Additional Resources Updates

[Michael Brock]

Nohwear wrote:

So, is the additional resource page going to be updated soon the reflect the unchained stuff? And hopefully include Heroes of the Wild.

Should be Wednesday.

[Gwen Smith]

Rycaut wrote:

but perhaps there is a better approach - just thinking about this:

Books with great than some N number of allowed options are ALWAYS described in terms of the specific items that are not allowed (i.e. Ultimate Equipment or other hardcovers would default to a specific list of what is NOT allowed and a general blanket statement of what is allowed. IF pages or chapters are not-allowed adding the title of that page for clarity (i.e. instead of "chapter 6 isn't allowed" say something like "Chapter 6 - customer magic systems isn't allowed"

Books which are mostly NOT allowed (following a similar criteria) would have ALL affirmatively allowed items spelled out with a blanket statement saying that everything else in the book isn't allowed (and again if entire sections/chapters were allowed these would be at least documented a bit more than just Pages 28-29)

Books which are about evenly split between what is/isn't allowed would list Both lists - the allowed items and the disallowed items. This would allow for highlighting any future changes far more clearly in these cases (mostly splat books not hardcovers)

Rycaut, this seems to be how they do it, but on a section by section basis:

If a greater number of items are allowed, then they list only the not allowed items.
If a greater number of items are not allowed, then they list only the allowed items.

The problem is that until you read the text, you have no way of know whether it will be listing allowed or not allowed--which is the same problem your system will have, and I don't see a way around that issue.

It's true that color-coding "allowed" vs. "not allowed" statements might help, but then you would lose the "updated" color coding.

I supposed it's possible that "font-coding" or "typeface-coding" would work, but since strong/bold and emphasis/italics are already used, you'd have to go with something like "Arial=allowed; Times NR=not allowed". However, depending on the site coding or CSS, that might not display the same in all browsers.

I'm not sure there's a better solution than the way they already do it, which relies on users to read the text instead of skim it.

[Rycaut]

I'm not sure they are all that consistent (at least in the past, more recent updates are getting better) as I've seen a lot of "everything on page X and ...." types of updates (both for allowed and disallowed) which gets very confusing if you are trying to confirm whether a specific item is allowed and don't have all of your sources at the ready.

i.e. I'm building a character and using a source like say Archives of Nethys to look for options I might want to consider as I plan a build. I see say an animal companion that fits my concept and mechanically is very good - now I want to confirm that it is allowed. So I try to look it up on the Additional Resources - but unless it is specifically called out (as allowed or as not-allowed) doing so may not be sufficient to confirm if it is allowed. This is especially complicated by anything which may have appeared in multiple books (so falls into the "not allowed from this book unless it is specifically allowed from another source" - checking what is/isn't covered under those cases is non-trivial.

or even more likely, I'm helping a player with a build (and/or auditing their character at a game I'm running) - a quick check of the Additional Resources may help catch some illegal builds (in one case that caught that an archetype everyone at the table thought was legal wasn't actually) but again only if searching finds it. If it is covered by one off the "everything on these 2 pages is legal" you need to go look at those pages to check. And yes, the player has the responsibility to own the content and theoretically have it available while playing PFS but at least at nearly every game of PFS I've played few people had every single book they owned with them (we play after work or at conventions - carrying our whole library is "challenging" - PDF's help a lot for us subscribers but we still need to find things to confirm what is/isn't allowed).

I agree that there isn't a perfect solution - but I think while it would take some work there may be some partial solutions that would help reduce confusions around a few key areas - stuff that might be, relatively, easy to summarize in tables:

- Animal Companions that are legal
- Familiars (regular and improved which are legal)
- Deities
- Archetypes (there are a few recent ones that I'm actually surprised appear to be legal - ones that appear to grant access to firearms)

More challenging would be:

Magic items
Feats
Spells
Alchemical items
Regular non-magical items (including stuff like animals for purchase)
Special rules (way finder ioun stone resonance, alchemical items used to power spells etc)
Class features with choices (Rogue talents, rage powers, domains, evolutions etc)

[Matthew Morris]

Michael Brock wrote:

Nohwear wrote:

So, is the additional resource page going to be updated soon the reflect the unchained stuff? And hopefully include Heroes of the Wild.

Should be Wednesday.

Well here's to hoping the things I want in Heroes of the Wild make the cut. :-)

[Acedio]

Rycaut wrote:

stuff

It would take a huge effort to refactor the document in this way, and I'm honestly not sure if it would solve the problem you ran into. Having a document in a different format would not catch discrete changes, because it would still be an enormous amount of data to sift through. The highlight of the changes made is each revision is done manually and will still be prone to human error. If they generated it using a diff tool that might be different.

That being said, Archives of Nethys has a nice, mostly correct, list of what is legal for PFS (it'll have the grand lodge logo next to it). That might satisfy your needs for a tool that can tell you quickly if a build option is legal.

This debate is getting a bit long for this thread, so it might be time to break off into a new one if it needs to be discussed further. We should keep this thread limited to specific questions and clarification requests so it's easy to sift through the information here.

[Ascalaphus]

@Rycaut: I don't deny the inconvenience, but I would urge you, to always look at the original source, not just rely on Nethys.

Nethys is correct 99% of the time, but not always. Same with any other fan site; they all have glitches, larger or smaller. So you have to check the original source too.

Of course I use Nethys for preliminary browsing as well, because it's soooo much more user-friendly.

[Rycaut]

yes - I'm well aware of how Nethys marks things - use it all the time - this case (animal companions) is one case where they are inaccurate. There are other cases I've seen where they simply don't indicate one way or another which options are PFS legal. And yes, I will check the originals - but as I noted, I don't always have them at the ready - and even when I do it isn't always clear that I need to (i.e. in this very specific case of the Spinosaurus it was legal when I checked as I was theory crafting a build, then when I went to actually make that character I noticed that it was no longer legal (though still marked as PFS legal on Nethys).

I understand that any reformatting would be a lot of work - I just wish we had some formal standard for how they plan on indicating what is/is not allowed as I think it would help a lot of people.

(The more that I'm thinking about it the more I think that some tables that summed up key items across all legal sources could be exceptionally helpful - Nethys does this to a degree but as noted they aren't always accurate. )

Anyway I'm repeating myself so I will stop discussing this on this thread.

[Karui Kage]

There's a lot of this to dig through, could someone help me out and tell me what's incorrect on the Archives? Totally believe there is something, I don't catch every change to legality, but I'm doing work on it today and may as well fix the error. :)

And in the future, if you guys ever see anything wrong, please shoot me a mail and I'll correct it asap (nethys at archivesofnethys.com)

[Rycaut]

The list of level/illegal animal companions has a number (like the Spinosaurus) who no longer appear to be legal (I haven't gone through and checked all of them but a number of other options from Book 2 and 3 are incorrect and I'm not sure that the legal options from Bestiary 4 are listed in the archives at all.

Not sure if the Orders for Cavaliers indicate which are and which are not PFS legal

can't recall the other items I noticed

and most importantly - THANKS! The Archives of Nethys is an amazing and wonderful resource for Pathfinder players - really appreciate the effort put into it.

[Ascalaphus]

Karui Kage wrote:

There's a lot of this to dig through, could someone help me out and tell me what's incorrect on the Archives? Totally believe there is something, I don't catch every change to legality, but I'm doing work on it today and may as well fix the error. :)

And in the future, if you guys ever see anything wrong, please shoot me a mail and I'll correct it asap (nethys at archivesofnethys.com)

I can't think of any right away, but I'm fairly sure I've seen it once or twice.

I do want to thank you for the amazing work you do on making all the PF material easily accessible.

[Karui Kage]

Thanks to both of you for the kind words :) I'm almost done with Tombs of Golarion, I'll look over the animal companions/Bestiary 4 once I'm finished.

[Jeff Merola]

I do know that it lists all of the Bardic Masterpieces as illegal, despite many of them being legal.

[Rycaut]

Bardic Masterpieces is the other thing I was looking at which was missing notes as to which were PFS legal (many are)

[Karui Kage]

Oh man! That's actually a legitimate bug that I hadn't heard of until now. Plenty of those performances are tagged legal, but not displaying as such. Going to fix that first, thanks for informing me! :)

[BigNorseWolf]

Rycaut wrote:

yes - I'm well aware of how Nethys marks things - use it all the time - this case (animal companions) is one case where they are inaccurate.

That one isn't nethy's fault. They were removed a legal options at some point without any comment, being pointed out, or red text.

[Rycaut]

yup - not blaming Archives of Nethys in the least - but since he asked for things that should probably be updated - animal companions are one (and this thread found another actual bug in the Archives site re Bardic Masterpieces).

Hopefully this thread and discussions will help avoid future "silent" updates (if nothing else lots of people comparing one set of resources like Archives of Nethys with the official listings may help find other errors (on either side).

It was also noted that there may at times have been differences between the Additional Resources as displayed on the web and as available to be downloaded (I can't confirm this as I have only downloaded it occasionally and never checked the download against the website)

[Karui Kage]

Bardic Masterpieces was a code bug. The header was using a pre-formatted plain text name, instead of the one I have with the PFS label. That's all fixed now, should look accurate if you visit the page.

Otherwise, I did some validation on all the animal companion entries from Bestiary 1-4. Few things I came across:

Bestiary 1 and 4: In terms of animal companions, no changes here. All are still accurate as of the current Additional Resources.

Bestiary 2: I think the legal companion here should be the "allosaurus" instead of the "compsognathus". The latter doesn't get an animal companion entry in the book, even though the back (page 312) implies they do on page 90. The entry on page 90 belongs to the allosaurus. I've left both marked as NOT legal for now until it's cleared up.

Bestiary 2 and 3: The rest should all be correct now. It seems like the largest change was in the megafauna being removed as an option, along with a few dinosaurs.

[shadowhntr7]

I'm both excited for and scared by the additional resources update. Mainly for one feat- Branch Pounce. If it makes it in, my dream of a grippli monk (or maybe unchained rogue) doing the whole Final Fantasy dragoon thing will become reality.

At the same time, if it doesn't the concept I've wanted forever will be shelved. Antipication!

That said? Karui Kage: thank you so much for the work you do with the Archives! Such an excellent resource. :)

[Imbicatus]

Branch Pounce + Boots of the Cat seems like a potent combination.

[shadowhntr7]

Exactly. I've always wanted to make that character concept, and Branch Pounce makes it actually possible in PFS.

A rough sketch at 9th level had me able to jump 210 feet per move action.. though I hit an invisible ceiling at 100 feet. All that with no buffs or potions. Combined with a natural climb speed, I can jump up a building's wall, grab on, and jump down on my next turn.

Currently going through the normal monk, unchained monk, and unchained rogue and making a comparison list for builds. Unchained Rogues can get High Jump now too. :)

[cartmanbeck]

Oooh, glad you guys like my Branch Pounce feat! :)

[shadowhntr7]

You have no idea. :D

I've bought the book for that alone (presuming legality in PFS.. and there's no reason it shouldn't be). When I saw it sitting there, staring at me all "Yeah, that's right. You can do this now!" I was cheering like you wouldn't believe.

[Arkos]

I'm still hoping to see Daughters of Fury hit AR at some point because I so-very-badly want the totally meta thrill of purchasing an item I designed and then using it like crazy.

I know it's kind of a niche dream, but it's my dream.

[shadowhntr7]

Daughters of Fury? Never heard of it I don't think.. where's it from?

[RainyDayNinja]

Arkos wrote:

I'm still hoping to see Daughters of Fury hit AR at some point because I so-very-badly want the totally meta thrill of purchasing an item I designed and then using it like crazy.

I know it's kind of a niche dream, but it's my dream.

I know that feel, bro. All of my characters will be toting some Ironmorph Dust ASAP.

[cartmanbeck]

Yeah, I'll need to build a cleric of Calistria to pull out and use the Deck of the Hellwasp's Sting. :)

shadowhntr7 wrote:

Daughters of Fury? Never heard of it I don't think.. where's it from?

It was the winning module from RPG Superstar last year, and it just recently was released. Those of us who got into the top 32 got our items included. Some of us got monsters included as well.

Daughters of Fury

[shadowhntr7]

Dang, that'd be awesome. :)

I oughta give that a shot sometime.

[Karui Kage]

There was definitely a LOT more from that book than I expected out of a module.

[Matthew Morris]

Joseph Kellogg wrote:

Arkos wrote:

I'm still hoping to see Daughters of Fury hit AR at some point because I so-very-badly want the totally meta thrill of purchasing an item I designed and then using it like crazy.

I know it's kind of a niche dream, but it's my dream.

I know that feel, bro. All of my characters will be toting some Ironmorph Dust ASAP.

So do I. I keep hoping to see the Tankard of the cheerful duelist show up somewhere besides KQ.

[Imbicatus]

Perhaps on a chronicle sheet if it gets sanctioned.

[Chris Lambertz]

The Additional Resources page has been updated with Pathfinder Unchained and Heroes of the Wild.

[Nohwear]

I am confused, how is Wild Caller Summoner legal?

[Imbicatus]

Chris Lambertz wrote:

The Additional Resources page has been updated with Pathfinder Unchained and Heroes of the Wild.

It looks like the entry for Battle of Bloodmarch Hill has the items for The Hill Giant's Pledge and vice versa.

[Preston Hudson]

Nohwear wrote:

I am confused, how is Wild Caller Summoner legal?

Best guess, after a quick look at the archetype, it is based off the Unchained version of the Summoner.

[Jeff Morse]

Nohwear wrote:

I am confused, how is Wild Caller Summoner legal?

it looks like it uses the new unchained rules for picking a plant eidolon.

[Sebastian Hirsch]

In the product thread of Heroes of the Wild, it seemed pretty clear, that the Wild Caller is not compatible with the new summoner, and it is lacking the new kind of advancement the new summoner gets.

However it is a legal retraining option for grandfathered summoners.

[Matthew Morris]

Interesting Fey Thoughts isn't allowed. Is it 'too good' for PFS? I ask because I rarely multiclass so multitalented isn't that good a deal for my build choices.*

Still, I'll trade a +2 to perception or a craft skill for fey magic. So I'm one for three in the 'things I wanted legal' this month.

*:

I have an eyes of the ten apprentice I was torn between bard and magus. Bard would have taken fighter (or wizard) VMC, while magus would have taken Bard VMC. Either way, I like(d) the idea of taking Chillblight emissary, fey thoughts, fey magic and the fey foundling feat to make for a very alien half elf. Fey thoughts isn't as 'useful' for a bard (since it would 'only' give me swim as a class skill) vs. being useful for a magus.

[Cubed]

Nohwear wrote:

I am confused, how is Wild Caller Summoner legal?

RAW. The Wild Caller is legal until declared otherwise. The same AR that changed the summoner also states that the Wild Caller is legal since it is in "Archetypes: the archetypes on pages 24–25 are legal for play". Please note that other summoner changes are coming.

[shadowhntr7]

Branch Pounce is legal! *jumps 210 feet in the air in excitement*

..but Fey Thoughts isn't. While the gnome I just made and is level 1 would've liked it, it didn't include Survival.. so I'll live. Still, I'm confused why it was banned?

[Apocryphile]

Nohwear wrote:

I am confused, how is Wild Caller Summoner legal?

That confused me too. The AR states archetypes on p.24-25 are legal, and the Wild Caller is the only thing on page 25!

Not sure if you could take it on a new summoner though. Unless your ability to change your eidolon's form by terrain type is what you're getting instead of the by level advancements..

[Cubed]

shadowhntr7 wrote:

Branch Pounce is legal! *jumps 210 feet in the air in excitement*

..but Fey Thoughts isn't. While the gnome I just made and is level 1 would've liked it, it didn't include Survival.. so I'll live. Still, I'm confused why it was banned?

Branch Pounce is extremely situational. Having a Tree Feather Token could come in really handy, though.

[John Compton]

Apocryphile wrote:

Nohwear wrote:

I am confused, how is Wild Caller Summoner legal?

That confused me too. The AR states archetypes on p.24-25 are legal, and the Wild Caller is the only thing on page 25!

Not sure if you could take it on a new summoner though. Unless your ability to change your eidolon's form by terrain type is what you're getting instead of the by level advancements..

It is available for those Advanced Player's Guide summoners who might want to use the retraining rules that appear in Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Campaign to retrain into an archetype. It is not compatible with the unchained summoner.

[Cubed]

John Compton wrote:

Apocryphile wrote:

Nohwear wrote:

I am confused, how is Wild Caller Summoner legal?

That confused me too. The AR states archetypes on p.24-25 are legal, and the Wild Caller is the only thing on page 25!

Not sure if you could take it on a new summoner though. Unless your ability to change your eidolon's form by terrain type is what you're getting instead of the by level advancements..

It is available for those Advanced Player's Guide summoners who might want to use the retraining rules that appear in Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Campaign to retrain into an archetype. It is not compatible with the unchained summoner.

Please tell me that the upcoming Summoner's Handbook will have its own "Wild Caller"-ish archetype.

"Featuring dozens of new feats, magic items, archetypes, and character options"

[shaventalz]

I'm confused as to who can take the Signature Skill feat.

AR says "...Signature Skill feat [is] only available through the rogue's edge class ability."

The Signature Skill feat duplicates that ability, but is not provided through it.

Is the feat restricted to those who already have the rogue's edge ability, or just those with levels in Unchained Rogue?

[Imbicatus]

You can only gain Signature Skill via Rogue's Edge. You cannot take it as a feat selection.

[shaventalz]

Imbicatus wrote:

You can only gain Signature Skill via Rogue's Edge. You cannot take it as a feat selection.

But you don't gain Signature Skill through rogue's edge. You gain *skill unlocks* through rogue's edge.

[Protoman]

Additional Resources wrote:

Traits: all traits on pages 3–7 are legal for play, except fey thoughts. Feral speech does not allow a PC to learn Druidic.

I'm not sure why Fey Thoughts is mentioned since the Feyborn section was presenting alternative racial traits. Are the Fey Magic and Low-Light Vision options PFS legal? If they are, that means a human couldn't take either because Fey Thoughts isn't available, right?

[Dylos]

Additional resources wrote:

Pathfinder Adventure Path #92 "The Hill Giant's Pledge"

Animal Companions: all animal companions on pages 82–83 and 86–87 are legal for play

At first when I saw this I was excited for more options, then I checked the pages listed, and there are no animal companions in this book on these pages.

[Matthew Morris]

Protoman wrote:

Additional Resources wrote:

Traits: all traits on pages 3–7 are legal for play, except fey thoughts. Feral speech does not allow a PC to learn Druidic.

I'm not sure why Fey Thoughts is mentioned since the Feyborn section was presenting alternative racial traits. Are the Fey Magic and Low-Light Vision options PFS legal? If they are, that means a human couldn't take either because Fey Thoughts isn't available, right?

Or it means you *can* sub it out, but don't get the free skills. :-(

[Protoman]

Matthew Morris wrote:

Protoman wrote:

Additional Resources wrote:

Traits: all traits on pages 3–7 are legal for play, except fey thoughts. Feral speech does not allow a PC to learn Druidic.

I'm not sure why Fey Thoughts is mentioned since the Feyborn section was presenting alternative racial traits. Are the Fey Magic and Low-Light Vision options PFS legal? If they are, that means a human couldn't take either because Fey Thoughts isn't available, right?

Or it means you *can* sub it out, but don't get the free skills. :-(

That...seems like an awkward and unclear situation that could benefit from a tad more elaboration in the Additional Resources page lol