Additional Resources update rant


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 109 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge 3/5 *

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Matthew Morris wrote:

Cunning Caster: Because Pathfinders are murder hobos, so they can’t subtly do anything.

Guild Emissary: Hey, heaven forbid those exchange characters actually belong to a guild and have another way to do the gather information. I mean a feat that replaces another that’s unheard o- oh, hello Dirty Fighting.
Subtle devices: See Cunning Caster, above.

These make my wayang dark tapestry oracle sad. This is exactly the sort of thing he'd want to be able to do.

Scarab Sages 4/5

Of the three books, I only have Dirty Tactics Toolbox, so I'm not sure what those other feats do. However, Dirty Fighting seems pretty clearly to have been designed to counter many of the Combat Expertise is a feat tax complaints over the years. I can certainly see a situation where replacing Combat Expertise and the Int requirement that comes with it would be acceptable, but replacing Power Attack as a requirement, for example, would not. Which is also likely why Dirty Fighting doesn't replace Power Attack as a prereq.

So I guess my question is, what feat does Guild Emissary replace? And in what context?

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

Guild Emissary doesn't replace anything.

Two-thirds of its benefits deal with shopping for magic items and the Contacts system, respectively. I'm guessing that's why it was cut.

It does seem like something that might make a good Chronicle boon, though...

5/5 5/55/55/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Constable.....why on earth did that get banned

I've got it.. must have been the murderhobos union. Too many taking people alive...

Lantern Lodge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Now, I don't have the book that it came from, but "Constable" sounds like it would be something that requires following laws?

When the other 5 members of your party and your VC Briefing are in agreement that doing some illegal tomb looting is your mission, I could see where this could bring up issues. Better to nip it in the bud before Constable Jerkass is turning in fellow Pathfinders.

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

No alignment restrictions at all. It's not even especially tied to law enforcement.

Lantern Lodge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Then maybe it's banned because it's horribly named.

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

I should clarify: it's not bad at being law enforcement, or terribly off-theme either. But it's still mostly a cavalier.

It has no code of conduct, other than the character's Order, and it has no restrictions on that - or on alignment. You could be a chaotic evil Constable of the Order of the Rough Beast, by RAW.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

Constable sounds like it got cut because it's someone who would stay with their community and police it; or maybe go on a long-distance manhunt. Not someone who joins up with a globe-trotting society just to see what's out there.

5/5 5/55/55/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Anderson wrote:
Constable sounds like it got cut because it's someone who would stay with their community and police it; or maybe go on a long-distance manhunt. Not someone who joins up with a globe-trotting society just to see what's out there.

Really, given the problems that paladins and well.. a lot of clerics would have working with the society thats not really an issue.

Scarab Sages 2/5

James Wygle wrote:
shadowhntr7 wrote:
They also won't be proficient in them, so you'd have to spend a feat on it- which I don't think you can.
The eldritch guardian's familiar shares the master's combat feats that its form is compatible with; if they're physically capable of wielding weapons, then that would include weapon proficiencies.

Unfortunately, weapon and armor proficiencies gained from a class do not count as 'combat feats' in PFS. They do not count as feats at all. So, this would not work even if the wasp had a compatible body.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

I was also terribly disappointed that eldritch archer didn't make the cut.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Still working on my defense of the eldritch archer, but I would not call it broken, it might even be one of the less powerful magus builds out there.

Silver Crusade 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Eric Ives wrote:
OK, I pledge to work on drafting a compelling good-faith argument for the Constable, but it probably won't be posted tonight. Any particular features I should focus on?
Definitely hard to come up with an argument for why something should be included when you don't know why it got hit with the ban hammer.

Is the ban hammer in the hammer weapon group?

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Still working on my defense of the eldritch archer, but I would not call it broken, it might even be one of the less powerful magus builds out there.

How does it stack up against the standard Dervish Dance-shocking grasp-Magical Lineage magus? That's where I'd like to see analysis start.

Also, to everyone else: it might be best to wait for a new thread before we all get into this particular discussion. ^_^

Dark Archive 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Eldritch Archer needs to be banned. Its just way too over powered. Sorry, but it is.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Likewise, is there any particular reason why the Waylayer archetype from the dirty tactics toolbox isn't legal (its on page 13, which is not listed as a page for legal archetypes)? I mean, the 1st level ability is pretty nice, but we already have a legal trait that roughly does the same thing.

3/5

Sin of Asmodeus wrote:
Eldritch Archer needs to be banned. Its just way too over powered. Sorry, but it is.

Can you explain why you have this opinion? Just saying it is overpowered is not going to convince anybody to agree with you, and it also prevents people from making an argument against your position.

Grand Lodge 2/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I know that including things from AP Player's Guides isn't common, but could the rules for Evangelist/Exalted/Sentinel of Milani from page 14 of the Hell's Rebels Guide be considered please?

Silver Crusade 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darrell Impey UK wrote:
I know that including things from AP Player's Guides isn't common, but could the rules for Evangelist/Exalted/Sentinel of Milani from page 14 of the Hell's Rebels Guide be considered please?

I strongly suspect that the obedience will get printed in Inner Sea Faiths this spring, and will be made legal at that time.

5/5 5/55/55/5

While we're ranting...

the mammoth goad ban.

WHY?

Dark Archive 2/5

Lorewalker wrote:


Unfortunately, weapon and armor proficiencies gained from a class do not count as 'combat feats' in PFS. They do not count as feats at all. So, this would not work even if the wasp had a compatible body.

Then you take Exotic Weapon Proficiency and your monkey can and use a Falcata!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
General Spoon wrote:
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:
Eldritch Archer needs to be banned. Its just way too over powered. Sorry, but it is.
Can you explain why you have this opinion? Just saying it is overpowered is not going to convince anybody to agree with you, and it also prevents people from making an argument against your position.

Read Cyrad's post above... he pretty much spellls it out. One of the limiting factors for the magus is that he had to put his bod up front to do his mega single target damage.

The Eldritch Archer does away with that and brings in all the advantages of archery. Melee magi may just as well quit the Society now, and take up knitting.

Grand Lodge 2/5

LazarX wrote:
Melee magi may just as well quit the Society now, and take up knitting.

Now I'm not saying one way or the other on whether or not they should be banned because I don't have the pdf, but really? Just because something more effective comes along all of these other pathfinders that are perfectly effective (or more than perfectly effective) in their own right should just give up?

3/5

LazarX wrote:
General Spoon wrote:
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:
Eldritch Archer needs to be banned. Its just way too over powered. Sorry, but it is.
Can you explain why you have this opinion? Just saying it is overpowered is not going to convince anybody to agree with you, and it also prevents people from making an argument against your position.

Read Cyrad's post above... he pretty much spellls it out. One of the limiting factors for the magus is that he had to put his bod up front to do his mega single target damage.

The Eldritch Archer does away with that and brings in all the advantages of archery. Melee magi may just as well quit the Society now, and take up knitting.

The poster I was replying to did not make any references to other posters in the thread and their arguments, not even so much as "for reasons already mentioned." You, however, are doing it right ;)


James Anderson wrote:
Constable sounds like it got cut because it's someone who would stay with their community and police it; or maybe go on a long-distance manhunt. Not someone who joins up with a globe-trotting society just to see what's out there.

To me, that's simply a flaw in a player's creativity. A constable who is on the hunt for a renowned criminal seems more likely to join the Society than, say, an Honor Guard cavalier, or a vigilante. The community guardian oracle is even more tied to a specific location.

In addition, there are numerous examples of globe-trotting detectives and policemen. Sherlock Holmes, half of Jackie Chan's characters, John McClane, Javert, Clouseau. Even characters who typically stay in one place have the occasional cases out of town.

The Exchange 3/5

Cyrad wrote:
The archetype's only drawback is the arcane bond.

The class' weakness is a 1/2 off price weapon.. oh my.

I'd also like to point out to everyone Eldritch Archer stacks with pretty much every other single best magus archetype. It even stacks with Myrmidarch so you can get touch spells 5 levels earlier than the Eldritch Archer arcana and without the range limitations.

Or you can just be kensai or hexcrafter stacked with it. This is just one of the most flexible and powerful archetypes I've seen in a long while.

Does it have to be banned? I doubt it but it's certainly the magus archetype I would build if given the chance.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

The Archetype has other downsides, like the fact, that it changes spell combat, you lose access to weapons with a high crit chance, etc... I am still working in a more comprehensive post (ideally while I am not in my phone)

Grand Lodge 4/5

Jayson MF Kip wrote:

Now, I don't have the book that it came from, but "Constable" sounds like it would be something that requires following laws?

When the other 5 members of your party and your VC Briefing are in agreement that doing some illegal tomb looting is your mission, I could see where this could bring up issues. Better to nip it in the bud before Constable Jerkass is turning in fellow Pathfinders.

Hi. SHIELDMARSHAL Boomstck McCracken at yer service.

:)

Silver Crusade 4/5 ****

Yes, but we don't have to follow the laws because whatever we do is the law.

not actually a shieldmarshal for 2 more games.

Dark Archive 4/5

Magus gun slinger double barrel gun. Pistoleros plus eldritch archer archetype. It says ranged weapon. Hi welcome to a special kind of hell.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Arcane Bonds must be "Always Available", so firearms are out.

Also, most ppl are unhappy with the nerf to Double Barrelled Firearms, so that appeal dropped anyways.

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

Nefreet, all arcane bonds? Or only the free one you get? Since you can spend 200 gp per level to transfer your arcane bond to a new object, including an existing magic item, transferring doesn't seem to be affected.

Start with a crossbow arcane bond, when you can afford a double pistol, transfer to that.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

Nefreet wrote:


Also, most ppl are unhappy with the nerf to Double Barrelled Firearms,

I don't think that is true at all. Lots and lots of people loved the nerf. Many of the gunslingers with double barrelled guns hated it, of course, but that is normal for a nerf. And some of the gunslingers thought that the nerf was warranted.

Silver Crusade 4/5 ****

pauljathome wrote:
Nefreet wrote:


Also, most ppl are unhappy with the nerf to Double Barrelled Firearms,
I don't think that is true at all. Lots and lots of people loved the nerf. Many of the gunslingers with double barrelled guns hated it, of course, but that is normal for a nerf. And some of the gunslingers thought that the nerf was warranted.

Put me in the camp that thought it was a needed balance. I am quite happy with it. I can move and get two shots off, or I can full attack. Works for me.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Flint Wheeler wrote:

Yes, but we don't have to follow the laws because whatever we do is the law.

not actually a shieldmarshal for 2 more games.

Well there pard'ner, don't let all the power get to yer head too quick now.

The power to proclaim justice and all that nonsense, you think that's real power? Hah! Hell no, boy!

The real power is that shieldmarshals are the only folk in all of Golarion that can open and close doors as a swift action. That's a mighty strong ability to have. So be mighty careful boy, that kind of power corrupts awful quick.

Just tone it back and keep a cool head and you'll do alright.

-Sir Erimond Thorne, Shieldmarshal of the Grand Dutchy of Alkenstar

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

*now pictures shield martial worshiper of Eristil, who can guarantee being able to open a door for a lady at a moments notice*

Shadow Lodge

TL;DNR: if you accept that a standard archer's first round advantage (getting to full-attack while melee has to move into position) isn't cause to ban archery, and the standard magus' ability to add spell damage on top of the same damage as a (non-Improved) Two-Weapon combatant isn't cause to ban magus, then there is no way eldritch archer can be considered powerful enough to be banned.

Long version: Eldritch archer is to standard magus as an archery-based fighter is to a two-weapon fighting based fighter.

Seriously, it seems like the only argument that eldritch archer is "OP" is that they usually don't have to worry about moving, allowing them to full-attack w/ Spell Combat in round 1. Thing is, that's always been an advantage archers have had over melee combatants: archers almost always get to full-attack in the first round, and melee combatants have to move into range.

A melee magus is already going to be able to use use Spellstrike in round one, assuming he could make a (non-charging) melee attack that round at all, so the extra spell damage in round one isn't OP. A melee magus is also going to be able to get the same number of attacks per round with Spell Combat as an eldritch archer gets with Ranged Spell Combat, once he's in range to full-attack, so the extra attack isn't any more powerful than the melee magus either (especially since the melee magus gets to hold the charge if he misses, while the eldritch archer just flat loses the spell).

Also, keep in mind that they only get that extra Ranged Spell Combat attack if they're within range for that spell, so unlike standard archers, they might actually want to move closer before they start shooting.

Bottom line, the first-round action economy advantage is inherent to all ranged characters, and isn't any more grounds to call the archetype OP than it is to call archers OP in general. They maybe one attack with extra damage from a spell (with the same number of attacks as a Rapid-Shotting archer of the same BAB), if they're within spell range, and the melee magus will do just as many attacks (probably with a better crit profile) just as soon as they close the distance.

There is only one pitfall I see for the archetype, and it's easily fixed: while the normal Spell Combat feature explicitly bans combining it with Two-Weapon Fighting, nothing stops the eldritch archer from combining Ranged Spell Combat with Rapid Shot. This means in the early levels, an eldritch archer can get three attacks, whereas another archer (or magus using Spell Combat) could only get two. As I said, this is easily fixed by just making a one-sentence clarification in the Additional Rules entry that the extra attack from Ranged Spell Combat does not stack with the extra attack from Rapid Shot, and we already have precedence for making that kind of clarification.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

Nefreet wrote:

Arcane Bonds must be "Always Available", so firearms are out.

Actually I am pretty certain that it was clarified that the Arcane Bond item that you get for free as a class feature has to be "Always Available" but that you could make any item "Always Available" or not into your Arcane Bond.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

James Wygle wrote:

TL;DNR: if you accept that a standard archer's first round advantage (getting to full-attack while melee has to move into position) isn't cause to ban archery, and the standard magus' ability to add spell damage on top of the same damage as a (non-Improved) Two-Weapon combatant isn't cause to ban magus, then there is no way eldritch archer can be considered powerful enough to be banned.

Long version: Eldritch archer is to standard magus as an archery-based fighter is to a two-weapon fighting based fighter.

Seriously, it seems like the only argument that eldritch archer is "OP" is that they usually don't have to worry about moving, allowing them to full-attack w/ Spell Combat in round 1. Thing is, that's always been an advantage archers have had over melee combatants: archers almost always get to full-attack in the first round, and melee combatants have to move into range.

A melee magus is already going to be able to use use Spellstrike in round one, assuming he could make a (non-charging) melee attack that round at all, so the extra spell damage in round one isn't OP. A melee magus is also going to be able to get the same number of attacks per round with Spell Combat as an eldritch archer gets with Ranged Spell Combat, once he's in range to full-attack, so the extra attack isn't any more powerful than the melee magus either (especially since the melee magus gets to hold the charge if he misses, while the eldritch archer just flat loses the spell).

Also, keep in mind that they only get that extra Ranged Spell Combat attack if they're within range for that spell, so unlike standard archers, they might actually want to move closer before they start shooting.

Bottom line, the first-round action economy advantage is inherent to all ranged characters, and isn't any more grounds to call the archetype OP than it is to call archers OP in general. They maybe one attack with extra damage from a spell (with the same number of attacks as a Rapid-Shotting archer of the same...

This FAQ says that spell combat works with haste and similar effects (blessing of fervor, speed weapon), but is not actually a full attack, thus you can't actually use rapid shot.

FAQ wrote:

Magus, Spell Combat: Does spell combat count as making a full attack action for the purpose of haste and other effects?
Yes.

Edit 9/9/13: This is a revised ruling about how haste interacts with effects that are essentially a full attack, even though the creature isn't specifically using the full attack action (as required by haste). The earlier ruling did not allow the extra attack from haste when using spell combat.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Flint Wheeler wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Also, most ppl are unhappy with the nerf to Double Barrelled Firearms
I don't think that is true at all. Lots and lots of people loved the nerf. Many of the gunslingers with double barrelled guns hated it, of course, but that is normal for a nerf. And some of the gunslingers thought that the nerf was warranted.
Put me in the camp that thought it was a needed balance. I am quite happy with it. I can move and get two shots off, or I can full attack. Works for me.

I'm actually of the same mindset. My Savage Technologist uses a Double Barreled Pistol, and I wouldn't change a thing about him. But the perception I've gotten from the forums and several players was that people were unhappy with it. Could be regional. *shrug*

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
graywulfe wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Arcane Bonds must be "Always Available", so firearms are out.
I am pretty certain that it was clarified that the Arcane Bond item that you get for free as a class feature has to be "Always Available" but that you could make any item "Always Available" or not into your Arcane Bond.

You are correct. I was mistaken. Only the free item at 1st level must be Always Available.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Jacksonville

Nefreet wrote:

Arcane Bonds must be "Always Available", so firearms are out.

Also, most ppl are unhappy with the nerf to Double Barrelled Firearms, so that appeal dropped anyways.

As a serial Gunslinger and 4-star GM, I heartily approve of the clarification. I don't think that it is a nerf myself. It curtails hideous abuse and yet gives a mechanical benefit.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

UndeadMitch wrote:
Darrell Impey UK wrote:
I know that including things from AP Player's Guides isn't common, but could the rules for Evangelist/Exalted/Sentinel of Milani from page 14 of the Hell's Rebels Guide be considered please?
I strongly suspect that the obedience will get printed in Inner Sea Faiths this spring, and will be made legal at that time.

That's encouraging, though in the meantime, why not allow it from the PG? Sanctioning from PGs isn't unheard of, and two other gods have had their obediences approved from the Iron Gods AP books.

At least it's good to know there's prospects for my Milanite cleric to transition to something with multiple skill points.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

blackbloodtroll wrote:

This was a rules-hassle-free way of going about inconspicuous casting.

Is that not the opposite of disruptive?

I'm hoping it's because behind the screens there's some work going on to FAQ the old "can you see spellcasting if there's no components" question, which is now fairly urgent (these feats, psychic spells, lots of intrigue heavy AP stuff).

So I was hoping this was like Pummeling Charge, ban it while the theoretics are getting sorted out.

Silver Crusade 5/5

Ascalaphus wrote:
UndeadMitch wrote:
Darrell Impey UK wrote:
I know that including things from AP Player's Guides isn't common, but could the rules for Evangelist/Exalted/Sentinel of Milani from page 14 of the Hell's Rebels Guide be considered please?
I strongly suspect that the obedience will get printed in Inner Sea Faiths this spring, and will be made legal at that time.

That's encouraging, though in the meantime, why not allow it from the PG? Sanctioning from PGs isn't unheard of, and two other gods have had their obediences approved from the Iron Gods AP books.

At least it's good to know there's prospects for my Milanite cleric to transition to something with multiple skill points.

Not arguing with you, I would like to see it made legal from the PG in the interrim. But, the only stuff out of PG's that I can think of that have been made legal are from the 3.5 era. They haven't made anything legal from a PG for a while (with the exception of the Paizocon GM boons that give a campaign trait from the most recent AP PG).

1/5 * RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

James Wygle wrote:
Seriously, it seems like the only argument that eldritch archer is "OP" is that they usually don't have to worry about moving, allowing them to full-attack w/ Spell Combat in round 1. Thing is, that's always been an advantage archers have had over melee combatants: archers almost always get to full-attack in the first round, and melee combatants have to move into range.

No, the Eldritch Archer is broken because you get to play a God wizard and an archer at the same time without either of their weaknesses. The "first round advantage" is only a small part of it.

I gave several other reasons and explained them in earlier posts. The magus is a powerful class balanced by having class features that only work in melee combat. Taking away that restriction without any significant drawbacks results in a broken class.

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

UndeadMitch wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
UndeadMitch wrote:
Darrell Impey UK wrote:
I know that including things from AP Player's Guides isn't common, but could the rules for Evangelist/Exalted/Sentinel of Milani from page 14 of the Hell's Rebels Guide be considered please?
I strongly suspect that the obedience will get printed in Inner Sea Faiths this spring, and will be made legal at that time.

That's encouraging, though in the meantime, why not allow it from the PG? Sanctioning from PGs isn't unheard of, and two other gods have had their obediences approved from the Iron Gods AP books.

At least it's good to know there's prospects for my Milanite cleric to transition to something with multiple skill points.

Not arguing with you, I would like to see it made legal from the PG in the interrim. But, the only stuff out of PG's that I can think of that have been made legal are from the 3.5 era. They haven't made anything legal from a PG for a while (with the exception of the Paizocon GM boons that give a campaign trait from the most recent AP PG).

However there also hasn't been anything *but* campaign traits (as player options go) for the last few years. Most of the recent Player's Guides have contained background information and suggestions for which classes and races are the best fit. As Golarion has gotten more filled out from other sources there's less need to put a few regional weapons in each Guide.

As for why the campaign traits aren't legal. . . there's a deliberate design decision in the Adventure Path line to make the campaign traits stronger than regular traits to encourage people playing the AP to take these very thematic options that help fill out the background of the AP characters. Which in turn means they're a bit out of balance for PFS Organized Play standards.

I personally really want to see the Milani Deific Obedience made legal. She's always been my favorite of the "minor" deities.

Silver Crusade 5/5

Kevin Willis wrote:
UndeadMitch wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
UndeadMitch wrote:
Darrell Impey UK wrote:
I know that including things from AP Player's Guides isn't common, but could the rules for Evangelist/Exalted/Sentinel of Milani from page 14 of the Hell's Rebels Guide be considered please?
I strongly suspect that the obedience will get printed in Inner Sea Faiths this spring, and will be made legal at that time.

That's encouraging, though in the meantime, why not allow it from the PG? Sanctioning from PGs isn't unheard of, and two other gods have had their obediences approved from the Iron Gods AP books.

At least it's good to know there's prospects for my Milanite cleric to transition to something with multiple skill points.

Not arguing with you, I would like to see it made legal from the PG in the interrim. But, the only stuff out of PG's that I can think of that have been made legal are from the 3.5 era. They haven't made anything legal from a PG for a while (with the exception of the Paizocon GM boons that give a campaign trait from the most recent AP PG).

However there also hasn't been anything *but* campaign traits (as player options go) for the last few years. Most of the recent Player's Guides have contained background information and suggestions for which classes and races are the best fit. As Golarion has gotten more filled out from other sources there's less need to put a few regional weapons in each Guide.

As for why the campaign traits aren't legal. . . there's a deliberate design decision in the Adventure Path line to make the campaign traits stronger than regular traits to encourage people playing the AP to take these very thematic options that help fill out the background of the AP characters. Which in turn means they're a bit out of balance for PFS Organized Play standards.

I personally really want to see the Milani Deific Obedience made legal. She's...

Most of the PG's have some extra stuff. Iron Gods had some feats and extra rules, RoW had familiars and spells, that's just off the top of my head. I full well understand why the campaign traits from the PG's aren't legal for play, so thanks for the lecture. If they didn't make the extra rules options from previous PG's legal, there isn't really much sense in making the deific obedience from the Hell's Rebels PG legal yet, even though it would be pretty cool.

Edit: Shattered Star has prestige awards and the traits from the Faction Guide. RoW also has Winter Witch PrC and archetype. Skull and Shackles has equipment.

51 to 100 of 109 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Additional Resources update rant All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.