DMs ONLY: Haunts

Rather than block this entire thread in a /spoiler I'm going to assume PCs read the header and don't come in.

I'm pretty confused about the Haunts section in the Haunting of Harrowstone book - page 64.

Can we talk about this some and some folks explain them to me?

Haunts appear to have (among other things):

• How you notice them (usually perception)
  
• Their hps
  
• A 'weakness'
  
• A trigger
  
• An effect upon trigger
  
• A set of requirements to dismiss them - "Destruction"
  

Wow this is confusing. OK so.

• PCs get near a haunt, and have a chance to 'Notice' them. That makes sense.
  
• The trigger effect goes off. That makes sense.
  
• How are the PCs supposed to know how to destroy a haunt? For example the Headless Horseman requires a holy weapon buried in the ground and them him taunted so as to move over the area. The Cold Spot one has to have a metal object subjected to Heat Metal and then that object buried in hallowed ground. Whhaaaa? Are the PCs supposed to figure this out from talking to old wise men or something? I can swing that. "Oh, you felt that cold spot? I think ol' jenkins had a grandfather who dealt with that. Go talk with him." ????
  
• Why do haunts have hit points? Can PCs just attack the Choking Hands and try and do 18 points of damage to it? What does that even look like?
  
• What are these Weaknesses? Most of them appear to be weak to "Hide from Undead". Orbs are weak to "slow" - is that the slow spell?
  
• And finally, they appear to reset - usually 1/day. What does that look like? If you trigger it and then walk away, next day it can happen again? Is it that simple?
  

There are some words in the document about working out a code to talk with a spirit through rapping. Example?
PC: "Spirit! Rap once for yes, twice for no."
PC: "Spirit, to lay you to rest do I need to bring mancacles enchanted with bless weapon."
<RAP>
PC: "Sweet! Is that is?"
<RAP><RAP>
PC: "Ummm... spirit... do I have to then throw these manacles into moving water?"
<RAP>
PC: "Cool! Got it!"

My PCs are less psychic.

Clearly I'm very confused here and MUST be missing something. Someone please enlighten me.

This will answer the majority of your questions:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/haunts

The only thing not covered therein is the "destruction" clause. Haunts usually occur as part of a module, and the answer is in the module. Since there is effectively a "haunt bestiary" in this book, then I agree, the "destruction" section seems very out of place, and as a GM, you'll have to invent a way to get this info to the players (usually through "talking to grandfather jenkins").

I'm assuming you have access to the Haunt rules; if not, you can read them here;

Haunts

Hit Points represent damage they can take from positive channeling, before being suppressed. This does not destroy them.
Other attacks only damage them if they are called out as a weakness.

The permanent destruction is indeed dependent on trial and error, or using other detective skills to ascertain what went wrong in this location, and working to put it right. Some of these are actions that most PCs should want to perform, regardless of alignment, or whether they are divine casters. Finding the bones of a victim walled up in the creepy old house should compel any native of Golarion (let alone Ustulav) to lay them to rest, without the prompting of the haunt punishing them if they don't.

Some of the other conditions are less obvious, true.
Ideally, they should be thematic and reflect the deceased's manner of death or state of mind.

Wow this is confusing. OK so.

• PCs get near a haunt, and have a chance to 'Notice' them. That makes sense.
  
• The trigger effect goes off. That makes sense.
  
• How are the PCs supposed to know how to destroy a haunt? For example the Headless Horseman requires a holy weapon buried in the ground and them him taunted so as to move over the area. The Cold Spot one has to have a metal object subjected to Heat Metal and then that object buried in hallowed ground. Whhaaaa? Are the PCs supposed to figure this out from talking to old wise men or something? I can swing that. "Oh, you felt that cold spot? I think ol' jenkins had a grandfather who dealt with that. Go talk with him." ????
  
• Why do haunts have hit points? Can PCs just attack the Choking Hands and try and do 18 points of damage to it? What does that even look like?
  
• What are these Weaknesses? Most of them appear to be weak to "Hide from Undead". Orbs are weak to "slow" - is that the slow spell?
  
• And finally, they appear to reset - usually 1/day. What does that look like? If you trigger it and then walk away, next day it can happen again? Is it that simple?
  

A good point of reference is the Advanced Gamemastery Guide section on haunts(pg 242) (and linked by Snorter). This goes into the basics of haunts and may provide more detail than what is offered in Harrowstone.

As to the destruction of haunts, yes it can be a combination of trial and error, or even research/knowledge checks (think Ghost hunter/Van Helsing type characters or NPCs here). I do feel that some of the destruction methods don't work for me personally and I will be referencing other horror/occult sources to make the changes (the cold spot one for example).

And Snorter is right about the hp, they are only there for positive energy attacks, and also are listed in case another specific source can do damage to them. If they are hit with enough positive energy to reduce them to 0 they are merely shut off for their reset time.

Many of them have Weakness: Hide from Undead because in many ways these are fragmentary or residual undead forces, and thus are somewhat affected by spells that deal with the undead. I do agree that the orbs write-up is a little vague, but it does look like it would be the Slow spell that would make them weaker over time.

Now with the above basic points being covered I am going to get into some specifics, maybe this will help with running haunts (and making them more effective)

*Warning* - These are all my takes and variations on haunt use; as such they do not follow the rules as written.

I like to think of the stat write-ups for haunts to be guidelines (strong ones) but not wholly written in stone. You asked what does a reset look like? It could look like a bunch of things. If the party used a method to temporarily destroy the haunt it may look like the haunt is destroyed - swirling of energy, distant howls and screaming. These factors all depend upon the haunt. The method (and how it would look and feel) for temporarily shutting down a haunt vs. laying one to
rest should probably be different.

I think haunts should more or less be static in how they react, how powerful they are, what sets them off – I just don’t think there should be one set of stats for the haunt as presented. Some of these powers are waning (as in the case of orbs) while others are on the ascendancy, and that can all be reflected in stats – I just think that one set doesn't work for me.

I would also go a different road for the reset times. Instead of a fixed 24 hours from the point of reset, I would go to the next sundown, sunrise, full moon, or a time more relevant to the haunt in question. Instead of taking a very mechanical approach to haunts I would invite GMs to make some customized changes as they see fit.

Basically what I am suggesting using the write-ups as a guidelines but making some customization as it warrants; if it makes the haunt harder to destroy or deal with then up the CR.

Just my take on haunts, I like the premise but I think each GM needs to make them his own.

Man, laying it on a little thick there, are we Ullapool? A little less sarcasm and I might taken some time out of my day to give you a healthy, informative primer on Haunts that both you and others might have benefited from, but I'm afraid I'm going to give you the bare minimum instead. Maybe I'm just being sensitive because I wrote them.

And Erik, fyi, the destruction mechanic is very much covered in the haunt rules your link provides.

If you've seen haunts in other adventure paths, you may recall that there was always a big block of explanatory text that gave all of the basics so you could run them properly. With the publication of the GameMastery Guide and the availability of the rules on the PRD, it is no longer necessary. Of course, that's stated explicitly in the first paragraph of the article, but who reads that junk anyway? The folks above did a good job providing you with the links you need, so be sure and check out the rules first so you know how everything works.

As for destruction methods, these are left very nebulous on purpose, as the haunts rules imply. They may not work for all GMs. But they are part of the rules and required in the individual stats, just like all the other stuff, and just like traps have a line telling you how things reset and how deep the pit is. I think my original turnover addressed Knowledge (religion) and (local) checks to discern the destruction method of haunts, and if I recall was 15+ the CR of the haunt. It didn't make final publication, but use it if it works for you. BUT, that's for generic stuff like these anyway, and haunts, as Mike's adventure expertly demonstrates, are meant to be customized —they are, after all, used best as story elements, and much more than just damage-inflicting traps. In any case the haunts in the article are meant more as drag-and-drop tools for you to use and modify as you see fit and as best suites your game and play style.

It is also worth noting that many of the destruction methods presented in this article are inspired by actual folkloric methods and exorcisms for dealing with those specific types of hauntings. Sure, some of them are weird and obscure, but that's part of the fun, and I know we have an educated audience here that appreciates the care taken to somewhat preserve the folklore flavor of some of these spirits, and that's why Paizo approached me to write it. Something had to fill in that mechanic, and it's OK to change it if it doesn't suite you. Auxmaulous has some great ideas above. Be sure and check them out. THAT'S the right way to approach something.

So you know, and entire religion called Spiritualism with millions of followers started with a couple of young girls in New York in 1848, asking questions of the spirits and having answers rapped out to them. Look it up. Fascinating stuff. Again -just a little historical angle that the article nods at, and, if I may say so, a damn clever way to communicate with haunts. I'm rather proud of it. Keep in mind that beyond “Yes” and “No,” spirits can also signal letters or numbers called out, generating short, cryptic responses that could reveal the means to their final rest or give clues to inquisitive PCs. Hell, it would probably be fun to play out at the table for a few minutes, but don't overdo it. Gets old quick...somehow Victorians did it for hours on end. Your example was pretty creative, so use that energy to create something meaningful for your players using these very cool rules and mechanics, and next time scale back the sarcasm a little bit and you'll be amazed who steps forward to help! =-)

can disrupt undead effect a haunt. the rules linked say positive energy such as channel energy, cure spells and etc. I only ask as the listed examples usually heal character as a primary function with the harming of undead being a secondary function. were disrupt undead is a positive energy spell that only harms undead. just wondering as this came up and were weren't sure. thank you.

can disrupt undead effect a haunt. the rules linked say positive energy such as channel energy, cure spells and etc. I only ask as the listed examples usually heal character as a primary function with the harming of undead being a secondary function. were disrupt undead is a positive energy spell that only harms undead. just wondering as this came up and were weren't sure. thank you.

Yup, disrupt undead does positive energy damage* so it would affect a haunt as long as the haunt is a valid target for a spell (this is a ray spell so you do need something/somewhere to target with the spell).

Thanks for the pointer at the PRD. The haunts sound really interesting, I just didn't understand how to run them.

Maybe I'm just being sensitive because I wrote them.

Hey, haunts are solid. A worthy addition to the game.

My only quibble with them is, what happens when you have haunts that present as creatures? Like, the Headless Horseman or the Mad Monk? Because PCs will surely try to attack or otherwise interact with them at some point.

Is it just "sorry, nothing the PCs can do (other than channeling energy and a very short list of other things like disrupt undead) can affect them?"

Because if so, then haunts take on an additional aspect: until PCs figure out what they are, they're a potential resource sink, as the PCs waste time and resources casting spells on them, trying to hit them ("but that was my Ghost Touch arrow!" "Yeah dude, he shook off my magic missile too.") and the like. Not sure if I like this or not, but it would definitely be a thing.

Doug M.

One of my problems with haunts and there necessary destruction methods is that they are overly specific. Even assuming the players make the knowledge/investigation check to figure out how to destroy the haunt, it is quite possible to do so. The cold spot, requires 'heat metal' a druid only spell. So I hope you have a druid in you're party, or else the haunt is pretty much indestructable. Worse, another requires Bless Weapon a Paladin only spell. So again, a Paladin is required or your out of luck.

As for destruction methods, these are left very nebulous on purpose, as the haunts rules imply. They may not work for all GMs. But they are part of the rules and required in the individual stats, just like all the other stuff, and just like traps have a line telling you how things reset and how deep the pit is. I think my original turnover addressed Knowledge (religion) and (local) checks to discern the destruction method of haunts, and if I recall was 15+ the CR of the haunt. It didn't make final publication, but use it if it works for you. BUT, that's for generic stuff like these anyway, and haunts, as Mike's adventure expertly demonstrates, are meant to be customized —they are, after all, used best as story elements, and much more than just damage-inflicting traps. In any case the haunts in the article are meant more as drag-and-drop tools for you to use and modify as you see fit and as best suites your game and play style.

I think when I run them, I'd err on the generous side; as Max and Doug say, they could present a serious drain on PC resources, if they're throwing every spell they've got in trial and error.

So, if The Groaning Woman requires the PCs to 'bring her the head of her killer', and the PCs make a fist of it, by disintegrating him, or beheading him in such a way that his noggin falls in the river, I won't be sitting back in my chair with my arms folded, going "Hmph, well now what are you going to do?". If they bring her his hands or the murder weapon, as proof of his death, I'd probably think "Yeah, that's close enough".

The aim is not to stall the game in its tracks, but to get the players thinking about their surroundings, the people who lived and died there, and see things through their eyes. That causes a far greater sense of immersion than normal, and the players should remember the spirit of the jilted milkmaid or the innocent hanged man far longer than if they were a wraith or ghost that jumped out, said 'Boo!' and got dispatched in one round by a PC's ghost touch sword.

The aim is not to stall the game in its tracks, but to get the players thinking about their surroundings, the people who lived and died there, and see things through their eyes. That causes a far greater sense of immersion than normal, and the players should remember the spirit of the jilted milkmaid or the innocent hanged man far longer than if they were a wraith or ghost that jumped out, said 'Boo!' and got dispatched in...

Snorter is right on the money here.

Personally, I'd rather have too many awesome options for my adventure than not enough.

One of my problems with haunts and there necessary destruction methods is that they are overly specific. Even assuming the players make the knowledge/investigation check to figure out how to destroy the haunt, it is quite possible to do so. The cold spot, requires 'heat metal' a druid only spell. So I hope you have a druid in you're party, or else the haunt is pretty much indestructable. Worse, another requires Bless Weapon a Paladin only spell. So again, a Paladin is required or your out of luck.

Why do you have to destroy them? If you can, great. If you can't, no biggie. You get XP for surviving a haunt, not for destroying it.

I can understand the view of completest parties that don't leave dungeons until every rat and slime is slain, and I suppose parties that want to do that with haunts can go hire resources they don't have as an extended part of the adventure, but that's their choice. (Kind of in the same way that if there's a trap they can't disable they might want to go hire a rouge.) All in all, though, it doesn't affect the adventure's assumptions about PC experience or the plot.

Brandon Hodge wrote:

Maybe I'm just being sensitive because I wrote them.

Hey, haunts are solid. A worthy addition to the game.

My only quibble with them is, what happens when you have haunts that present as creatures? Like, the Headless Horseman or the Mad Monk? Because PCs will surely try to attack or otherwise interact with them at some point.

Is it just "sorry, nothing the PCs can do (other than channeling energy and a very short list of other things like disrupt undead) can affect them?"

Because if so, then haunts take on an additional aspect: until PCs figure out what they are, they're a potential resource sink, as the PCs waste time and resources casting spells on them, trying to hit them ("but that was my Ghost Touch arrow!" "Yeah dude, he shook off my magic missile too.") and the like. Not sure if I like this or not, but it would definitely be a thing.

Again, this is my take on the issue – I do think DMs need to take considerations when implementing haunts in their games to get as much detail as possible to avoid problems with some forethought.

For the "combat poised" haunts (headless horseman) you could have some kind of incorporeal set of fightable stats - hell, he can even be a very solid corporeal creature. Something within it's CR that can be destroyed by more conventional means (energy attacks, magic weapons, some holy items) but the bad guy reforms again the next night (or even in a few minutes) making him an unconventional creature to fight. So the party can use conventional means to temporarily stop the haunt, but in the end they need to use the harder researched method to put it down for good. It gives the PCs a sense of some power, but to get the job done the really need to do their homework. There are no wasted magic missiles unless the PCs are just trying to hurt/dissipate it to get the hell away (think Terminator).

Haunts are very interesting creature/mechanics, I don't think PC should be punished because they don't fit the taditional creature encounter mold, but at the same time they should not be under the impression that a spell or sword are going to do the HP damage and solve all their problems everytime.

Once the PCs realize that "yeah, we can hurt it but it just comes back" they won't be prone to waste spells or fight it unless they have to, so if things turn ugly they can still try to punch through but this thing is going to come back. I would only go this route with the very "fightable" style haunts and if this is something which would suit your group of players.

Weaker presence haunts shouldn't be something which directly convert to fighting stats just to make things conventional for the players. Again, this is just my opinion and take on using haunts.

Haunts (even weak ones) are the lords of their domain. They are the supernatural force in their assigned area. They are hard tied to their locale, and in most cases operate on a very "programmed" level, so some of the power associated with haunts is mitigated by these factors.

The site location restrictions also play a huge role in balancing out haunts - even it it's something that can manifest a corporeal body, is tough, keeps coming back, etc - all these factors are mitigated by the local it is trapped or tied to. A powerful headless haunt that rides down a lonely stretch of road can actually just be ignored. His range is limited, then people will avoid the road, the road becomes disused and the haunt only then interacts with those foolish or ignorant of its domain.
Maybe the old road led to a ruined fort which has now been overtaken by the wilderness and is hard to locate. The only ones stupid enough to follow the road looking for the fort would be adventure types - common folk avoid the place as they do the old road which leads to it.

Max Mahem wrote:

One of my problems with haunts and there necessary destruction methods is that they are overly specific. Even assuming the players make the knowledge/investigation check to figure out how to destroy the haunt, it is quite possible to do so. The cold spot, requires 'heat metal' a druid only spell. So I hope you have a druid in you're party, or else the haunt is pretty much indestructable. Worse, another requires Bless Weapon a Paladin only spell. So again, a Paladin is required or your out of luck.

Why do you have to destroy them? If you can, great. If you can't, no biggie. You get XP for surviving a haunt, not for destroying it.

What if (as our GM did, playing right out of this book) the Haunt occurs in a location where its destruction is required. Like say a Choking Hand haunt in the town jail, or some darkened alleyway, as mentioned in the description? Doesn't do the town folk much good to say, 'Well don't go in there', or 'Don't worry, we will comeback every day and kill it again.' While haunts can of course appear in dungeons, they are also the sort of obstacles designed to show up in inhabited areas, and indeed this often the most appropriate setting for some of them.

But even in a dungeon the resetting nature of undestroyed haunts is a serious inconvenience. It’s rarely fun for the players to face the same hazard more then once. And they will rightly feel a bit put out having to expend resources to defeat a hazard they have already defeated (and may not get anymore XP for).

Snorter wrote:

The aim is not to stall the game in its tracks, but to get the players thinking about their surroundings, the people who lived and died there, and see things through their eyes. That causes a far greater sense of immersion than normal, and the players should remember the spirit of the jilted milkmaid or the innocent hanged man far longer than if they were a wraith or ghost that jumped out, said 'Boo!' and got dispatched in...

Snorter is right on the money here.

Traps are just traps - just there to kill you. Many GMs view monsters in the same way (though that doesn't have to be the case of course). But haunts are really meant to have a reason and a story behind them. If you want to indulge that, great, it's there for you. If you don't, nothing lost.

Personally, I'd rather have too many awesome options for my adventure than not enough.

Absolutely agree with this; well said, Snorter and Wes! :)

I find the Haunts quite interesting and I can't wait to run them, however I have several questions about their mechanics as my players are very much rules-lawyers and will want to know EXACTLY how they work.

1) I understand that with most haunts only positive energy will damage them ... but I'm still a bit unsure on how that works exactly. For example, Cure Light Wounds is only supposed to work on living creatures and haunts aren't living (or even undead) creatures from what I can tell. However in the description of the haunt itself it mentions that cure spells could in theory work. But even if those spells work, since cure spells are touch spells what would you touch exactly to inflict damage on the haunt?

A good example is The Piper of Illmarsh, his haunt seems quite tricky as he first manifest as a floating flute and then also as ghost. Can you attack and damage both of these items at the same time? Which brings me to the next question...

2) When it comes to combat against a haunt how does it work in terms of AC and hitting it? Again my example above, when the floating flute appears I know my players will try to hit that thing with positive energy. But there are no stats for hitting the floating, moving flute itself. How should this be handled?

3) Would a Cure Light Wounds Potion (or similar positive energy potion) damage a haunt?

4) Finally the most confusing aspect of the haunt is the destruction item. Haunts are described as very similar to traps, but the main difference that I know my players are going to fight me on big time is that with a trap the disarm function is largely done in the abstract. You just need to do a successful roll and the trap is disarmed, you don't need to know EXACTLY how to disarm the trap, that is all done within the roll itself.

However with a haunt that is not the case. You need to learn and understand a specific action on how to destroy the haunt, and some of those methods I don't think I would ever figure out on my own they are so complex.

So how is the best way to handle learning how to destroy a haunt. I know my players will want this to come down to a simple roll like disarming a trap (i.e. the old "I might not know what to do but my PCs would know what to do!"). Although learning how the haunt works and then destroying it would be a lot more fun and better storytelling, I still can't understand how a PC would learn this information.

I understand that this is largely up to the GM, but I also know my players and they always HATE run rules are so generic like that. They want/like very specific rules that they can follow and plan for (or better yet, roll for). So any help on this would be greatly appreciated, thanks!

I find the Haunts quite interesting and I can't wait to run them, however I have several questions about their mechanics as my players are very much rules-lawyers and will want to know EXACTLY how they work.

1) I understand that with most haunts only positive energy will damage them ... but I'm still a bit unsure on how that works exactly. For example, Cure Light Wounds is only supposed to work on living creatures and haunts aren't living (or even undead) creatures from what I can tell. However in the description of the haunt itself it mentions that cure spells could in theory work. But even if those spells work, since cure spells are touch spells what would you touch exactly to inflict damage on the haunt?

positive energy spells applited to the haunt (via channeled energy, cure spells and the like) can damage the haunts hit points (no will save), attacks must hit a 10AC to effect the haunt.

A good example is The Piper of Illmarsh, his haunt seems quite tricky as he first manifest as a floating flute and then also as ghost. Can you attack and damage both of these items at the same time? Which brings me to the next question...

2) When it comes to combat against a haunt how does it work in terms of AC and hitting it? Again my example above, when the floating flute appears I know my players will try to hit that thing with positive energy. But there are no stats for hitting the floating, moving flute itself. How should this be handled?

I would say since the haunt manifests in both, then both qualify for the "must strike AC 10 in order to affect the haunt and not merely the physical structure it inhabits". Not this is for ONLY channel, and cure type effects, nothing else damaged a haunt itself.

3) Would a Cure Light Wounds Potion (or similar positive energy potion) damage a haunt?

Not unless it drinks it, IMO

4) Finally the most confusing aspect of the haunt is the destruction item. Haunts are described as very similar to traps, but the main difference that I know my players are going to fight me on big time is that with a trap the disarm function is largely done in the abstract. You just need to do a successful roll and the trap is disarmed, you don't need to know EXACTLY how to disarm the trap, that is all done within the roll itself.

However with a haunt that is not the case. You need to learn and understand a specific action on how to destroy the haunt, and some of those methods I don't think I would ever figure out on my own they are so complex.

So how is the best way to handle learning how to destroy a haunt. I know my players will want this to come down to a simple roll like disarming a trap (i.e. the old "I might not know what to do but my PCs would know what to do!"). Although learning how the haunt works and then destroying it would be a lot more fun and better storytelling, I still can't understand how a PC would learn this information.

I understand that this is largely up to the GM, but I also know my players and they always HATE run rules are so generic like that. They want/like very specific rules that they can follow and plan for (or better yet, roll for). So any help on this would be greatly appreciated, thanks!

You might want to just show some effects from the haunt, and for example if they need to free a corpse stuck in a wall (one of the haunts) they might see the haunt, and maybe a "shadow or a ghost" clawing itself out of the wall. Give them a knowledge/religion check to have a idea someone is trapped in the wall, if they get really high then give them the info they need to be buried.

Mainly to me there not supposed to destroy most of the haunts until they put the whole place to rest, the prison is supposed to be a scary crazy place where your always watching your back for the object coming to life and attacking you.

Stonesnake, in my opinion mechanics concerning haunts should be mysterious to players, and remain that way. They're not monsters, hazards or traps; in a sense you could call them an amalgam of all three, and yet they're a unique phenomenon in the rules. Every haunt is ideally tied to a story element that is part of the mystique surrounding them, and there may be unique mechanics related to it. If you do it "right", your players should feel terrified and mystified by them -- even if they succeed in unraveling the backstory and the means to destroy a haunt. Yes, rules-lawyers will hate this sort of GMing, but then again, there's no need for players to know everything; I'm fine with PCs investigating haunts in-character, but I can't stand players who insist that I'm doing it "wrong" by occasionally using unique (read: outside the core mechanics and/or the grasp of player characters) abilities/spells/other phenomena in my games.

I find the Haunts quite interesting and I can't wait to run them, however I have several questions about their mechanics as my players are very much rules-lawyers and will want to know EXACTLY how they work.

I should say up front that I have a KQ article addressing some of these very same questions in the works -the same sorts of questions I had as I wrote the haunts for my Haunting of Harrowstone article. So, if you promise not to tell anyone I'll spill:

1. Attacking Haunts
The rules already address your first 3 questions in the 4th section under "Haunt Rules": On the surprise round in which a haunt manifests, positive energy applied to the haunt (via channeled energy, cure spells, and the like) can damage the haunt's hit points (a haunt never gains a Will save to lessen the damage done by such effects, and attacks that require a successful attack roll to work must strike AC 10 in order to affect the haunt and not merely the physical structure it inhabits). Unless the haunt has an unusual weakness, no other form of attack can reduce its hit points.

So, there you go. Hit AC 10. Haunts get no Will save if you're using cure spells. Viola! Personally, I think AC should be 10+haunt CR, and they should have the incorporeal miss chance, but I'm a mean bastard. The holy weapon quality technically doesn't count as positive energy, but as a GM I'd probably let it fly, but only let the weapon deal the +2d6 holy damage, and nothing else.

2. Destroying Haunts
I pretty much covered this in my post above, but here it is again. Most certainly characters are aware of local legends, superstitions, and folklore for dealing with haunts that their players will not be aware of. My suggestion is to handle it the same way you'd handle PCs trying to find other info: with Knowledge checks. Say they face the rolling fire haunt from the March 9th Paizo Blog After they've run into it once, they return to the dungeon a few days later and *poof* it sets alight and starts rolling after them. Again. "Wait a sec!" says the cleric. "I have heard of these things! Everyone turn your cloaks inside out! Merisiel, hand me a knife!"

My rule is to use Knowledge (religion) or (local), with a DC equal to 15+ the haunt's CR. Alternatively, after you've dismissed the haunt once, but before you've figured out how to destroy it, you could try communicating with the haunt itself, with the new rules for rapping haunts in the article's sidebar. It worked for the Fox Sisters...should work for PCs! Pull out the ouija board and have some fun! =-)

2. Destroying Haunts

I pretty much covered this in my post above, but here it is again. Most certainly characters are aware of local legends, superstitions, and folklore for dealing with haunts that their players will not be aware of. My suggestion is to handle it the same way you'd handle PCs trying to find other info: with Knowledge checks. Say they face the rolling fire haunt from the March 9th Paizo Blog After they've run into it once, they...

And I would say that if the characters don't have the knowledge skills, you might encourage them to ask the local people nearby, researching any old stories concerning the area (much as is done with the history of the prison in the AP).

While I most directly addressed the mechanics of destruction in my post, I wanted to reiterate Asgetrion's post, and Wes and Snorter's above them: the story is the key with haunts and their tortured existence. Remember that even a lowly CR 1 haunt exists because things went very, very badly when the original creature died. Maybe not every haunt needs to be handled with some sympathetic backstory, but they are much more effective as intriguing story elements than PC-killing ambushes. My article deals with mostly historically-based, more 'generic' drag-and-drop haunts, without the benefit of a Haunting of Harrowstone-esue story to back them up, so feel free to use them as you feel best suite your campaign style!

What if (as our GM did, playing right out of this book) the Haunt occurs in a location where its destruction is required. Like say a Choking Hand haunt in the town jail, or some darkened alleyway, as mentioned in the description? Doesn't do the town folk much good to say, 'Well don't go in there', or 'Don't worry, we will comeback every day and kill it again.' While haunts can of course appear in dungeons, they are also the sort of obstacles designed to show up in inhabited areas, and indeed this often the most appropriate setting for some of them.

But even in a dungeon the resetting nature of undestroyed haunts is a serious inconvenience. It’s rarely fun for the players to face the same hazard more then once. And they will rightly feel a bit put out having to expend resources to defeat a hazard they have already defeated (and may not get anymore XP for).

I hate to have to offer a spoiler by way of explanation since it sounds like your a player of this but...

Also, remember the Reset time on a haunt is not when it does reset, it's when it has a chance to reset. Something like the choking hands has a good chance of returning day after day, but it's not a sure thing.

But, really, if haunts are a problem, it might be a good idea to search out their source and put an end to it so they don't bug you or the imperiled locals any more. Or do what most threatened villagers do, hire some adventurers to take care of it for you.

1. Attacking Haunts

The rules already address your first 3 questions in the 4th section under "Haunt Rules": On the surprise round in which a haunt manifests, positive energy applied to the haunt (via channeled energy, cure spells, and the like) can damage the haunt's hit points (a haunt never gains a Will save to lessen the damage done by such effects, and attacks that require a successful attack roll to work must strike AC 10 in order to affect the haunt and not merely the physical structure it inhabits). Unless the haunt has an unusual weakness, no other form of attack can reduce its hit points.

So, there you go. Hit AC 10. Haunts get no Will save if you're using cure spells. Viola! Personally, I think AC should be 10+haunt CR, and they should have the incorporeal miss chance, but I'm a mean bastard. The holy weapon quality technically doesn't count as positive energy, but as a GM I'd probably let it fly, but only let the weapon deal the +2d6 holy damage, and nothing else.

It was the miss chance I was wondering about.

And I agree that the Touch AC should scale.
So, for what it's worth, I don't think you're a mean bastard. :)

I'd let a caster hold the charge on a missed cure spell, though. So he could have another go next round without blowing multiple spell slots.

But, really, if haunts are a problem, it might be a good idea to search out their source and put an end to it so they don't bug you or the imperiled locals any more. Or do what most threatened villagers do, hire some adventurers to take care of it for you.

Doesn't this really just bring the thing full circle? To reiterate, my problem with haunts is two fold:

1) Overly specific method of destruction. 'Heat Metal' and 'Bless Weapon' are spells granted only to two specific classes, Druids and Paladins. If the party does not contain a member of one of these classes, destruction of these Haunts is impossible. These classes can be rather rare in many settings. For example while Ravengro contains a low-mid level cleric there is no Druid or Paladin.

2) Respawning nature. If the Haunt can't be destroyed, the fact that it respawns can be quite an anoyance. Again, its rarely fun for the players to face the same hazard multiple times. And in some situations (haunt in an urban area for example) simply bypassing the haunt is not an acceptable outcome.

You can see how these two can compound one another. Its frustraiting for the players to be powerful enough to be able to 'kill' a haunt, but lack the specific resources to put it down for good. Now sure, for some specific haunts, the research and work to figure out a way to put it to rest for good can be a fun part of the campaign, but this can't be the case for every haunt. I mean the 'Cold Spot' a CR1 haunt is clearly not designed to be a session defining encounter, but putting it to rest is far more trouble then stopping any other CR1 threat.

The specific examples in Carrion Crow are just examples as how it can work out in a specific campaign setting. It's good that there exists in the campaign an alternate means of putting it to rest (not the players have any possible way of knowing this), but its certianly not in the default rules for the haunt, which is the problem.

Doesn't this really just bring the thing full circle? To reiterate, my problem with haunts is two fold:

1) Overly specific method of destruction. 'Heat Metal' and 'Bless Weapon' are spells granted only to two specific classes, Druids and Paladins. If the party does not contain a member of one of these classes, destruction of these Haunts is impossible. These classes can be rather rare in many settings. For example while Ravengro contains a low-mid level cleric there is no Druid or Paladin.

2) Respawning nature. If the Haunt can't be destroyed, the fact that it respawns can be quite an anoyance. Again, its rarely fun for the players to face the same hazard multiple times. And in some situations (haunt in an urban area for example) simply bypassing the haunt is not an acceptable outcome.

If you choose to use a haunt in the absence of background story, then you will have problems with haunts.

Add to this the fact that most of the haunts will be dealt with only once, unless the players feel the need to return to rooms they already went through (and have no reason to go back to at all).
The other haunts are just repeating/resetting traps the players will know to bypass after a few occurances (or they can start looking for ways to destroy the haunt, and maybe have to hire someone to aid them).

As for using haunts elsewhere on your own, you can make the haunt destruction method what you want, and within the capability of your players. I notice for every hard to destroy haunt that you point out, there are easy to destroy haunts too.

And, also as noted, they can be interesting bits of background that the players can get into (a lead in for a side story, if you build it that way).
Of course if your players hate background and just want to kill and loot, then haunts are a bad thing for them to get involved with.

And like you said above, we have seemed to come full circle. I really love the idea of Haunts, but the implementation is such a strange combination of hard rules (AC 10 for all Haunts? Really?) and incredible vagueness.

First the AC of 10 for all haunts. AC 10 is way too low, especially for high level haunts. But then when it comes to something like a Cold Spot you're telling me that a spot on the floor has an AC of 10? I can tell already my players are going to be up in arms with this rule.

And then when it comes to destroying them permanently. Should we use Knowledge (Religion), or (Local), or perhaps (Dungeoneering), or perhaps (Arcana), or Spellcraft? I can make a case for anything really ... as will my players I'm sure.

I almost wish they took out the positive energy rule altogether and just used the weakness in determining how to damage the haunt. Otherwise every single haunt becomes the same. Find haunt, cast positive energy, stop the haunt (until the next reset).

I love Paizo and all their products, but these haunt rules appear to be incredibly vague/unbalanced.

Why do you have to destroy them [haunts]? If you can, great. If you can't, no biggie. You get XP for surviving a haunt, not for destroying it.

I can understand the view of completest parties that don't leave dungeons until every rat and slime is slain, and ...

Because Good-aligned parties will want to set the restless dead to rest, that's why. They might ignore the extraneous rats and slimes and such, but (as an extreme example) a player priest of Pharasma isn't going to let a haunt pass. Many clerics and paladins will feel similarly, as will a significant portion of other characters.

MI

Inserting a round a bout way to inform the PC's that taking care of the big issue will solve the smaller ones might be in order if every haunt is deemed to be an issue that must be solved.

Inserting a round a bout way to inform the PC's that taking care of the big issue will solve the smaller ones might be in order if every haunt is deemed to be an issue that must be solved.

Haunting of Harrowstone does include exactly that information, Wraithstrike, but it is hardly "roundabout," as the PCs are told directly by a major NPC that specific actions will lay all the Harrowstone haunts to rest.

Stonesnake, I'm not sure how else I can help you, man. First everyone skips reading the actual rules and complains that there isn't another way to damage haunts beyond channeled positive energy, so I point out other options in the rules that allow for the fairly easy application of cure spells (AC 10, no Will save, no incorporeal miss chance) and even open the door for holy weapons to damage them, and suddenly that's way too easy and "strange" and "vague."

AC 10 is about right for a cold spot. A cold spot haunt isn't a chilly patch on the floor. It is, to quote Dr. Ray Stantz, a "free roaming vapor." That is, it is a small, nearly invisible moving 'spot' where the temperature suddenly drops to a deadly chill. So, for something that doesn't dodge and flit around much, but on the other hand you really can't see well and really only feel, AC 10 is about right to swipe a cure-spell-enchanted hand through. Like I said above, if I had my way all haunts would have an incorporeal miss chance, but I didn't write the original rules...just these example haunts, and most folks think they're tough enough to handle. But AC 10 doesn't even matter for 99% of attack forms anyway, because it is a haunt and immune to weapon damage that isn't positive energy, so I'm not sure your PCs will have much of a chance to get "up in arms" over a declared AC.

As for permanent destruction, all I can do is point you back to my original response to your questions. I answered them quite thoroughly, so I'm not sure where you are getting this sudden frustration. Knowledge (local) or Knowledge (religion) are the two most appropriate skills for discovering a haunt's destruction, because they are pseudo-undead and their destruction methods are tied up in local folklore, stories of murder, and superstition. Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana) aren't appropriate because they aren't magical effect. Knowledge (history) might be a third alternative, but I wouldn't go that far myself, because most haunts have a story tied into the local region. If you want to make a case for all of those other skill checks, more power to you -maybe it'll make it easier on all of your easily aggravated players, but as the author, that's be my call.

These haunt rules aren't anything new. They've been around since AP #2 (The Skinsaw Murders), and have been well received since that time without giving people a whole lot of trouble. I suggest you take a few minutes to read the GMG or PRD rules really thoroughly, because they answer most of the questions raised on this thread, and them adapt and incorporate them into your campaign in a way that your players will accept. If they don't work as published for you, that's OK. Give them a tweak until they do. =-)

Stonesnake, I'm not sure how else I can help you, man. First everyone skips reading the actual rules and complains that there isn't another way to damage haunts beyond channeled positive energy, so I point out other options in the rules that allow for the fairly easy application of cure spells (AC 10, no Will save, no incorporeal miss chance) and even open the door for holy weapons to damage them, and suddenly that's way too easy and "strange" and "vague."

AC 10 is about right for a cold spot. A cold spot haunt isn't a chilly patch on the floor. It is, to quote Dr. Ray Stantz, a "free roaming vapor." That is, it is a small, nearly invisible moving 'spot' where the temperature suddenly drops to a deadly chill. So, for something that doesn't dodge and flit around much, but on the other hand you really can't see well and really only feel, AC 10 is about right to swipe a cure-spell-enchanted hand through. Like I said above, if I had my way all haunts would have an incorporeal miss chance, but I didn't write the original rules...just these example haunts, and most folks think they're tough enough to handle. But AC 10 doesn't even matter for 99% of attack forms anyway, because it is a haunt and immune to weapon damage that isn't positive energy, so I'm not sure your PCs will have much of a chance to get "up in arms" over a declared AC.

Actually that description you wrote up was quite helpful. I kept thinking of the cold spot as physical spot on floor, sort of like a spot that never changes or moves. But changing it (and all the other haunts) into a free roaming vapor that can move around and change suddenly I can better picture this in my mind and how to handle them.

I will use your rules and see how it plays out with my players. I actually spoke to them ahead of time and explained to them that there will be haunts in this adventure and that they will need to roleplay to figure out how to destroy them and that it won't be just simple dicerolls and that seemed to help quite a bit. Of course once they start taking damage we'll see if they keep their promise of being open minded about them, but as long as I have some rules to use on a consistent basis that will go a long way.

Personally I think they will be awesome and fun to play. But I also know my players and there is one in particular that HATES vague rules. He wants every single thing spelled out, accounted for, with zero room for interpretation. I'm just trying to plan ahead of time for him as if there isn't a roll involved that corresponds to a written rule ... he's going to cause a ton of trouble for me. I'll try to use your suggestions and see how it goes.

Hurry up and publish that article as that will go a long way in helping me say, "see? Here is a published article in KQ on how to handle them. Now stop your b$&&~ing!" :)

Actually that description you wrote up was quite helpful. I kept thinking of the cold spot as physical spot on floor, sort of like a spot that never changes or moves. But changing it (and all the other haunts) into a free roaming vapor that can move around and change suddenly I can better picture this in my mind and how to handle them.

Alright! Glad that helps!

Also keep in mind that all haunts have an area they affect, and they can't move beyond it. The listing specifies this for each one, and in most cases it is a room, chamber, hallway, or other defined area.

In the case of a cold spot, their area is a 15-foot radius, so maybe those same Knowledge checks will help PCs figure out that as long as they stay out of its "free roaming" area, they'll be safe until they can figure out how to destroy it. The heat metal criticism above for that is all on me...I should have considered party makeup on that one, and a red-hot chunk of metal would work just as well for permanently destroying one of those buggers.

Good idea about informing players ahead of time, and I'd let them get some of the preliminary Knowledge checks out of the way so they can effectively cope and manage resources. I hate to admit that a PC in my home game died from a haunt in What Lies in Dust because our GM played it off so subtly, and neither myself nor the cleric of Pharasma I was playing realized what it was (it was a phantasmal killer-based haunt). My character was sitting on a full-day's allotment of channel uses, and here I was getting ready to write an article on the darn things! Ha!

Good gaming!

These haunt rules aren't anything new. They've been around since AP #2 (The Skinsaw Murders), and have been well received since that time without giving people a whole lot of trouble. I suggest you take a few minutes to read the GMG or PRD rules really thoroughly, because they answer most of the questions raised on this thread, and them adapt and incorporate them into your campaign in a way that your players will accept. If they don't work as published for you, that's OK. Give them a tweak until they do. =-)

OM, don't even start on running ROTL before they had the official Haunt rules (maybe online, but pre-GMG), it was very weird. To me they didn't work right, and I didn't know how they worked so I just "winged it".

Now with those rules, and the way it's written it's much better, and I think they add a lot to the adventure :).

So the only way to hrt a haunt is with positive energy?

So the only way to hrt a haunt is with positive energy?

Yeah. I probably will be using knowledge history with a DC of 15+haunt CR to find out what the weakness is so the players can possibly find a second way to destroy it.

edit: added the word "probably"

As a Ravenloft fan, I have to say I LOVE haunts. I had a lot of fun DMing the Skinsaw murder, and the players loved it too.

---

Just a silly additional question: the positive damage can be applied by the players on a haunt ONLY in the surprise round, and not after?

Which means they could have to experience the Pipper's haunt a few times before reaching the said number of hit point to destroy it?

Joël

My only gripe with haunts is that aside from ouija boards, positive energy attacks, research and rapping, there are no meaningful ways of interacting with haunts.

That means that Fighters (or anyone down on skill points) are simply incapable of making meaningful contributions to the challenge (aside from hauling away bodies of fallen companions).

That's why I would institute a fallback method for interaction in case everything else fails, and there are no other options.

For example, a seance coupled with an offering to one's patron deity to intercede on character behalf and allow to communicate with spiritual remnants (or grant a vision). As it worked to great effect in Larry Niven's Dream Park, I'd say that it would make a decent last resort, especially for lower level parties (or travellers stranded at the bottom of a dungeon).

Additionally, I'd love to include an alternative, high level method for sealing or destroying haunts. The sealing would be semipermanent and it would serve as a way to introduce "sealed evil" plot into campaign or setting. The destruction would require use of magic several spell levels in excess of haunt CR (CR1 haunts invulnerable to level 10 parties are somewhat implausible from d20 design standpoint... note the "somewhat" - it's perfectably acceptable for high level characters to be powerless against lowly challenges, but against assumption of (CR - 8) of 3.x, i.e. the threat does not qualify to register on xp radar, haunts should be vulnerable to high-powered parties as long as the party CR high enough in comparison to haunt's CR).

Regards,
Ruemere

Just a silly additional question: the positive damage can be applied by the players on a haunt ONLY in the surprise round, and not after?

Which means they could have to experience the Pipper's haunt a few times before reaching the said number of hit point to destroy it?

Hey Joël!

I know exactly which sentence of the haunt rules you are reading to give that impression, but haunts can continue to be harmed by positive energy on every round they manifest.

The rules first say:

On the surprise round in which a haunt manifests, positive energy applied to the haunt (via channeled energy, cure spells, and the like) can damage the haunt's hit points...*snip*...If the haunt is reduced to 0 hit points by positive energy, it is neutralized—if this occurs before the haunt takes its action at initiative rank 10, its effect does not occur.

However, this sentence is specifically referring to single-round, non-persistent haunts, which is sort of the "default" form of haunts; a brief, horrific experience. But, the rules go on to say:

Persistent haunts continue to trigger their haunt effects once per round on their initiative rank until destroyed or they no longer have a target.

So...if a haunt is actively manifesting...that is, on any round on which its effect is triggered and occurring, then it can be damaged and possibly destroyed. But applying positive energy damage to the area after it has been dismissed, or during its reset phase, does nothing until it is again able to manifest.

For example, a seance coupled with an offering to one's patron deity to intercede on character behalf and allow to communicate with spiritual remnants (or grant a vision). As it worked to great effect in Larry Niven's Dream Park, I'd say that it would make a decent last resort, especially for lower level parties (or travellers stranded at the bottom of a dungeon).

Though the article I hinted at above will talk more at length about seance rules, the simplest means for other players to contribute as a group to spirit communication is with the Aid Another action. Remember that the +2 bonus from Aid Another is cumulative, so everyone who can sit quietly long enough (stop fidgeting with your scrolls, Ezren!) and make a DC 10 Linguistics check can help the "medium" figure out spirit communications, per the sidebar rules. That should work in a pinch!

Would you mind putting that into your article? And would you mind also addressing the other issue (included after editing original post).

I'd like to buy KQ with these rules.

Regards,
Ruemere

Thank you Brandon, and indeed, this confusion was after reading the rules about haunts.

Bu the way, well done overall with CC. As another poster wrote, this is in the top 10 of gothic adventures ever.

I've added this in my ongoing Ravenloft campaign.

Joël

My only gripe with haunts is that aside from ouija boards, positive energy attacks, research and rapping, there are no meaningful ways of interacting with haunts.

That means that Fighters (or anyone down on skill points) are simply incapable of making meaningful contributions to the challenge (aside from hauling away bodies of fallen companions).

That's why I would institute a fallback method for interaction in case everything else fails, and there are no other options.

For example, a seance coupled with an offering to one's patron deity to intercede on character behalf and allow to communicate with spiritual remnants (or grant a vision). As it worked to great effect in Larry Niven's Dream Park, I'd say that it would make a decent last resort, especially for lower level parties (or travellers stranded at the bottom of a dungeon).

Additionally, I'd love to include an alternative, high level method for sealing or destroying haunts. The sealing would be semipermanent and it would serve as a way to introduce "sealed evil" plot into campaign or setting. The destruction would require use of magic several spell levels in excess of haunt CR (CR1 haunts invulnerable to level 10 parties are somewhat implausible from d20 design standpoint... note the "somewhat" - it's perfectably acceptable for high level characters to be powerless against lowly challenges, but against assumption of (CR - 8) of 3.x, i.e. the threat does not qualify to register on xp radar, haunts should be vulnerable to high-powered parties as long as the party CR high enough in comparison to haunt's CR).

Regards,
Ruemere

Well, a friend of mine actually let his group converse with a haunt; I'd probably let it fly, too, with a successful knowledge (religion) or diplomacy check (DC 15 + CR, most likely). His point was that the players seemed genuinely interested in that poor soul's story, and how to put it to rest; why not indulge them, if this was so important? Besides, it lead to a (more or less) improvised side quest to visit the person responsible for his death (a necromancer, I think?). Anyway, I don't think we need to have another creature type, or treat haunts as some sort of half-traps/half-undead. Haunts exist to scare your players, and all of them have story elements linked to their tragic fate. Most of them are quick, brief, frightening phenomena that are *supposed* to catch your players by surprise and occasionally *be* "undefeatble" (unless you know what you're dealing with). And ideally each haunt feels unique (in terms of flavor and mechanics), so that they seem much more mysterious than "mere" undead with a template or two.

Interesting idea. Especially since third party haunts (LPJR, I'm look at your "Two dozen..." series) often contain very difficult destruction criteria, and as per d20 guidelines, CR equal threat should not consume more than 20% of party resources.

Regards,
Ruemere

Solrenevermead wrote:

can disrupt undead effect a haunt. the rules linked say positive energy such as channel energy, cure spells and etc. I only ask as the listed examples usually heal character as a primary function with the harming of undead being a secondary function. were disrupt undead is a positive energy spell that only harms undead. just wondering as this came up and were weren't sure. thank you.

Yup, disrupt undead does positive energy damage* so it would affect a haunt as long as the haunt is a valid target for a spell (this is a ray spell so you do need something/somewhere to target with the spell).

** spoiler omitted **

What about Holy Water? I'm inclined to say yes, but haven't seen anything official.

I know I just asked this question else-board, before I found this thread, but... what the heck, eh? It seems like the kind of a problem that'd come up.

Some haunts seem to haunt specified objects and act through them, (without making them animated objects.) Slamming Portals, Old Embermaw, and a certain grandfather clock from an old PF module I ran come to mind. What happens when the players (try to) destroy the object associated with the haunt?

Seriously, I figure this is a given. The first Slamming Portal that slams in the party's faces is going to get smashed until it is no longer a door to be slammed.

Some haunts seem to haunt specified objects and act through them, (without making them animated objects.) Slamming Portals, Old Embermaw, and a certain grandfather clock from an old PF module I ran come to mind. What happens when the players (try to) destroy the object associated with the haunt?

I can speak for the slamming portal and the rules as put forth in the GMG, but I'll leave Old Embermaw and other writer's creations to them.

First, remember that a haunt, by its very nature, is a manifesting undead force that replicates a spell effect. That being the case, resolution for destroying an "inhabited" object is no different than if the party sorcerer had cast hold portal on a dungeon door (in this case, the spell adds 5 to the the DC to force it open), or animate object on a chair (it can be destroyed as described by the spell effect and Bestiary listing for the created construct).

It really is that simple for normal haunts. Remember that in many cases, like the slamming portal haunt or anything using telekinesis, that the item itself is not a receptacle for the haunt -it is merely temporarily "possessed" by an animating force. The slamming portal haunt can slam other doors and windows in a room (within its area of influence) as long as there are doors or shutters to slam. Obviously, just like any spellcaster, if there isn't a door to affect because PCs destroyed it, they'll have to resort to the nearest chest of drawers! Heh heh. It is, after all, just a CR 1 haunt. Alternatively, a GM could rule that the haunt can wander toward other rooms and doors in an area.

So-called "boss" haunts are often exceptions meant to propel the story or action in a specific way, and their rules and stats should reflect the consequences of destroyed objects. If they specifically haunt a particular object of significance, then as a GM I'd elect that if the object is destroyed (and that isn't the specified means of the haunts official destruction) then the haunt morphs into a similar haunt of a close CR -a haunt that uses telekinesis or animate object on other things would do nicely. Or whatever suites the story!

If I get a chance this afternoon, I'll peek at Old Embermaw and see if I have suggestions.

EDIT: Just flipped to Old Embermaw. I'd say, by all means, let the PCs go to town beating up on an old iron furnace while it does 4d6 fire damage a round. I think they'll figure out their folly a couple of rounds later and run away screaming. I mean, what's the hardness/hitpoints of a big chunk of pot iron like that? Hardness 10 with 60 hit points? Now THAT'S scary! =-)

I know I just asked this question else-board, before I found this thread, but... what the heck, eh? It seems like the kind of a problem that'd come up.

Some haunts seem to haunt specified objects and act through them, (without making them animated objects.) Slamming Portals, Old Embermaw, and a certain grandfather clock from an old PF module I ran come to mind. What happens when the players (try to) destroy the object associated with the haunt?

Seriously, I figure this is a given. The first Slamming Portal that slams in the party's faces is going to get smashed until it is no longer a door to be slammed.

Drakli and I will be co-GMing this AP and this is possibly the only thing we haven't discussed together (we're normally very thorough).

You're right, the first time our players face a simple slamming portal or haunted bed pan they're goin to destroy it. My idea is that sometimes this should work, since haunts can be a pain in the A to deal with. Other times a spirit can be so malevolent that it manifest if its vessel or area is destroyed. This should encourage players to try and puzzle out a haunt before going to town on it.

So the situation plays out as follows:

1. Haunt engaged - either a one round event like the hot pokers or a drawn out event like the piper.

2. Players can choose to leave the area if they can, they can destroy the area or object in question, they can interact with the haunt on its terms or they can try to communicate with it.

3. They disable the haunt (which manifest at a later time), they flee the haunt altogether or they lay the haunt to rest.

We've got the ouji board for communication or a knowledge religion/local check to get the spirits attention. This will be fun the first few times, but may get old and procedural real quick. It'll be best if the GM(s) keep the players on their toes.

Just my 2 cp.

We've got the ouji board for communication or a knowledge religion/local check to get the spirits attention. This will be fun the first few times, but may get old and procedural real quick. It'll be best if the GM(s) keep the players on their toes.

TOTALLY! I can't stress this enough, and you already get it, that trying to communicate with every rapping spirit or pulling out the ouija board for every minor haunt does not make for an entertaining evening, so save the really meaty exchanges for important haunts. Otherwise, resort to Knowledge checks and give players the solutions to putting minor haunts to rest. Sure, every haunt has a tragic story behind it, but PCs aren't going to want to hear every one! =-)

Sounds like you guys are on the right track.

Procedurally, then, a haunt works like this for my party, which frequently sends one person 10' or so ahead to scout.

1. Scout enters the haunted area.
2. I have everyone roll initiative, per PF rules.
3. If scout beats 10, they have a chance to notice the haunt. It's a surprise round, so they have up to a standard, at which point they will most likely retreat.
4. At 10, the haunt most likely finds nobody in the room. Will it manifest anyway?
5. Characters who have not yet entered the area can still see the haunt but not be affected by it, correct?

Am I running these correctly?

3. If scout beats 10, they have a chance to notice the haunt. It's a surprise round, so they have up to a standard, at which point they will most likely retreat.
4. At 10, the haunt most likely finds nobody in the room. Will it manifest anyway?

Well, that's taking a slightly more mechanistic approach to the turn-based, initiative-order structure of a manifestation than I do.

Let's say you have a boogeyman haunt, that manifests as a scary ghost-monster that shouts booga-booga and is like the scare spell. You can run it that the scout gets initiative 18, notices that *something* is about to happen, and runs for it, and then eight 'beats' later, the boogeyman appears and waggles its tongue and rolls its eyes at nothing before vanishing. The PCs look at each other, shrug, and move on. OR, you can describe it as the scout feels something jumping out of the closet, and dives for the door right as the horrible monster appears and then vanishes again, scaring the players, if not scareing the PC. The scout still gets to react before the manifestation, but it feels more immediate.

You really shouldn't run a haunt as a tactical combat encounter (even if the rules insist on it), because the beat-beat-beat of initiative-based turns sucks all the spookum and terror out of the manifestation. The Ghostbusters wouldn't have been as terrified of the ghost in the NY Public Library if they knew that she wouldn't be able to get 'em until her next initiative pass after going all monster-y.