Additional Resources Updates

[Michael Brock]

After discussing with the rules and design teams, PFS will use the scorpion whip found in the Adventurer's Armory, not Ultimate Equipment. Future printings of the Ultimate Equipment will fix the problem.

Additionally, Pummeling Charge has been removed from the banned list and will be legal again once the Additional Resources goes live.

Finally, the rules and design teams are discussing the fixes to make with MoMS. Until that time, we will not make any changes to it for PFS.

[AxeMurder0]

For anybody curious, I think that means the scorpion whip will be the following:

Scorpion Whip:

Exotic One-Handed Melee Weapon
5gp
1d4 x2
3lbs.
Slashing
disarm, reach, trip

Scorpion Whip: This whip has a series of razorsharp blades and fangs inset along its tip. It deals lethal damage, even to creatures with armor bonuses. If you are proficient with whips, you can use a scorpion whip.

Note that it does not finesse or have a 15ft reach, or work against adjacent targets, but it doesn't provoke, it damages targets with armor and has the trip keyword. Additionally if you are proficient in the whip you get the scorpion whip as well.

[Ascalaphus]

@Robert: I interpret that differently.

Adventurer's Armory wrote:

Scorpion Whip: This whip has a series of razor-sharp blades and fangs inset along its tip. It deals lethal damage, even to creatures with armor bonuses. If you are proficient with whips, you can use a scorpion whip.

It's the "this whip" part that's significant; a scorpion whip is like a normal whip except for the parts called out to be different. So it keeps the 15ft reach, finesse and adjacent target issues, but loses the armor and nonlethal issue.

It's literally an ordinary whip augmented with some sharp bits. They don't make it any shorter or longer.

---

@Mike: thanks! This saves a cool weapon from the scrapheap of dangerously unclear rules.

[blackbloodtroll]

Just to confirm:

1) Whip feats, such as Whip Mastery, and whip traits, can be used with a Scorpion Whip?

2) You can use a Scorpion Whip, "as a whip", and deal nonlethal without penalty?

3) Weapon Focus(Whip) applies to a Scorpion Whip?

4) Scorpion Whip is can still be enchanted with the Agile enchantment, and used with the Slashing Grace feat?

[ARGH!]

With the new playtest going live next week, how much of that will be pfs legal?

[Undone]

Michael Brock wrote:

Additionally, Pummeling Charge has been removed from the banned list and will be legal again once the Additional Resources goes live.

Finally, the rules and design teams are discussing the fixes to make with MoMS. Until that time, we will not make any changes to it for PFS.

I have renewed confidence in the PFS leadership.

If I may make one possible recommendation to MoMS.

Just say Monk's of many styles may not multiclass.

No other alterations are required and no PFS specific class errata is required.

[Imbicatus]

Undone wrote:

If I may make one possible recommendation to MoMS.

Just say Monk's of many styles may not multiclass.

No other alterations are required and no PFS specific class errata is required.

That's much more severe than restricting feats that have a style feat prerequisite to 6th level bonus feats or higher.

The problem isn't the bonus feats bypassing prerequisites, it's that it can do so at first to second level.

If you ban multiclassing, then the vast majority of players with a MOS will need a full rebuild of the class. If you restrict the better style feats to 6th level or higher (like archers with improved precise strike), then the two level dip still has value, but it doesn't grant access to high level feats too soon.

[JohnF]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Just to confirm:

1) Whip feats, such as Whip Mastery, and whip traits, can be used with a Scorpion Whip?

2) You can use a Scorpion Whip, "as a whip", and deal nonlethal without penalty?

3) Weapon Focus(Whip) applies to a Scorpion Whip?

4) Scorpion Whip is can still be enchanted with the Agile enchantment, and used with the Slashing Grace feat?

Of those, I'd have my doubts about #2.

As the description of a Scorpion Whip explicitly states that it deals lethal damage, I'd interpret that as being a specific override to the general case of whips doing non-lethal damage.

[Dylos]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Scorpion Whip is can still be enchanted with the Agile enchantment, and used with the Slashing Grace feat?

Regardless of anything else, the Scorpion Whip is a one handed melee slashing weapon and therefore you can take Slashing Grace (Scorpion Whip)

[blackbloodtroll]

Wait, Scorpion Whip no longer works with Weapon Finesse?

[Ascalaphus]

Question: why aren't the Shoanti totems listed on the inside front cover of Varisia, Birthplace of Legends legal?

[Starglim]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Question: why aren't the Shoanti totems listed on the inside front cover of Varisia, Birthplace of Legends legal?

There's nothing that needs to be legal, as the totems have no mechanical effects.

edit: The same is true of roles. The only point I can see to declaring a role legal is as a quick confirmation that everything the role suggests is legal. Having said that, I don't immediately see anything illegal in the Cypher Hunter role, which is excluded.

[Helikon]

Any info when Iron Gods will be PFS legal?

[blackbloodtroll]

Is not the Ultimate Combat Scorpion Whip legal?

[Ascalaphus]

Starglim wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

Question: why aren't the Shoanti totems listed on the inside front cover of Varisia, Birthplace of Legends legal?

There's nothing that needs to be legal, as the totems have no mechanical effects.

edit: The same is true of roles. The only point I can see to declaring a role legal is as a quick confirmation that everything the role suggests is legal. Having said that, I don't immediately see anything illegal in the Cypher Hunter role, which is excluded.

As I understand, those totems can grant domains similar to worshipping a god. Except you don't get a favoured weapon. I suppose it's a bit weird that they don't have alignments listed; would that make them True Neutral?

[DM Beckett]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Starglim wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

Question: why aren't the Shoanti totems listed on the inside front cover of Varisia, Birthplace of Legends legal?

There's nothing that needs to be legal, as the totems have no mechanical effects.

edit: The same is true of roles. The only point I can see to declaring a role legal is as a quick confirmation that everything the role suggests is legal. Having said that, I don't immediately see anything illegal in the Cypher Hunter role, which is excluded.

As I understand, those totems can grant domains similar to worshipping a god. Except you don't get a favoured weapon. I suppose it's a bit weird that they don't have alignments listed; would that make them True Neutral?

Ive tried asking this a few times, as Im unclear on if the Golarion Day Shoanti Shaman is legal or not, but never got a responce.

[FalseTruths]

Is there a change log for the additional resources? If not, would it be possible to start one going forward?
Edit: possibly a community project we could store on the shared prep site? I would be more than willing to start a change log, but I don't know if I would be able to maintain it myself.

[kinevon]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Is not the Ultimate Combat Scorpion Whip legal?

I believe one of the recent announcements regarding conflicting sources, in this case for the scorpion whip, is that the Adventurer's Armory version is the legal version.

Is the UC Scorpion Whip write-up the same as the AA errataed version? If so, it should be legal. If it is the same as the UE version, then it should not be legal.

[blackbloodtroll]

Adventurer's Armory has an One-handed Scorpion Whip, and the Ultimate Combat one is a Light weapon.

[Starglim]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Starglim wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

Question: why aren't the Shoanti totems listed on the inside front cover of Varisia, Birthplace of Legends legal?

There's nothing that needs to be legal, as the totems have no mechanical effects.

edit: The same is true of roles. The only point I can see to declaring a role legal is as a quick confirmation that everything the role suggests is legal. Having said that, I don't immediately see anything illegal in the Cypher Hunter role, which is excluded.

As I understand, those totems can grant domains similar to worshipping a god. Except you don't get a favoured weapon. I suppose it's a bit weird that they don't have alignments listed; would that make them True Neutral?

That's not my reading.

Varisia, Birthplace of Legends page 13 wrote:

Shoanti shamans are typically druids or oracles, though clerics who worship deities who grant the domains noted on the inside cover often integrate their faith with the tribe's broader spiritualism

A totem suggests what domains you might want to gain through the druid's nature bond, if they are legal for druids, or by worshipping a deity who grants them. In the same way, it suggests what oracle mystery you might choose. (This probably means we could reverse-engineer which of the gods cited on page 13 each quah favours - a small project?)

edit: Probably a discussion for another place.

[Majuba]

Re: Spinosaurus legality

Thanks to Preston Hudson, I've narrowed the band of time to Nov 28, 2012 (still legal) to March 27th, 2013 (not legal). Anyone with a PDF of Additional Resources between those times could help narrow it down further.

Still requires a rebuild, unless we get noticed that they are grandfathered in, but it's nice to know.

[GinoA]

Majuba wrote:

Re: Spinosaurus legality

Thanks to Preston Hudson, I've narrowed the band of time to Nov 28, 2012 (still legal) to March 27th, 2013 (not legal). Anyone with a PDF of Additional Resources between those times could help narrow it down further.

Still requires a rebuild, unless we get noticed that they are grandfathered in, but it's nice to know.

archive.org might be helpful. There appear to be several updates in that window, although the content is garbled for me. Not sure why that is.

[DesolateHarmony]

Archive.org wrote:

r3�Zb���3�x����P�����X�\G�/t��MןƘ4��:�W�xW?[2���v�;"R�.�I�$u��?����o� ��$�֔��y�d��#X��}q��8��N8���>ʯ*"R��W�K���f�R��1�&����v�Ta����E��B��2 �y�`ٛ���<[}E�[޹�U��F�9�W��H1!��$�ڎ�_�N�/w���C��<�Ň�*���w��;:���?�p� 8�ie���Nj�M�ĵ�2'�^s�}�y�r���OV��(O�$(�op�NmG����Td����+��v^�䅖��h/�������~ۖ 3����cb����� �Mc#݄�������Ug����-~�̼�ݧ�@�h��n���i�=tM_o���-�iȦN�^[����×�~��?��l��/٨�j��ѓ� O� �g�f��ÃF��, <��$���Vi&�p�߱���گ6xUϽ��

This is what I get for Jan5th, 2013.

[BigNorseWolf]

DesolateHarmony wrote:

Archive.org wrote:

r3�Zb���3�x����P�����X�\G�/t��MןƘ4��:�W�xW?[2���v�;"R�.�I�$u��?����o� ��$�֔��y�d��#X��}q��8��N8���>ʯ*"R��W�K���f�R��1�&����v�Ta����E��B��2 �y�`ٛ���<[}E�[޹�U��F�9�W��H1!��$�ڎ�_�N�/w���C��<�Ň�*���w��;:���?�p� 8�ie���Nj�M�ĵ�2'�^s�}�y�r���OV��(O�$(�op�NmG����Td����+��v^�䅖��h/�������~ۖ 3����cb����� �Mc#݄�������Ug����-~�̼�ݧ�@�h��n���i�=tM_o���-�iȦN�^[����×�~��?��l��/٨�j��ѓ� O� �g�f��ÃF��, <��$���Vi&�p�߱���گ6xUϽ��

This is what I get for Jan5th, 2013.

Dammit! an old school faction mission

[Lou Diamond]

Mike and John, some of the things that you nix for use see very arbitrary
you allow Mammoths and dinosaurs but not dire animals all are present on in the game but not in PFS makes no sense to me it really would not change things you could always limit by level but to ban A Dire tiger when it is mechanically no different from the 7th level size increase for the tiger.

Could you add some other animals like the Panther to use as an Animal companion.

[Andrew Christian]

Lou, if the Panther is not individually stat'd in a Pathfinder book, then you can call the "large cat" animal companion a Panther.

Additionally, I'm not sure that any of the Dire Animals actually have an animal companion stat block.

For any dire animal to be used as an animal companion, it would need the animal companion stat block to be accompanied with its standard bestiary stat block. Pathfinder Society does not typically create content, but rather just uses the existing rules.

["Devil's Advocate"]

Starglim wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

Starglim wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

Question: why aren't the Shoanti totems listed on the inside front cover of Varisia, Birthplace of Legends legal?

There's nothing that needs to be legal, as the totems have no mechanical effects.

edit: The same is true of roles. The only point I can see to declaring a role legal is as a quick confirmation that everything the role suggests is legal. Having said that, I don't immediately see anything illegal in the Cypher Hunter role, which is excluded.

As I understand, those totems can grant domains similar to worshipping a god. Except you don't get a favoured weapon. I suppose it's a bit weird that they don't have alignments listed; would that make them True Neutral?

That's not my reading.

Varisia, Birthplace of Legends page 13 wrote:

Shoanti shamans are typically druids or oracles, though clerics who worship deities who grant the domains noted on the inside cover often integrate their faith with the tribe's broader spiritualism

A totem suggests what domains you might want to gain through the druid's nature bond, if they are legal for druids, or by worshipping a deity who grants them. In the same way, it suggests what oracle mystery you might choose. (This probably means we could reverse-engineer which of the gods cited on page 13 each quah favours - a small project?)

It's actually referring to this, I believe: (sort of a fix for Humans of Golarion that was expanded upon in Varisia but forgot to actually reference where it's was really found).

LINKY

Totem Domain:

At 1st level (for clerics) or upon gaining a domain as part of Nature Bond at 1st level (for druids—a druid who instead opts to take an animal companion cannot use the Shoanti shaman archetype), pick one of your Shoanti quah's totems. You can use an image of this totem you carry or wield as your divine focus in addition to using the normal divine focus you might utilize (such as a holy symbol). In addition, you add that totem's domain choices to the list of domains you may choose from when picking a domain. If you are a cleric, you must still choose one of your domains from those normally granted by your deity. If you are a druid, your totem domain options replace the standard domain options granted by nature bond.

[Chad Kundrick]

Majuba wrote:

Re: Spinosaurus legality

Thanks to Preston Hudson, I've narrowed the band of time to Nov 28, 2012 (still legal) to March 27th, 2013 (not legal). Anyone with a PDF of Additional Resources between those times could help narrow it down further.

Still requires a rebuild, unless we get noticed that they are grandfathered in, but it's nice to know.

I know for a fact that the Allosaurus and Spinosaurus we're both legal when I made my Hunter around Sept. 9th because I checked the additional resources to make sure they were legal and purchased the Bestiary 2. I'm just disappointed a reason wasn't given why or not.

I'm also pretty sure if you look at that archive from August 2014 you'll see it listed as legal since that was when I built this character.

[Mistwalker]

Chad Kundrick wrote:

Majuba wrote:

Re: Spinosaurus legality

Thanks to Preston Hudson, I've narrowed the band of time to Nov 28, 2012 (still legal) to March 27th, 2013 (not legal). Anyone with a PDF of Additional Resources between those times could help narrow it down further.

Still requires a rebuild, unless we get noticed that they are grandfathered in, but it's nice to know.

I know for a fact that the Allosaurus and Spinosaurus we're both legal when I made my Hunter around Sept. 9th because I checked the additional resources to make sure they were legal and purchased the Bestiary 2. I'm just disappointed a reason wasn't given why or not.

I'm also pretty sure if you look at that archive from August 2014 you'll see it listed as legal since that was when I built this character.

My copy of the additional resources that I downloaded on August 11th, 2014, does not list either the Allosaurus or Spinosaurus as legal choices for animal companions.

[Nefreet]

There have been discrepancies between the PDF and the webpage before.

I've personally never downloaded the PDF, and have utilized the webpage exclusively, and I know the Spinosaurus was also legal when I made my Druid. I already had the Bestiary, but after seeing it was allowed I searched for (and purchased) a figurine for it. So I also invested money into the option.

I'm fine with it being nixed, though. My Druid is 13th level now and won't see much more play. It was super powerful in melee, too. I'm just annoyed it was removed without really letting anyone know.

[Finlanderboy]

Nefreet wrote:

There have been discrepancies between the PDF and the webpage before.

I've personally never downloaded the PDF, and have utilized the webpage exclusively, and I know the Spinosaurus was also legal when I made my Druid. I already had the Bestiary, but after seeing it was allowed I searched for (and purchased) a figurine for it. So I also invested money into the option.

I'm fine with it being nixed, though. My Druid is 13th level now and won't see much more play. It was super powerful in melee, too. I'm just annoyed it was removed without really letting anyone know.

Yeah the behind scene changes are not the bets means to handle the situation.

If they want to ban things GREAT! But please let us know and not sneak things in. I do not want that fight at the table because something is nbow illegal. If a blog post was made saying they removed some animal companions I coudl easily deflect the debate to that.

[Codanous]

Its really true, and I hate asking them do any more work because they do so much for us already but, even if they just make a post in this thread when they ban something, it'd go a long way towards helping clear things up.

Its really confusing getting blind-sided by stuff being removed without much fan fare.

[Chris Lambertz]

To be honest, this thread was mostly created so we could let people know when the document gets updates (since we don't have normal product notifications, which we usually send out via email). A short summary of changes isn't a bad idea though. Perhaps we'll see and maybe start a new incarnation of this thread if that happens.

In other news... the page and PDF are now updated! :)

[Imbicatus]

Question: There is a confusing entry for the Goblin section in the monster codex. it states the infested curse is legal for non-goblin pcs and then states Non-goblin PCs may not use anything in this section in the next sentence. Which is it?

Also, it looks like the hobgoblin section was included with the goblin.

Quote:

Goblins: Everything from this section is legal only for goblin PCs, except the infested oracle curse. Non-goblin PCs may not use anything in this section. Hobgoblins: chain challenge, motivated march, and spirit of the corps are legal feats for play. All equipment on page 117 is legal for play. The yzobu is added as a legal animal companion.

[Jeff Merola]

No, it's saying that the infested oracle curse isn't legal for anyone.

[Hrothdane]

Also, there is no mention of the gnoll section of the Monster Codex and whether anything in it is legal.

[Jeff Merola]

Hrothdane wrote:

Also, there is no mention of the gnoll section of the Monster Codex and whether anything in it is legal.

Which means nothing is legal, of course. But yeah, it should be listed, since the other sections that have no legal material are listed.

Also, is it just my computer, or is the Boggard section included in the general disclaimer instead of its own line?

[Apocryphile]

Is there any news of material from Champions of Corruption??

Regarding the Scorpion Whip; as can be seen above, there's still disagreement regarding how the weapon works. A game I was playing in this week was disrupted in the middle of a combat by another player questioning whether a player's use of a Scorpion Whip was legal. So it does come up. The question in this case, was what reach a Scorpion Whip has. Some kind of statement along the lines of "A scorpion whip shares all features and qualities of a whip, except where it differs in the weapon description" or "A scorpion whip has the following qualities, and is a reach weapon with a reach of Xft."

Excellent update though, loads of stuff added, including lots of fun stuff from the Monster Codex which is a pleasant surprise. Thanks for all the work.

[Darrell Impey UK]

Jeff Merola wrote:

Also, is it just my computer, or is the Boggard section included in the general disclaimer instead of its own line?

No, it's got tangled into the disclaimer. Likewise hobgoblin into goblin and ogre into orc.

[Chris Lambertz]

Darrell Impey UK wrote:

Jeff Merola wrote:

Also, is it just my computer, or is the Boggard section included in the general disclaimer instead of its own line?

No, it's got tangled into the disclaimer. Likewise hobgoblin into goblin and ogre into orc.

All fixed! :)

[Darrell Impey UK]

Thanks. :)

Did you change your avatar Chris?

[Kysune]

So why is the Feral Child (Druid Archetype) banned? If it's the illiterate issue, is it too hard to state that the must spend 1 point in linguistics at level 1? Just seems strange that this archetype is banned for what looks to be no real reason. Please advise, thanks.

[AxeMurder0]

Reasons things are now allowed in PFS:

1: Take too much time/GM input
2: Wealth Imbalance
3: Evil
4: Held back for chronicle access
5: Too powerful
5: Campaign Flavor

While I'm not in charge of the campaign, they've taken to not answering this sort of question, as doing so only then encourages people to arguing details.

My guess is 5, flavor doesn't fit right with the Pathfinder Society.

On several occasions in the past Mike Brock has had his mind changed by thoughtful and concise arguments. If you really think it should be allowed, put together a sensible argument and start a thread.

[Ascalaphus]

Paizo as a whole is rather careful about avoiding situations where you get children devoured by horrible monsters. I suppose it's prudent, because it's a very hot button with some people.

[Sebastian Hirsch]

I am moderately shocked, that Totem Beast is PFS legal.

[Hmm]

Michael Brock wrote:

After discussing with the rules and design teams, PFS will use the scorpion whip found in the Adventurer's Armory, not Ultimate Equipment. Future printings of the Ultimate Equipment will fix the problem.

Additionally, Pummeling Charge has been removed from the banned list and will be legal again once the Additional Resources goes live.

Finally, the rules and design teams are discussing the fixes to make with MoMS. Until that time, we will not make any changes to it for PFS.

I cannot tell you how thrilled I am to see the old Scorpion whip back! I'd been noodling around with a concept for a bard character who used the scorpion whip, and then abandoned it once I'd looked at the text in UE.

Being able to use the AA concept instead makes the whip viable for what I want to do. I can do the whole Indiana Jones thing with a non-lethal prehensile whip to swing through rooms, and then a scary scorpion whip to use on armored bad guys... Maybe I'll carry multiple whips to allow for continuous swinging in pub fights.

Oh... this could be fun!

Hmm

PS I play with several monks in PFS. They'll all be thrilled to know that pummeling charge is back. Thank you.

[Ascalaphus]

John Compton wrote:

Investigator Crafting

Typically Mike and I discuss these decisions before ruling, so having not had an opportunity to confirm my inclination, I can't give a 100% certified answer; it's just something we didn't cover while going through all of the book's other options during our Additional Resources meeting. That said, I strongly suspect investigators will be able to craft in the same way that alchemists craft.

Any update on this?

[Kysune]

Robert Hetherington wrote:

Reasons things are now allowed in PFS:

1: Take too much time/GM input
2: Wealth Imbalance
3: Evil
4: Held back for chronicle access
5: Too powerful
5: Campaign Flavor

While I'm not in charge of the campaign, they've taken to not answering this sort of question, as doing so only then encourages people to arguing details.

My guess is 5, flavor doesn't fit right with the Pathfinder Society.

On several occasions in the past Mike Brock has had his mind changed by thoughtful and concise arguments. If you really think it should be allowed, put together a sensible argument and start a thread.

Created that thread here: Request to legalize Feral Child Archetype

[Protoman]

Ascalaphus wrote:

John Compton wrote:

Investigator Crafting

Typically Mike and I discuss these decisions before ruling, so having not had an opportunity to confirm my inclination, I can't give a 100% certified answer; it's just something we didn't cover while going through all of the book's other options during our Additional Resources meeting. That said, I strongly suspect investigators will be able to craft in the same way that alchemists craft.

Any update on this?

This was addressed here (investigators can craft poisons and alchemical items just like an alchemist). No idea when it goes on the FAQ itself.