Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

All posts created by Bob

I don't remember being able to sort bank vaults by tier, though you can do so in the Equipment and Crafting tabs of your inventory. It's possible we could add more sorting to the vaults as well, though it gets tricky because some sorting categories only apply to some tabs. Tier's probably about the safest category in that regard, though even there some things aren't really commonly thought of in terms of tier (coin, Azoth, premium packs).

Improving the situation for full vaults is high on our list of things to work on, and I'll add this possibility to the bug report we're using to track the issue.
Technically, University Commons was won in the land rush under the name RiverBank. The one minor favor we did grant a while back was allowing them to move from their original location to their new one closer to Thornkeep, which was unclaimed back then, because at the time they were very active with new players and the travel distance was clearly causing lots of problems. However, that move was made with the full understanding that there was no guarantee they'd be able to hold on to that location. They also had to completely abandon their old location (which was eventually taken over by another company using the old settlement takeover rules and became Greystone Keep) and set up their own holdings near their new location. They've basically earned their right to a settlement in the same manner as other settlements, and actually had to do a little more work than most.

It is true that the Bloodstone Swords, the company we devs generally play in (with non-GM characters only) is part of University Commons. So far, that settlement has done a pretty good job of letting us see the game from a regular-player perspective, participating in most of the activities that everyone else does, without getting involved in major territorial conflicts where it would be difficult to avoid the appearance of favoritism. If it stops serving that purpose, we'll have to reevaluate.

In terms of the settlement name, that's completely up to the founding company. Settlements are free to change their name any time, within reason, and nothing about the name University Commons required any special dispensation from us.
We do have a long-term plan for adding instanced dungeons, and the Emerald Spire Superdungeon is something we'd obviously want to recreate aspects of, and use for inspiration. Instanced dungeons won't really recreate the experience of playing through a module, but they'd add a bit of that flavor in a way that fits well with our overall sandbox MMO feel.

However, dungeons aren't on our short-term plans, since we need to focus on polishing off several other aspects of the game first, so they won't be getting added anytime soon.
University Commons has no official mandate from above and receives no special treatment or protection from Paizo. They're under the same settlement upkeep and warfare rules as every other player settlement, which could result in them being abandoned or taken over, but not in them becoming an NPC settlement.
We're celebrating 10 years of Pathfinder with a new Humble Bundle! For as little as $1, the top tier includes a 1 Month Free Trial for Pathfinder Online, along with great PDFs like the Pathfinder Beginner Box and Core Rulebook!

You can also get more than $500 in PDFs from Paizo for just $18, and a portion of each sale benefits Camden’s Concert for the treatment and cure of cystic fibrosis. Through March 6th!

The 1 Month Free Trial is for new Pathfinder Online accounts only, meaning its great for friends who are interested in giving the game a try, or for setting up an additional account for yourself. We're already seeing lots of new characters getting started up, so keep an eye out for potential new recruits!
Three more sequences were cleared since the last update, with 38 left to finish off! Here are all the completed sequence hexes:

  • Carpe Noctem 5-6
  • Aragon 2-3-2-3
  • Keeper's Pass 1-2
  • Alderwag 2-3
  • Unassigned (University Commons 5-6)
  • Callambea 4-5
  • Oak Knoll 4-5
  • Unassigned (Carpe Noctem 4-4-4)

All the other standard monster hexes are still running sequences, and every hex is now past the Bloodbriar Goblin Raid. There are also multiple hexes running the final escalation, so hopefully more will fall soon.
The general idea is that you fire off your attack, notice that was the last of your ammo, and immediately start getting some makeshift ammo ready in case you need it for another attack, rather than waiting until you decide to attack and only then getting some ammo ready. The latter would mean that every makeshift ammo attack would be delayed upfront, and could theoretically even mean that enemies could move out of range/sight while making the ammo.

I was testing it out a bit and for me any rooting always happened to me at the beginning of the attack, so right at the beginning of the first animation. Any slowing seemed to happen at the end of the attack, though it looked to me like it was happening just a bit before the second animation started. The rooting usually ended around the time I started making the ammo, and the slow only slowed me down, so I could generally move during makeshift ammo animation.

However, I did note that I couldn't actually fire off Evasion during either the first or second animation, which I take is the important point here. Same thing when I just needed to reload ammo. Basically, we consider you to be already busy doing one thing, like reloading or fashioning ammunition, so you can't start doing another big action until that's finished.

Theoretically, we could eventually make the system a bit more complicated and let you interrupt the makeshift/reload action with other feats that don't require animation, then save up the makeshift/reload action until you're once again between feats. That would certainly make sense, but would require a fair amount of coding time and would probably have some edge cases to work through.

Another alternative would be to make the reload/makeshift stage more of a manual process, where if you don't have ammo ready, the ammo-using feats aren't available until you manually trigger a reload/makeshift action first. That would put you in better control of the order actions take place in, but would mean a lot more button presses when using makeshift ammo.
I would like a single character to be able to have more than one Crafter's House open at the same time.

That's an understandable desire, but it's one we need to balance against the limited number of places available for player housing. Admittedly, a single player could theoretically lock up all the available housing spots by spreading the housing across multiple accounts/characters, but at least that adds an extra layer of difficulty to doing so, not to mention that it looks better to other players when all the spots aren't held by a single character name.

We also have a general design principle of asking players to make meaningful choices between different possibilities, and letting players deploy multiple housing options at once changes that from a choice of "which one" to "how many." Just as one character can't slot every possible enchantment at once, we don't want one character to be able to benefit fully from every possible house at once.

That said, if we ultimately feel that the current limits are too restrictive, it wouldn't technically be too difficult to raise the number of houses that can be deployed at once a bit, though any specific limit we set would feel somewhat arbitrary. Alternatively, we could look into more expensive housing variants that support multiple skills, or housing add-ons that give existing housing some extra capabilities. There'd probably have to be some tradeoffs or serious prerequisites involved, but there are probably some interesting solutions we could consider. There'd be more work involved, but they'd probably be more fun as options, and would decrease the demand on the limited spaces available.
No ETA yet. There are some complicated bits we need to work through that set the tone for the rest of the plan, and we're closing in on those, but there are still a fair number of details to work through.
Not in any way attempting to be rude or annoying here with these questions, but the above leads me to feel like you have "a plan". Is the reluctance to write it out due to not having it organized in an orderly layout/timeline or is it just a vast strategy that is too long and obvious to bother sharing?

How stuck in pre-assigned priority is it and how much is left for "crowdforged" idea/discussion is there? Either order is fine (your game, money, risk) but I miss the original "ideals" of the "crowdforged feeling". smile

It's more like we have a rough idea of a plan, but there are still details we need to work through before it's solid enough to call it a plan. We're holding off until the plan is at the right stage for sharing it more widely.

The plan will of course be heavily influenced by all the discussions we've had here on the forums and elsewhere, and we'll continue to crowdforge the details as we're implementing things. Not every part of the plan can be up for debate, but we do our best to involve the community as much as we can.
No ETA yet. There are some complicated bits we need to work through that set the tone for the rest of the plan, and we're closing in on those, but there are still a fair number of details to work through.