fork out 750 gold pieces so you can save their lives later then you shouldn't be expected to expend your resources on them, let them know this before the game starts so they have the opportunity to buy them. Just call it a form of health insurance!

If you are a cleric remember Tarks First Commandment: Thou art not a Bandaid!

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Atrius wrote:


So to go along with this, I could create a character who his whole function is to get to a certain level and never spend money but stockpile it for potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario and then just let the character die off and start again?

Not sure I like it, but that seems to be what you are telling me.

First of all, this is a big MMO farming attitude and is gaming the system. Gaming the system is really frowned upon.

Eventually though, you’d run out of lower level scenarios to play characters at, and wouldn’t have any higher level characters to play through the higher level scenarios.

So for playing longevity such a strategy doesn’t make much sense.

The Exchange 5/5

Atrius wrote:
nosig wrote:
Atrius wrote:

Um, isn't there a rule against giving an item or money to other characters at the table?

If I give you a charge from my wand, shouldn't that be the same as me giving you a potion or scroll? Last I knew if someone offered you a potion or scroll, you had to replace it at the end of the scenario.

I think you should then have to carry your own wand. I suppose if you ask, I can use one of my actions to use it on you. This would be the same as asking the fighter - Do you think you could use your turn to Aid me so I get a better AC?

The rule is that you CAN'T replace it - but most Judges will turn a blind eye to someone who does it this way:

Encounter: I hand you my Anti-Toxen to use - and your PC drinks it.
Post-Encounter: the party is in town and your PC goes and buys an anti-toxin ang gives my PC "his original" anti-toxin back. He could NOT give me the 50GP it costs, or give me a Potion of CLW (also 50gp) or anything like that... but if my PC loans you something and it isn't consumed or distroyed in the adventure your PC has to return it at the end of the adventure.

So to go along with this, I could create a character who his whole function is to get to a certain level and never spend money but stockpile it for potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario and then just let the character die off and start again?

Not sure I like it, but that seems to be what you are telling me.

Funny you should say that - "his whole function is to ... potions and scrolls and then use them on all the other characters to help them get through a scenario..." is the Support character thread. Just that - Oh! and other equipment too, Alchemist fires, Anti-toxin, sunrods, etc. Check out the other thread, it's all about this character build.

So the answer to your question is yeah - that's the way the rule works. Kind of silly though. Better than the "you can't give him your vial of anti-toxin - he has to have one of his own" I got at one table.

Edited: wait, from Andrews post I am lead to believe that you were trying to "game the system"? Huh? you are going to spend 12 hours getting a character up to 2nd level - spending no money to keep yourself alive (what? how does this work), just so you can turn over 1500 gp in consumables to another character? what is that guy paying you? I hope it's by the hour - my gaming time is valuable... and even at $8.00 an hour that would be $96.00...

51 to 100 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Being the only character who can use a wand of CLW... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.