>>Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

4,651 to 4,700 of 6,818 << first < prev | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hayato Ken wrote:

Pathfinder Unchained was really awesome.

When will we see more along those lines?

We love tinkering on rules in the design team. We have side conversations at work about this kind of thing all the time. But being able to unleash ourselves into a new book? That's up to fans of Unchained like you to generate enough sales to convince the higher-ups that we should write another one! Until then, we can also unleash a little bit of our tinkering creativity in our advisory role on Starfinder.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slithery D wrote:
Mark, what percentage of questions do you try to answer?

Nearly all. Usually unless I miss a question accidentally, a question is particularly rude or passive aggressive (which few are in this thread, yay!), or the question is too hard to answer right then (which also sometimes causes me to stop answering and then fall behind if I see one of those coming up, rather than skip it). Most common is for me to miss one accidentally.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
KingOfAnything wrote:
Do all unchained eidolons start with 2 Natural Armor, or just the serpentine elemental?

They should have 2 nat armor from their base forms (page 34), and then the elemental serpent has 2 more from the evo. The base forms on 34 are the default, and the listed info by subtype lists the changes (generally just the evolutions change, but like Strength score and nat armor wouldn't).

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gisher wrote:
Gisher wrote:
swoosh wrote:

One more pathfinder question question.

Do you think, as written, the Occultist's Conjuration Resonant Power is broken? And if so do you have any suggested ways to improve it?

It is weird that the only Occultist spell that it works with is Glitterdust.

But the Sha'ir archetype does get Summon Monster (elementals only) spells so they can get some use out of it. And Mark did write the Sha'ir.

Thinking about how Augment Summoning works on SLA's that are based on Summon Monster, I'm now wondering if the Conjuration Resonant Power would work with the Servitor Base Focus Power. That would make Casting Focus a lot more useful.

It's duration isn't right for that regardless of the SLA thing.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
aristalis wrote:
Hi Mark, been a fan of the Kineticist ever since I started watching Avatar, and recently started up mine in PFS. Was wondering if feats like Kinetic Focus: Fire are in the works because of the ruling on spell feats effecting SLAs, or if spell focus evocation would work. One of my PFS GMs also eagerly thinks about this. Have a great week!

Glad you're enjoying it! Spell Focus (evocation) wouldn't apply, as they aren't evocations. SLAs and spell feats is an open question I've seen a few times on the board with no solid answer yet, and depending on how you rule that, it may or may not allow Elemental Focus to apply. It's certainly an interesting point to consider that a feat that gave +1 DC to all fire wild talents (say), is a significantly larger impact on the character than all evocation spells is, since all your wild talents are going to be fire unless you expand.

Have a good week yourself!

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:

Mark, this may be the dumbest rule question I've ever asked, but I was wondering if you could weigh in with something unofficial for this.

I have NO desires to try that, it's just a thought experiment that makes me laugh a lot to think about.

It's not dumb at all; Mounted Combat is messy, and the rules don't come close to covering a bunch of possible corner cases, much like the one you present with recursive mounts (to move away from your extreme example, a mounted character with a familiar riding on her back isn't that far beyond the norm). I don't have a great answer for you, as there seem to be a few things in the mounted combat rules that are really hard to fully reconcile when you go into the nitty gritty.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The NPC wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
I'm going to put up some things I heard (or said) about Horror Adventures in Paizocon panels on my fan page if you're interested in checking it out. Right now I have up some info about the corruptions.
Saw it. Very nice. This could definitely work for my purposes. I know there were some pictures of the corruptions, but do you have any of the others?

I have them all, but I don't know if they've been released anywhere yet. I do have a bunch more stuff on my page now (link in the quote), covering all the other chapters of the book!

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:

Hey Mark,

Does the Fortuitous weapon enchantment give you an extra AoO to use during your turn, or do you need Combat Reflexes for it to be at all useful?

When I opened up my ACG, I was thinking this would be a straightforward answer, but on reading it, I totally see the ambiguity. My initial take when I was looking it over a few months ago for my swashbuckler in Skull and Shackles was that it just let you take two on the same provoking act and you needed Combat Reflexes (which I already had anyway), but now on reading it again, I'm no longer convinced it doesn't grant it to you anyway. Good question!

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
swoosh wrote:

Was the Cipher Investigator's (UI) Tenuous Threat ability changed in development?

The ability lets you use studied strike 1/day/enemy without studied combat, which doesn't really seem to line up with the 'forgetting the cipher's a threat' fluff of the name and the opening sentence.

Not really changed too much. I think the idea is that the momentary forgetfulness of your threat adds the precision damage without studying because it's more like making a sneak attack after feinting, just using studied strike damage because that's less confusing than "you can make a sneak attack that deals damage equal to your studied strike damage" while also applying your on-hit studied strike stuff.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alanya wrote:
Did you and/or Linda (hopefully) manage to escape PaizoCon without contracting concrud?

Somehow yes. Woohoo!

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
If you wanted to design a character based on the Lancer class from Final Fantasy fame (example characters include Kain from FFIV [American 2], Cid from FFVII, and Freya from FFIX, or the generic class from FF Tactics), to be able to emphasize that awesome leap attack that puts Mario's vertical jump to shame, what would you use?

Given Kain was a dragoon, I think it's likely that the dragoon archetype's leaping lance ability was an homage to him, since that sort of maneuver doesn't really seem like it would be super-associated with dragoons otherwise. That's more of a damaging lance leap attack, as opposed to high jump though. Avian wildsoul vigilantes also have a nice dive attack but they fly more so than leap. Something like air's leap for kineticist can work to give you an enormous leap.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:

I have a cool idea how to make a cool class cooler, so cool kids can be cool. You know you want to hear it!

The Evangelist has a per-requisite:
Feat: Deific Obedience

It's all about the cool good people, so I understand why it doesn't including Demonic Obedience as another option.

But shouldn't it have said:
Celestial Obedience or Deific Obedience

Because as it stands now, nothing in Deific Obedience prohibits you from taking the feat with a god from the Celestial list. Then you can take the Evangelist prestige class with a Celestial god. Deific Obedience is just a feat tax in that case?

Or is it that this shouldn't be possible and the requirement of Deific Obedience is short hand for "a god on it's list"?

Demonic Obedience has the demoniac and Celestial Obedience has the mystery cultist (and the Eldest have their own thing), so I think the idea is that each set of entities gets their own prestige class(es).

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

Oh noes :(

*channels positive feelings*

He's doing better, but it did mean he missed the company summer party last weekend :(

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TrinitysEnd wrote:
If you have a sword with the Flaming Enchantment and attack a weapon immune swarm, do you still apply the flaming damage, or is that negated as well?

I remember in 3.0 you used to be able to swing around torches and damage swarms, and that might have also applied to flaming weapons back then, I can't remember. This text seems to be missing from Pathfinder, though many GMs (including in our group) still allow the torch thing in our games.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChesterCopperpot wrote:

Quick Occult Questions, Mark:

The description of ley lines says: "Occult skill unlocks such as dowsing can also help detect the presence of ley lines over long distances, which can be quite useful in locating an accessible portion of a ley line"

The dousing skill unlock doesn't set a DC for finding a ley line. What do you think would be appropriate? Would it be easier to find more powerful ley lines?

Appreciate your thoughts! Thanks.

I agree that different ley lines might have different DCs (based on the power, what sort of energy it carries, and so on) and the distance might factor in (presumably anything longer than dowsing's usual range limit of long range would have a significantly tougher DC). 20-25, like dowsing for graves and metal, might be a good place to start if the ley line is in dowsing's usual range.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:

Hey Mark, I know this is a rules question but I feel like the rule is pretty clear on this so I didn't know where else to ask this question.

The courtly hunter archetype from Ultimate Intrigue specifically states that "Levels in other classes that grant animal companions do not stack with levels of courtly hunter for the purpose of determining the abilities of her courtly companion." I was originally looking at grabbing levels of sacred huntsmaster to pick up the hunter tactics ability (which is why I assume this sentence exists). But this rule sort of ... opened up a whole new can of worms for me and I was wondering if you had any insight.

1) If courtly companions and animal companions don't stack, does that mean if I multiclass into, say, druid that I get a second animal companion? (Aka a courtly companion from hunter levels and an animal companion from druid levels.)

2) Even though the levels don't stack, does my courtly companion benefit from abilities and other effects that affect animal companions? (Like hunter tactics, or Celestial Servant.)

I'd suspect you'd get a second companion, and that second companion would be the one that has the features from your other class. The courtly hunter changes the way that a clever player of the archetype interacts with her animal companion in a pretty fundamental way, essentially losing the additional combat edge over the druid's companion to gain something that is close to being a gestalt of animal companion and familiar (eventually with multiple forms so you can grab bat for blindsense and flying, fish for water infiltration, and so on). The fact that it no longer uses Handle Animal and tricks is a big departure, since normally even really smart companions like an oracle or paladin mount require them, and especially that combined with the changing creature type and the leshy/fey spirit within puts it into its own category and would mean it would combine weirdly with other things (it's got a leshy/fey spirit, so it isn't an ally called from the celestial planes, for instance). Given how many players use their animal companions (expendable combat machines), the courtly hunter's pet works best with different options and requires a player to get into a different headspace to get the most advantage out of it. Your raptor/kitty/etc is still as much a combat machine as a druid animal companion (though not as much as a hunter animal companion), but it's also an incredible infiltrator and spy (especially if you pick an innocuous/common to the area animal for one of the forms, or more than one, since it can keep changing to different kinds of animals on its own to avoid suspicion) and possibly even an extra face with courtly focus if you get it beastspeak, depending on how you allotted skills (depending on your own skill choices, it likely has the most skills available of any companion/eidolon/phantom/mount type creature, and a much nicer class skill situation than normally too, since it gains all of yours).

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cryomancer86 wrote:
Thanks for taking the time to do this. I have a few questions about the Control Winds spell. Does this spell move with the caster, or is it immobile? My second, and more important, question is the spell lists Fortitude negates. Just what does fortitude negate? Does it only negate picking up/pushing enemies, or would it negate all the wind effects such as perception penalties, ranged attack penalties, fly penalties/etc? My third question is if multiple castings of this spell stack. Thanks again!

It lists a separate area, rather than emanating from you, so it's probably immobile. I would guess it negates the checking/pushing/picking up part, like gust of wind's Fort save.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mark, just a thanks for taking the time to answer all these questions, even when backlogged so much. That really means a lot!

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Yeah, Thankies Mark ^w^

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark why does the garrote no inflict normal damage? Why does it not inflict sneak attack damage? A wire Garrote IN real life inflicts lethal damage, it both strangles and slices the throat of the victum.

Sometimes the in-game stats of something, particularly a tool of violence like a weapon or garrote, reflect a main use for the game but not all the other side uses (for instance, longswords were frequently used to pierce someone but only do slashing damage) or a low damage injury becomes 0 for simplicity and to focus on another effect. If garrotes did 1 damage on their attack, for instance, negating the damage with DR would also negate the kicker effect, and you'd probably want to be able to strangle a DR creature with a garrote, like how Herakles strangled the Nemean Lion to beat its DR/–.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark in your opinion would adding Improved Evasion as an advanced slayer be ok? Is Pazio going to add more Slayer Talents?

I'm pretty sure slayers don't even have the original evasion and have to grab it as an advanced slayer talent from the ninja advanced talent. In that case, I'd say leave improved evasion to the monks and rogues.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

Can you offer insight into how Unchained Rage Powers are supposed to interact with a RP granting class that isn't the UnBarb?

Can other classes take them?

Can the Unbarb take chained Rage Powers?

The Class and it's Rage Powers seem kinda stillborn since I haven't seen any love for Unchained Rage Powers since Unchained came out.

Been kinda curious about this for awhile.

I'd say up to you and your group whether to use Unchained rage powers or normal for skalds and the like, though you'd have to mod out their rage too in some cases. The rogue was meant to be a power boost, but the barbarian never was (granted some rage powers that weren't enticing enough, like raging swimmer, did get a bump, but rage powers as a whole didn't like rogue talents); it's a simplification that removes some bad stuff like rage death and some complicated stuff like cross-character-sheet math recalcs.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Can you offer insight into how Unchained Rage Powers are supposed to interact with a RP granting class that isn't the UnBarb?

Can other classes take them?

Can the Unbarb take chained Rage Powers?

The Class and it's Rage Powers seem kinda stillborn since I haven't seen any love for Unchained Rage Powers since Unchained came out.

Been kinda curious about this for awhile.

I'd say up to you and your group whether to use Unchained rage powers or normal for skalds and the like, though you'd have to mod out their rage too in some cases. The rogue was meant to be a power boost, but the barbarian never was (granted some rage powers that weren't enticing enough, like raging swimmer, did get a bump, but rage powers as a whole didn't like rogue talents); it's a simplification that removes some bad stuff like rage death and some complicated stuff like cross-character-sheet math recalcs.

K, Thankies.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

Heh.

Also, Mark, have you ever seen, Scooby Doo!: Mystery Incorporated, and if so, how much did you like it? :)

Mark Seifter wrote:
Haven't seen it, but was a big Scooby Doo fan as a little kid. Is that the one where Velma is a tsundere?
Tacticslion wrote:

... a little bit. ... maybe. I promise nothing. >.>

(Yes.)

EDIT: For ninja-Mark!

Incidentally... do you have Netflix?

(This is a leading question. The ultimate goal, if you do, is to say, "Then watch this!"... but I've just done that, soooooo...)

Yes. However, while I am open to watching cartoon series that show up on Netflix, like the extremely solid Young Justice, which I watched with Linda, nowadays it usually takes a burden of positive buzz (particularly if it notes intelligent writing) for me to watch one. That said, the burden isn't particularly high either.

Paizo Employee Designer

thegreenteagamer wrote:
Mark, just a thanks for taking the time to answer all these questions, even when backlogged so much. That really means a lot!

No problem! And thank all you guys for being a great little subcommunity within the Paizo community. I saw that there was a small stretch of deleted posts in this last batch, but I'm happy that those are really rare compared to most threads!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So Mister Seifter,

Who do I have to kill to get my hands on a golem headed chimera?!

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Seitz wrote:

So Mister Seifter,

Who do I have to kill to get my hands on a golem headed chimera?!

Answered here.


I saw. I just had this annoying buzzing sound in my head...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Protoman wrote:

Mark, while I like the kineticist's burning infusion, especially for its bonus to attack, DCs, and caster level checks against the on-fire target, I find myself hesitant to use it at times due to still not fully understanding how exactly the target puts it out:

I assume the "Reflex negates" is to avoid getting set on fire to begin with. But if already on fire from burning infusion, does the target:

1) Start suffering taking the 1d6 on-fire damage immediately once they fail the initial saving throw? Or on its next turn like with alchemist's fire?

2) What's the actions to put out the fire? Is it a full round action (like with immolation bombs, explosive bombs, and alchemist's fire)? Is it like the like the Environment Catch on Fire rules where I think it's a free Reflex save at beginning of target's turn (if they fail, more damage) and during their turn they can get another saving throw if "rolling on the ground or smothering the fire with cloaks or the like permits the character another save with a +4 bonus" (I assume full-round action for that too)?

3) What's the DC to put out the fire? Is it like the Environment Catch on Fire rules of a flat DC 15 Reflex save to put out fires on clothing and equipment or does one use the initial saving throw DC of 10 + half kineticist level + Con modifier?

As of late I've been doing target starts takes on-fire damage on their subsequent turns (like with alchemist fire, but where it actually sticks around) and full-round action to put it out using the initial Reflex DC because I felt that DC 15 Reflex of the Environment rules was rather low and for equipment rather than actual person on fire and the actual DC used is the "avoiding set on fire DC to begin with" in general. But I'd like to be sure on the procedures and difficulties so as to not be unfairly penalizing my burning infusion victims.

Yeah, the catching on fire rules are pretty confusing and seem almost-contradictory at times in multiple places. I tend to pretty much agree with you on much of what you include here, with one exception that (annoyingly), ongoing damage is just not as codified as it should be, so when it happens during your turn is unclear, despite being important if it might knock you out (and bleed you might never take if you can stop it before end of turn). We could really use something like a "beginning of turn phase" and "end of turn phase" that has specific things that happen during them (with ongoing damage picking a side and sticking with it).

Thanks, Mark! That helps a lot! I think I'll change it up that the ongoing damage would happen on my subsequent turns for future consistency but will list the possible options for GMs. My PFS pyro leveled up to 12 and just waiting to use it for Eyes of the Ten eventually.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

Heh.

Also, Mark, have you ever seen, Scooby Doo!: Mystery Incorporated, and if so, how much did you like it? :)

Mark Seifter wrote:
Haven't seen it, but was a big Scooby Doo fan as a little kid. Is that the one where Velma is a tsundere?
Tacticslion wrote:

... a little bit. ... maybe. I promise nothing. >.>

(Yes.)

EDIT: For ninja-Mark!

Incidentally... do you have Netflix?

(This is a leading question. The ultimate goal, if you do, is to say, "Then watch this!"... but I've just done that, soooooo...)

Yes. However, while I am open to watching cartoon series that show up on Netflix, like the extremely solid Young Justice, which I watched with Linda, nowadays it usually takes a burden of positive buzz (particularly if it notes intelligent writing) for me to watch one. That said, the burden isn't particularly high either.

Mark watches Young Justice? Yeeeeeeeess.


I have yet to find time to watch Young Justice, but it is on my (very, very long) list of saved shows to do exactly that to.

While one person recently decided 'meh' on Mystery Inc., I feel very differently.

On the surface, it is definitely a goofy cartoon... but there are many times I struggled between deciding if what I was watching was one of the most stupid or coolest things I've seen in a cartoon.

The show's writing is extremely intelligent, but that intelligence downplayed for goofy laughs that are safe for kids. It's meant to strongly appeal to people who grew up on the original while safely watching this with a younger audience. It has surprisingly startling (and sometimes surprisingly dark) satire generally dropped in casual conversation as an aside, almost always brushed off rather immediately as a joke. One of the more interesting things, is that, unlike, say, Animaniacs (which does the same thing), it's not even subversive about it - it's not trying to get racy stuff past the radar (for the most part), it's just making references that either sail clear over the head of youth (because they lack context) while being relevant to the adults (which are inevitably brushed right by with a pratfall or similar distraction) or are funny for two very different reasons. The humor can be very meta or reference-laden... but it's those same references that often leave me unable to decide between, "This is so daggum stupid!" and "This is so daggum awesome!" at the same time.

The characters are extremely tropey and at first will seem one-note... but it knows this and plays it up on purpose; in truth, the characters, although archetypal, have surprising depths and elements to them (though it's often obscured by the show's goofy nature). What's more, the characters don't just stay in one place - in one method or another, they each grow and become better and wiser and so on, while still being themselves.

The final confrontation is a bit, uh... I dunno... <spoiler>*... but it's a solid ride right up to that, and it gets shockingly dark just beforehand. More than that, the final ending is... perfect for the series, and will genuinely put you in that nostalgic-but-in-a-good-way place.

* EDIT: Spoiler-not-spoiler: upon reflection, the ending reminded me a great deal of Avatar: The Last Airbender, in that it made me go, "Huh. I kind of knew it was leading up to this but... huh. Okay." and yet that in no way invalidated the ride up to that point. And the thing before and behind that were awesomeness. I'm not saying that Mystery Inc. is on the same level; but the experiences were the same of, "Great ride, strong follow through, slightly rocky final confrontation, awesome finish." type of thing.

One thing I'll note, is that, while cartoony, it's not... hm... frantic, I guess? While I have nothing against others liking it, I'm not a fan of something like Spongebob - I understand the writing on that is clever, but the art, rapid pace, and similar elements cause a visceral, involuntary, and unpleasant reaction in me when it happens to be on... feelings I share with things like Ren and Stempy or Courage the Cowardly Dog or some similar shows. It's not even goofy on the level of, say, Animaniacs. Instead, it both accepts cartoon physics and denies them, simultaneously, creating a very silly world that has multiple facets of reality in it. You have to be down for masks with working lips, overly complex traps, and levitating steel, in other words. (This, in particular, seems to have been the breaking point for someone else who watched it recently based on my rather rave reviews.)

Anyway, it comes with my solid recommendation - if nothing else, I'd suggest grabbing it and leaving it on your saved to watch shows for when you're (hah!) not doing anything else (hah! I say!) and have (hah! hah-hah!) free time (and again, I say, hah!), because I loved that series, its references, homages, and both love of and humorous fun poked at the original material (but in a loving and intimately familiar way).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Mark, just a thanks for taking the time to answer all these questions, even when backlogged so much. That really means a lot!
Rysky wrote:
Yeah, Thankies Mark ^w^

I want to chime in with these. That you try is both amazing and humbling. And please: don't get burned out. I know that being an internet figure can be exhausting and stressful, and you have a lot of people putting expectations and whatnot... but I'm just thankful for your polite and awesome efforts.

Thank you!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's really nice to have you back, Mark.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Gisher wrote:
swoosh wrote:

One more pathfinder question question.

Do you think, as written, the Occultist's Conjuration Resonant Power is broken? And if so do you have any suggested ways to improve it?

It is weird that the only Occultist spell that it works with is Glitterdust.

But the Sha'ir archetype does get Summon Monster (elementals only) spells so they can get some use out of it. And Mark did write the Sha'ir.

Glitterdust, sha'irs, new spells, and giving the implement over to other characters all work. Logan and I sort of added resonant powers to the class from Jason's initial draft, and back when they had two, the idea that the summoning one was more useful for lending to the conjurer and the other was better for you (plus both were not as juicy as resonances for schools like divination, making you decide between getting a great resonance from divination or more uses of the more powerful servitor focus power). When Jason chose one to keep for each school to help make it less complicated, I noted that the class didn't have summon monster. I still put them in for sha'ir though.

Hmmm. I haven't checked new spells for this feature.

Thanks for filling us in on the rationale behind the design. I've been wondering if it was a mistake that might be errata'd in the next edition. Now things make sense.

I do think that a Sha'ir reach build that focuses on summoning could be really fun. Between the Summon Monster (Elementals) spells, Servitor, Necromantic Servant, Soulbound Puppet, Shadow Beast, and of course the Jin there are lots of options for building a small army. I'd probably use Servitor, the Summon Monster spells, and the Jin because I think I'd want my 1st and 6th level Implement Schools to be Transmutation and Conjuration respectively.

Casting Focus would extend the duration for the spells, and the Size Alteration Focus Power would let you bump those Elementals up a size. Throw in Augment Summoning and you would be pretty decent I think. Not nearly as good as a Conjurer Wizard or Summoner, of course, but decent. Meanwhile Legacy Weapon and Physical Enhancement would help you make those AoOs more effective.

You did a pretty good job with this archetype, Mark. I don't really care for element-based classes and hate losing access to so many Implement Schools, but I still want to play one of these. :)

By the way, I've posted statblocks for the Jin to spare people the trouble of applying the template.


Mark Seifter wrote:
Gisher wrote:
Gisher wrote:
swoosh wrote:

One more pathfinder question question.

Do you think, as written, the Occultist's Conjuration Resonant Power is broken? And if so do you have any suggested ways to improve it?

It is weird that the only Occultist spell that it works with is Glitterdust.

But the Sha'ir archetype does get Summon Monster (elementals only) spells so they can get some use out of it. And Mark did write the Sha'ir.

Thinking about how Augment Summoning works on SLA's that are based on Summon Monster, I'm now wondering if the Conjuration Resonant Power would work with the Servitor Base Focus Power. That would make Casting Focus a lot more useful.
It's duration isn't right for that regardless of the SLA thing.

Yeah, I eventually figured that out. That'll teach me to post from memory instead of looking the specs up.

Nah, it probably won't teach me anything.


Forecast for getting a FAQ today?

Sczarni RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Marc, what electronic games are you currently playing?

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Protoman wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Protoman wrote:

Mark, while I like the kineticist's burning infusion, especially for its bonus to attack, DCs, and caster level checks against the on-fire target, I find myself hesitant to use it at times due to still not fully understanding how exactly the target puts it out:

I assume the "Reflex negates" is to avoid getting set on fire to begin with. But if already on fire from burning infusion, does the target:

1) Start suffering taking the 1d6 on-fire damage immediately once they fail the initial saving throw? Or on its next turn like with alchemist's fire?

2) What's the actions to put out the fire? Is it a full round action (like with immolation bombs, explosive bombs, and alchemist's fire)? Is it like the like the Environment Catch on Fire rules where I think it's a free Reflex save at beginning of target's turn (if they fail, more damage) and during their turn they can get another saving throw if "rolling on the ground or smothering the fire with cloaks or the like permits the character another save with a +4 bonus" (I assume full-round action for that too)?

3) What's the DC to put out the fire? Is it like the Environment Catch on Fire rules of a flat DC 15 Reflex save to put out fires on clothing and equipment or does one use the initial saving throw DC of 10 + half kineticist level + Con modifier?

As of late I've been doing target starts takes on-fire damage on their subsequent turns (like with alchemist fire, but where it actually sticks around) and full-round action to put it out using the initial Reflex DC because I felt that DC 15 Reflex of the Environment rules was rather low and for equipment rather than actual person on fire and the actual DC used is the "avoiding set on fire DC to begin with" in general. But I'd like to be sure on the procedures and difficulties so as to not be unfairly penalizing my burning infusion victims.

Yeah, the
...

Wang Fire, <redacted name of Eyes of the Ten boon> for hire?

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashram wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

Heh.

Also, Mark, have you ever seen, Scooby Doo!: Mystery Incorporated, and if so, how much did you like it? :)

Mark Seifter wrote:
Haven't seen it, but was a big Scooby Doo fan as a little kid. Is that the one where Velma is a tsundere?
Tacticslion wrote:

... a little bit. ... maybe. I promise nothing. >.>

(Yes.)

EDIT: For ninja-Mark!

Incidentally... do you have Netflix?

(This is a leading question. The ultimate goal, if you do, is to say, "Then watch this!"... but I've just done that, soooooo...)

Yes. However, while I am open to watching cartoon series that show up on Netflix, like the extremely solid Young Justice, which I watched with Linda, nowadays it usually takes a burden of positive buzz (particularly if it notes intelligent writing) for me to watch one. That said, the burden isn't particularly high either.
Mark watches Young Justice? Yeeeeeeeess.

Yup, we watched it. It was quite good. Having watched Gargoyles as a kid, there are enough similarities that I can guess the influence (still be misassigning it though; having seen a lot of Pathfinder fans misassign influence of Paizo stuff to be skeptical of assigning it myself) and say that if the similarities are his influence and not someone else shared on the projects, I love the way Greg Weisman handles villains. Villains with back-up plans who can still achieve an objective despite being defeated are hard to pull off, but much more satisfying than a more typical cartoon villain like Skeletor who just fails completely every time and you eventually almost feel bad for the poor schmo.

I heard rumors Netflix might revive for a third season if enough people watch Young Justice on Netflix, so Tacticslion, you should consider watching it, I'd say particularly if you liked Xanatos in Gargoyles.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Wang Fire, <redacted name of Eyes of the Ten boon> for hire?

By the Ten I could only hope so!

Sir Knight Captain Wang Fire, Captain of the Kindled Kami Gray Corsairs ship, Bellflower Tiller to the downtrodden, could always use more titles.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Anyway, it comes with my solid recommendation - if nothing else, I'd suggest grabbing it and leaving it on your saved to watch shows for when you're (hah!) not doing anything else (hah! I say!) and have (hah! hah-hah!) free time (and again, I say, hah!), because I loved that series, its references, homages, and both love of and humorous fun poked at the original material (but in a loving and intimately familiar way).

Good recommendation. I particularly appreciated listing shows you didn't like as a contrast (since all positive makes it harder for me to establish a baseline). I also don't like the kind of shows you listed as not liking and used as a contrast, so that makes your recommendation more effective.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
Ashram wrote:
Mark watches Young Justice? Yeeeeeeeess.

Yup, we watched it. It was quite good. Having watched Gargoyles as a kid, there are enough similarities that I can guess the influence (still be misassigning it though; having seen a lot of Pathfinder fans misassign influence of Paizo stuff to be skeptical of assigning it myself) and say that if the similarities are his influence and not someone else shared on the projects, I love the way Greg Weisman handles villains. Villains with back-up plans who can still achieve an objective despite being defeated are hard to pull off, but much more satisfying than a more typical cartoon villain like Skeletor who just fails completely every time and you eventually almost feel bad for the poor schmo.

I heard rumors Netflix might revive for a third season if enough people watch Young Justice on Netflix, so Tacticslion, you should consider watching it, I'd say particularly if you liked Xanatos in Gargoyles.

Young Justice, Gargoyles; I knew Mark has good taste. What is next on the to-watch list? (Television or movies you are looking forward to).

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Mark, just a thanks for taking the time to answer all these questions, even when backlogged so much. That really means a lot!
Rysky wrote:
Yeah, Thankies Mark ^w^

I want to chime in with these. That you try is both amazing and humbling. And please: don't get burned out. I know that being an internet figure can be exhausting and stressful, and you have a lot of people putting expectations and whatnot... but I'm just thankful for your polite and awesome efforts.

Thank you!

You're most certainly welcome. It can definitely be exhausting and stressful being an "internet figure" as you say sometimes. But I do enjoy chatting with you guys!

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gisher wrote:
It's really nice to have you back, Mark.

Thanks! I'm all caught up from my Paizocon backlog of posts now, so maybe should be around more regularly until closer to Gencon!

Paizo Employee Designer

Gisher wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Gisher wrote:
swoosh wrote:

One more pathfinder question question.

Do you think, as written, the Occultist's Conjuration Resonant Power is broken? And if so do you have any suggested ways to improve it?

It is weird that the only Occultist spell that it works with is Glitterdust.

But the Sha'ir archetype does get Summon Monster (elementals only) spells so they can get some use out of it. And Mark did write the Sha'ir.

Glitterdust, sha'irs, new spells, and giving the implement over to other characters all work. Logan and I sort of added resonant powers to the class from Jason's initial draft, and back when they had two, the idea that the summoning one was more useful for lending to the conjurer and the other was better for you (plus both were not as juicy as resonances for schools like divination, making you decide between getting a great resonance from divination or more uses of the more powerful servitor focus power). When Jason chose one to keep for each school to help make it less complicated, I noted that the class didn't have summon monster. I still put them in for sha'ir though.

Hmmm. I haven't checked new spells for this feature.

Thanks for filling us in on the rationale behind the design. I've been wondering if it was a mistake that might be errata'd in the next edition. Now things make sense.

I do think that a Sha'ir reach build that focuses on summoning could be really fun. Between the Summon Monster (Elementals) spells, Servitor, Necromantic Servant, Soulbound Puppet, Shadow Beast, and of course the Jin there are lots of options for building a small army. I'd probably use Servitor, the Summon Monster spells, and the Jin because I think I'd want my 1st and 6th level Implement Schools to be Transmutation and Conjuration respectively.

Casting Focus would extend the duration for the spells, and the Size Alteration Focus Power would let you bump those Elementals up a size. Throw in Augment Summoning...

I'm not certain there are any new spells that fit that bill, but there might be, and there could be later. As to sha'ir, I'm pretty happy with it. One of the occultist archetypes we got in wound up being way too long, but the others needed more text to explain themselves, so in the end, we were down by about one archetype. I asked around, and Logan suggested something elemental focused, at which point I decided to try to see if the chassis could make a sha'ir, so Logan definitely deserves some of the credit for the initial idea.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
Forecast for getting a FAQ today?

Juggling a few possible topics, but I think it's quite likely we'll get a FAQ, even if it's not the main FAQ in contention for the slot right now.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas LeBlanc wrote:
Marc, what electronic games are you currently playing?

I've played some Bravely Second and Pathfinder Adventures (which surprisingly Paizo staff don't get for free, but it's free to play and fairly easy to get gold, so we have the currently available parts unlocced anyways as well as the character add-on deck, Valeros, and Ezren).

Quite recently, also Numenera: Torment was delayed so much that they finally decided to give non-beta baccers beta access, so I've played a bit, but only periodically due to glitches (Bluffing the first fight was glitched to automatically claim success but then fail, for instance, and I wanted to Bluff).

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
KingOfAnything wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Ashram wrote:
Mark watches Young Justice? Yeeeeeeeess.

Yup, we watched it. It was quite good. Having watched Gargoyles as a kid, there are enough similarities that I can guess the influence (still be misassigning it though; having seen a lot of Pathfinder fans misassign influence of Paizo stuff to be skeptical of assigning it myself) and say that if the similarities are his influence and not someone else shared on the projects, I love the way Greg Weisman handles villains. Villains with back-up plans who can still achieve an objective despite being defeated are hard to pull off, but much more satisfying than a more typical cartoon villain like Skeletor who just fails completely every time and you eventually almost feel bad for the poor schmo.

I heard rumors Netflix might revive for a third season if enough people watch Young Justice on Netflix, so Tacticslion, you should consider watching it, I'd say particularly if you liked Xanatos in Gargoyles.

Young Justice, Gargoyles; I knew Mark has good taste. What is next on the to-watch list? (Television or movies you are looking forward to).

Heh, only the best in cartoons, I guess. In the vein of cartoons I watched more recently and not as a kid, there's also Avatar (LoK was clearly important research for my job, since it was still running while I was working on kineticist). I don't particularly have any shows or movies I'm anticipating. Most of the shows I'm watching now (well I guess not "now" since the seasons are generally over) are from momentum but haven't been keeping up as well lately in my opinion (like a lot of the superhero shows).


Mark Seifter wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Mark, just a thanks for taking the time to answer all these questions, even when backlogged so much. That really means a lot!
Rysky wrote:
Yeah, Thankies Mark ^w^

I want to chime in with these. That you try is both amazing and humbling. And please: don't get burned out. I know that being an internet figure can be exhausting and stressful, and you have a lot of people putting expectations and whatnot... but I'm just thankful for your polite and awesome efforts.

Thank you!

You're most certainly welcome. It can definitely be exhausting and stressful being an "internet figure" as you say sometimes. But I do enjoy chatting with you guys!

And us with you!

Also, with your recent description of Young Justice, it certainly moved higher up the que... maybe even next! (Maybe even "now"... except it's struggling against Parks and Rec, Farscape, and Seven Deadly Sins (an anime). That said, it probably just bumped Justice League, Case Closed, and Power Puff Girls (as I've either seen them or don't have the focus for subtitles during the summer.

I'm also glad you liked my recommendation! As someone had followed only my positive "live reaction"-type posts, but was disappointed, as a result, I wanted to clarify to make sure you can judge it fairly!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think I remember hearing it's on American Netflix, but if you haven't seen it yet, Person of Interest is an excellent show.

4,651 to 4,700 of 6,818 << first < prev | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.