Ghartok, The Carrion King

BiggDawg's page

Goblin Squad Member. 286 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.




3 people marked this as a favorite.

What makes a successful gaming experience?

I have been pondering how to talk about this subject for a while now and I finally just decided to blurt my thesis out. Part of the difficulty with role playing games is that they use terminology from literature, but use them in slightly different ways, changing their true meaning. The reason for the variation is that they are games with several people involved, not a single person writing. This division of power and responsibility leads to the need to change the definition of the literary elements. There are three main elements to a game experience; the characters, the setting and the story.

The characters are created and controlled by the players. The creation of the characters is limited by the setting, but within the parameters of that setting the choices are entirely up to the players. The most important part of characters is their agency. The characters are the only part of the game that has agency, meaning they are the only ones that can take meaningful action. All action is only meaningful as it relates to or includes the characters. Anything outside of this is part of the setting.

The setting is everything else in the game that is not the characters. This includes rules, people, places, and things. From NPCs, to monsters, to the Gods, to different cultures, to locations on a map, to nuances of the monetary system everything outside of the characters is part of the setting. This includes the GM being the neutral arbiter of the game rules as the rules are the foundation and give rise to the setting. Events or things the GM plans to have happen are also part of the setting, they are not story elements.

The story is what happens when the agency of the characters interacts with the setting. The story is what happens when you and your friends sit down at a table and make interesting choices and roll some dice. The story is not told by any one person sitting at the table, it can only be told in retrospect when you and your friends reminisce about the time the Monk used stunning fist on the Spider lord and it rolled a 2 on its Fort save when it needed a 3. Or the time when the Barbarian told the assembled council of nobles "I'll marry the whore" when they tried to decide which character should marry one of their daughters to forge a new kingdom. The story is experienced, not told. It is in the memories of the shared experience that the story lives. It is the responsibility of all people involved to help create the best story they can by playing their role.

It is by these definitions that I present the formula Characters + Setting = Story. This formula has served me well in my 30 years of being a GM, and it has lead to a lifetime of great memories that my friends and I still share. Hopefully sharing this concept will give a new GM a good foundation so that they and their friends can create memories of their own to last their lifetime.


I wanted to try my hand at improving the rogue class please see my attempt below. The focus was to bring some of the Rogues skill primacy back from previous editions and to help give them a bump in combat so they can keep up at later levels. I wanted to do this using existing rules as much as possible without reinventing the wheel for the class or the skill system. Below is a synopsis of the changes followed by the actual rules.

* I granted them a number of automatic specific rogue talents in the vein of the 1st and 2nd edition rogue skills.

* I gave them an ability that grants them a scaling bonus on attack rolls when flanking to help combat their struggles with hitting

* I gave them an ability to add their trap sense bonus to initiative checks to help them take advantage of sneak attack at the start of combat.

* I gave them good Will saves so they are tougher to control with magic.

Please let me know if you have any suggestions, comments, or insults. All feedback is welcome, especially snarky quips.

(Below are the changes to the rogue table found in the CRB)

1st: Will Save +2; trap spotter.
2nd: Will Save +3.
3rd: Will Save +3; fast fingers, reactive.
4th: Will Save +4.
5th: Will Save +4; canny observer, flanking mastery 1.
6th: Will Save +5.
7th: Will Save +5; fast stealth.
8th: Will Save +6; flanking mastery 2.
9th: Will Save +6; wall scramble.
10th: Will Save +7.
11th: Will Save +7; flanking mastery 3.
12th: Will Save +8.
13th: Will Save +8; hide in plain sight.
14th: Will Save +9; flanking mastery 4.
15th: Will Save +9.
16th: Will Save +10; improved evasion.
17th: Will Save +10; flanking mastery 5.
18th: Will Save +11.
19th: Will Save +11; skill mastery.
20th: Will Save +12; flanking mastery 6.

* Trap spotter, fast fingers, canny observer, fast stealth, wall scramble, hide in plain sight, improved evasion, and skill mastery are all gained as bonus feats at the listed level. If the rogue uses a rogue talent to select them prior to the level they gain them as a bonus feat when the rogue reaches the appropriate level they gain a free retraining of that rogue talent choice (if they wish) and can select a new rogue talent as appropriate.

* Reactive allows the rogue to add their trap sense bonus to initiative checks.

* Flanking mastery grants the rogue a +1 bonus on attack rolls when flanking, the bonus on attack rolls increases by 1 for every three levels after 5th to a maximum of +6 bonus at 20th level (this bonus is in addition to the normal +2 bonus to hit when flanking).


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Below is a house rule that I have been using in my Eberron game called Magical Encumbrance. The basic idea is that the Wealth by Level table is an actual in game physical mechanic that limits the amount of magical items that a character can use at any one time. Items take 1 minute to bond and the bond can be removed from an item after resting for 8 hours. The in game expression of this mechanic is that magic items need a bit of your characters life force in order to function for them. You only have so much of this energy to bind to magic items and without it the magic items doesn't function.

You can still carry around a magic item that you don't have bound, but it provides no magical benefit. The item is still magical and it benefits from its magical nature in terms of saving throws and hardness, and any mundane effect of the item is still usable. For example you could wear a suit of platemail +1 that you don't have bound and you would get the benefit of wearing masterwork platemail and if anyone targeted or affected the platemail specifically it is still magical, but you would not benefit from the +1 enhancement bonus unless it is bound.

The major upside to these rules is that it helps to separate gold pieces from magical item power. Under the current rules the more gold you spend on magical items the more powerful you get with no diminishing returns. Spending gold on anything other than magical items is a net power loss as the game encourages you to spend all your gold on magical items. While not removing the connection of gold and magical items this rule does create a point of diminishing returns as you can keep buying magical items, but it is hard to use them after a certain point.

Another byproduct is that you have to be a certain level to make use of certain items. This helps alleviate some of the issues that certain magic items can have on the campaign setting. Something like the Lyre of Building actually needs a decently high level person to bond it so it helps explain some why they are much more common. This also means that certain powerful items can be around in a game without having to worry about the characters getting their hands on it and upsetting game balance.

This rule also encourages different sets of items for different situations. A character may have an adventuring set of gear and a set of gear that they use while they are in town or crafting. So far it has worked great in the Eberron campaign I am running and has helped to keep the Artificer who crafts at .325 cost reasonable. The Artificer can make magic items very quickly and cheaply, but the group only gains so much benefit from it. Consumables are the one area where gold can still be poured into to gain power, but that hasn't really been a problem so far. Below are the rules that I gave to the players as part of the house rule document for the game.

Wealth by Level as Magical Encumbrance
In this campaign for a character to gain the benefits of a magic item they must bond with it in order to activate the magic of the item. This process is a burden on the character and each character can only support so many magic items before additional magic items will not function for them. This burden is referred to as magical encumbrance. The function of this rule is to instead of having the Gamemaster jury rig the wealth of the party behind the scenes each character will have to account for the magical items the character is using and will be limited to the total GP value of these items based on the Wealth by Level table (reproduced below). This will allow gold pieces to be more freely given out based on character/player creativity and ingenuity as they will not upset the balance of magic item wealth and the Challenge Rating system. Not all magic items count against the magical encumbrance value and magic items can be added or removed from the encumbrance. Adding an item takes one minute of concentration while removing an item takes 8 hours of rest.

Items that do not count against Magical Encumbrance

Consumables
Consumables do not count against magical encumbrance as they are one shot items that are meant to be able to be used or transferred between characters. Consumables include potions, scrolls, or any other item that is entirely consumed and destroyed when used (such as tokens, magical arrows and other similar items). Wands are not considered consumables and have their own rules below.

Cursed Items
Initially cursed items are allocated against magical encumbrance, but once they reveal their cursed nature they no longer count against magical encumbrance and are instantly removed from that calculation.

Artifacts and Intelligent Items
Items that are classified as Artifacts or Intelligent do not count against magical encumbrance as they have their own independent power.

Exceptions for certain items

Wands
Wands count against magical encumbrance, but if a wand runs out of charges and the character has a wand with the same spell and GP value as the one that just ran out they can immediately begin using that wand and it takes the place of the exhausted wand.


Anyone have any thoughts for two new mythic paths?

I want to develop two new mythic paths for a mythic campaign setting I am developing. I need the two new paths to have some duality, even if it is a stretch. For example, archmage and hierophant is arcane and divine, guardian and champion are defense and offense or marshal and trickster are direct and indirect. The new paths should have some relation like the previous examples, even if it is a thin one.

Also if they can have some thematic relation to Air or Water that would be a bonus. I saw a post that suggested the idea of a Mystic path which I could see linking up with Air as both have a mysterious unseen quality. So something that could be thematically related to water and be a knowable visible quality could work. Not married to the idea of Mystic, it is just a thought, any other pairing that anyone can suggest would be great.

Thanks for any comments or suggestions!


I am running an Eberron game using the Pathfinder rules. The party is 8th level and after having cleared a ruined castle they want to take up residence and turn it into an Inn/Adventuring hotspot. The castle is located on top of an entrance to Khyber and in an out of the way area of the Shadow Marches near a House Tharashk Eberron dragonshard field.

One of the PCs is a Paladin who is a member of House Orien and has the Mark of Passage. Another of the characters is a Warforged Artificer. In order to increase accessibility and to set up a trade agreement with House Tharashk to move dragonshards they wanted to make a teleportation device. We settled on a set of stone monoliths (stonehenge like) that allow teleportation.

They want to make a set of Teleport Stones that allow anyone with the Mark of Passage to use Greater Teleport to teleport to another of the stones. This would be a command word activated wondrous item that has unlimited uses per day. The stones would be fixed in place once activated and could not be moved without destroying them. Stones could be added to this network and you need at least two of them before they are of any use. Already existing networks cannot be combined.

I used the formulas in the book as a starting point because I couldn't find any similar items. The basic formula I used was CL 13 x 7 (spell level) x 1800gp = 163,800gp. Now this is for an item that casts Greater Teleport using the full normal rules, these items are limited in that you can only teleport to another of these specific items. I agreed to reduce the price by 75% due to this limitation on the item. This brings the price down to 40,950gp. Further, the item is limited to use by someone with the Mark of Passage so I applied the 30% class requirement price reduction bringing the value down to 28,665gp. I rounded the final price up to 30,000gp for ease of calculations.

This means the Artificer can make the stones for 9750gp as he can make items for .325 of base value, but you have to make at least 2 stones so it will cost about 20,000 to make the base set. Does this seem like a reasonable price or did I discount the item too much for the limitation placed on the Greater Teleport effect? Any input is appreciated.


Hello all. I am just starting a new Eberron campaign and I have come up with some House Rules and conversion for the setting. Below is a link to the Google Doc folder with my conversions for anyone that is interested in viewing them. Any feedback or comments are welcome. Thanks

https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0BxPafO4bt9QSQmhEODlSMUktZzA/edit?usp=shar ing


Hello all and thanks for any advice or tips regarding the following situation.

I am starting a new game set in Eberron and two of the players decided to make Summoners and I was looking for and tips or advice on how to help keep the game challenging and interesting for them when there is a lot of summoned creatures. The party is as follows.

Gnome Summoner (Master Summoner)
Gnome Rogue, but will be going Summoner (Synthesist) from 2nd level on
Warforged Artificer
Human Paladin

The game is starting in Sharn and will be focused around dungeon crawls set in various exotic locals with a sandbox approach to the world in general. The Rogue/Synthesist starts off really weak but he is focusing on making a DEX based serpent Eidolon which will have amazing skills and good defenses with solid offense though it will take some time to develop. The Master Summoner is pretty standard with huge CHA, the Paladin is a 2h build and the Artificer is a 1h+shield heavy armor build.

Has anyone had multiple summoners before and where there any issues or pitfalls that you ran into? Does anyone see any major issues with this party set up or have any good ideas for types of enemies that I can mix in from time to time to provide a tough fight?

Thank you for your time and consideration.


My gaming group and I have been brainstorming on how to alleviate the need for the GM to manipulate the amount of gold pieces that a party has access to. The current system encourages the GM to restrain player creativity when it comes to earning money as it can be directly changed into magical item power which will upset the balance of the dice/game portion. While the Challenge Rating system can be adjusted by the GM, it is not an exact science so it forces the GM to control the wealth of the characters which can feel punitive as a player.

With the game expectations being calibrated around the Wealth by Level chart we decided to take the onus of adjudicating the system from the GM and place it on the players. The idea is that the Wealth by Level chart is used as a limit of "bound" magic items that a player can have at any one time. Binding a magic item to you would use up its market value in GP of your Wealth by Level GP pool and would allow you to use it. Items that are not bound to you do not function. It would take a night of rest in order to change what your bound items are.

Consumable items would only need to be allocated once, for example it would take 50 GP worth of your wealth by level to have a Potion of Cure Light Wounds slot, you could have as many potions as you could afford but would only take the one slot.

Items that have clear tiers to them could be paid for at a lesser tier, for example a Longsword +3 could be bound as a Longsword +1 and would only function as a Longsword +1 though it would still be a Longsword +3 for the purpose of destroying or damaging it.

Artifacts would be exempt from the Wealth by Level binding rules as they are generally more storyline based and cannot be created.

This would allow characters to have an appropriate amount of magical treasure and keep the Challenge Rating system relatively intact and allow a GM to be a bit freer with gold rewards. In addition it would lessen the penalty that characters take to their overall character power when they spend wealth on anything other than more magic items. This would encourage the spending of wealth on things in the game world, like caravans, castles, towns, and NPC's as the character would gain less utility by having more than their Wealth by Level in magic items on them.

This rule also means that magic items have less use to lower level people and instead are more the province of adventurers as you have to have levels in order to bind magic items. Really powerful magic items could only be used by high level people.

Characters would have to manage their Wealth by Level and would create some interesting choices on how to equip your character. It would end up being like encumbrance and help balance the mechanical side of the game without burdening the GM with the need to artificially limit the creativity of the players.

Thanks for reading the post and all feedback, suggestions, insight, sarcastic observations, insults or mockery are appreciated. Thanks!


Under the rules for Aiming a spell it states that "You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target". If a target has total concealment from something like invisibility or because the caster is blinded can you target someone using other senses like scent, hearing, blindsense, tremorsense, etc?

Could a caster that is blinded cast magic missile on a target that they know is in a certain square because of non-sight based senses?

Can a caster cast magic missile on an invisible target that they known is in a certain square because of non-sight based senses?

Reading the RAW it seems that they could not target in either situation, but does the RAI really mean sense and not see?


I have a question regarding the precedent set by the Necromancer's Athame in Ultimate Equipment (which is a great book). My question relates to the magic item creation rules, specifically the rules for creating new items. Under that section of the rules it says that you should always compare a potential new item to an existing item. My question is does the Necromancer's Athame set precedent for creating other types of specialist wizard magic items that function like the Necromancer's Athame, but for those other schools of magic?

Can someone create an Evoker's Athame, or a Summoner's Athame based on this item? What are other peoples thoughts on whether this is a good or bad thing?

Personally I think it is very powerful, not necessarily OP, but very powerful. It is only for specialist wizards and they have to have the bonded object arcane focus, which is a good option but has it's drawbacks as well. However at higher levels I can see this item being very potent as it allows a wizard to effective treat their specialty school as if they were a Sorceror.

I ask because I currently have two wizards in my Way of the Wicked campaign, one of whom is a Necromancer and the other is a Diviner. If I allow the Necromancer to make this item it will enhance his power as compared to the Diviner if I don't allow the Diviner to make one as well. My instinct is that if I allow the Necromancer to make one then I should allow the Diviner to make one as well in the interest of fairness and in support of the rules.

Thanks for your time, consideration, and any feedback.

PS - Does the wizard have to wield the Athame to use it? It is a slotless magic item and technically isn't a weapon, amulet, ring, staff or wand as required by the arcane bond class feature. So is it an example of specific trumping the general or because it states in the description that it is shaped like a dagger is it treated as such under the rules and therefore a weapon bonded item that must be wielded?


So here is the situation.

I am the DM and we just started the Way of the Wicked AP (looks awesome) and right out of the gate I am having trouble with one my players. The first session we spent entirely on character creation where I read them the issues that evil games face from the AP and we discussed it at some length. I explicitly said that you need to make a character that can play their way into the concept of a group of evil characters working together to bring down a LG Kingdom that tried to execute them. I also banned non consensual PvP, it's fine if it is something that two players want to RP but we are all there to take part in a shared imagination of the evil group mentioned above.

After spending all the first session trying to hammer home the social contract for the AP, right out of the gate the first action of one of the characters in the first encounter after escaping from their prison cell, as they were fighting the prison guards, was to cast sleep on one of the other players (who was a witch) and then try to kill them. The "reason" he did this was because "his character didn't want competition from another INT caster". I am pretty frustrated with the situation as not only do I see this as OOC him just trying to be a dick, but even in character it makes no freaking sense to while breaking out of prison off one of the other people helping you to get out of prison especially right in plain view of all the other characters who are now just going to kill you (especially since the witch befriended the NPC Ogre that was locked up with them by healing him).

Currently I am considering not asking him back, but this is the 3rd campaign I have had him in and I don't want to just boot him without good reason. He has been okay in the past, sometimes problematic, but not to this extent. He is a friend of a friend, and while I have known him for several years we don't hang out together. I DM for a couple different groups of friends exclusively so this isn't an open game at a store or convention. I am seeking advice from other GM's who have dealt with situations like this before or even from players that have been on either side of this kind of issue.

Thank you for your time and consideration.


I picked up the Way of the Wicked adventure path (looks awesome) and we sat down last night to make characters. I have 6 players that are all pretty good at optimization and gave them 30 stat points to make their characters and added 2 skill points per level as the AP suggests. The party is as follows

Catfolk Anti-Paladin
Hobgoblin Ranger
Elf Wizard (Necromancer)
Elf Wizard (Diviner)
Human Witch
Gnome Summoner (Synthesist)

My initial thoughts are free advanced template for all monsters and to double the amount of all monsters in the encounters. Does anyone have any advice or suggestions about the above party doing the Way of the Wicked AP? Any feedback is welcome.


As a disclaimer the following is entirely from my point of view and does not mean that you are playing the game wrong if you don't have the same issues that I do.

I wanted to start a thread to discuss the concept of simulation within Pathfinder and how simulation focused GM's deal with certain spells, items, monsters or abilities. I as a simulation focused GM from time to time encounter aspects of Pathfinder that to me ruin the simulated fantasy world as presented by a sourcebook or adventure path. These are the type of issues that I would like to discuss in this thread. If other simulation focused GM's or players have other types of issues I would love to explore those as well.

First I should probably explain what I mean by simulation focused. To me simulating an internally consistent fantasy world is how I derive the most pleasure from gaming. It is why I enjoy crafting campaign worlds, adventures, mechanics, NPCs, monsters, maps, dialogue, etc. All of these elements are a part of simulating a "believable" fantasy world. I put "believable" in quotes because obviously a fantasy world by its nature is unbelievable, but what I am referring to is given certain assumptions about the world (elves, dragons, magic, etc) that within those assumptions things should function rationally. If there are dragons then dragons should affect the campaign world in some manner dependent on their abilities. The campaign world achieves some form of equilibrium based on dragons being a part of it.

This concept is also sometimes called verisimilitude, or referred to as being rational or logical. While the setting itself is fantastic, once you get past that things operate within it in a reasonable manner given the things nature. This is not saying that every creature acts logically or optimally all the time, but that as a whole the setting acts consistently. If dragons are all super powerful monsters and really powerful sorceror's then they will hold a position in the world that is commensurate with those powers and they will use those powers as befits beings of extremely high intelligence.

The way that this point of view comes into conflict with Pathfinder at times is when something comes up that in the context Pathfinder presents it would negate the game setting itself. I will use my favorite example of the lyre of building. The lyre of building is a magical item that by its very existence would completely change the typical pseudo feudal fantasy setting that is base line for Pathfinder. Kingdoms would focus much of their economy around constructing lyre's of building and training people to use or create them as they are so much more efficient at construction than a force of normal people are. However from the perspective of a dungeon crawling group of adventurers it is a cool item that allows them to set up a nice camp for the night.

I understand that this issue is created because Pathfinder is a game trying to simulate a group of adventurers going into a dungeon (in some form or another) and that because of that focus things outside of it will create conflicts. I don't use that example as a complaint more as an illustration of what I mean by simulation and how that conflicts at times with Pathfinder. I love Pathfinder as I have been playing DnD for almost 30 years and I think it is a great system. However I mainly get enjoyment in gaming from simulating a fantasy world so when things like this come up it breaks my "immersion" as a GM.

Ultimately my question is are there other GMs or players out there that are as crazy as me? If so what are some things that you have had issues with in regards to simulation? How have you overcome these issues either with modifications to rules or ignoring rules? What setting elements do you find create or encounter the most problems? How do you handle high level magic and the conundrums it can create? Thanks for reading or commenting on this post I appreciate your time and consideration.


Wow what a difference a random encounter makes.

The party I GM for (All 8th level Paladin, Cleric, Druid, Alchemist) is on Carrion Crown 3 Broken Moon and they were traveling through the Shudderwood to Ascanors Lodge and I was rolling for random encounters. Rolled a 1 so I turned to the random encounter table and rolled a d100 and got a 100 and I looked at the result, a Witchfire.

Not being terribly familiar with the creature I look it up in Bestiary 2 and my eyebrows raised in shock (The PCs commented on this). This is a wandering monster? More like a wandering death sentence. Needless to say the Witchfire stalked the party (it is invisible at will flying incorporeal with a base +19 Stealth) and attacked them during the night when only one person (the Cleric) was on watch.

The Witchfire began focusing on the Cleric and kept using her range touch attack and flying mobility to remain untouched. Even when the party Paladin got a fly extract from the Alchemist he couldn't keep up with the Witchfire because he Fly skill was terrible and she could fly through the trees. While trying to chase her the Paladin crashed into a tree and fell to the ground.

After a few rounds with the Cleric down to single digit hit points and the characters already using 2 of their Harrow Cards (using the Carrion Crown optional system) I decided that this wasn't such a great "wandering" monster and reset the whole encounter by telling everyone that they all wake up from a terrible dream and that the Cleric had fallen asleep on watch. A will o wisp floated nearby and then it flew off.

My main comment is what in the world is a Witchfire doing on a Wandering Encounter table. This thing is a walking TPK unless your party is well prepared to handle it. My party could probably have defeated it by expending everything they had and even then its more likely that they would just drive it off given its hit points (115 base). This wandering encounter was by far the toughest fight to date in the adventure path including the Construct boss from the previous adventure (they defeated that without the help of the Beast).

Is this just an example of where the Challenge Rating system breaks down due to the specific special abilities a monster has? I see this fight being much tougher than a standard encounter for 4 9th level characters unless they are really built to defeat a creature such as this. I can see a Witchfire being the main boss type encounter of an adventure, but as a wandering encounter it just seems crazy. The other creatures on the encounter tables are things like bears, werewolves, other people, and some green hags.

This wandering Witchfire would be the undisputed ruler of the Shudderwood. Nothing in this entire adventure could possibly challenge it except maybe the Whispering Way leaders with some necromancy controlling it. Certainly no werewolf in the Shudderwood could challenge it. This creature would exterminate everything in the Shudderwood (and if there were more than one of these in the woods since it is a wandering encounter yikes!).

This is the one type of issue that I struggle with in Pathfinder (and some other games to). When a monster, spell or ability seemingly negates the setting itself. The Shudderwood as described and created would not exist given the existence of this monster inside it. Its like when a traveler brings a new animal into an ecosystem and it begins to take over. The Shudderwood is changed by the presence of this type of creature, no longer would the Shudderwood be about werewolves it would be about the Witchfire of doom. I understand that this is more of a personal point of view conflict than it is necessarily a problem of the game, I guess I am just wondering if other people have encountered this type of thing and what there thoughts on it are?

I am admittedly a heavily simulationist GM and simulation is largely how I derive pleasure from gaming so it may not be a big issue to others that get enjoyment from other aspects of gaming, but are there other simulationist GM's out there that struggle with these types of issues?


After running the start of an adventure path I came across the Weaverworm as it is a new creature in the AP's bestiary. There appear to be some errors in the Weaverworm stat block (lists Initiative +18 when it looks like it should be +8), but there is one section where I am not sure if it is an error or just taking something very suboptimal to make it slightly less powerful.

Under the feats section the Weaverworm has weapon finesse. The problem with this is its Strength is 24 and its Dexterity is 18 which means the feat is completely useless to it. I know monsters are not optimized on purpose, but is this another error or intentional? Am I just missing something beneficial about having weapon finesse when your strength is higher than your dexterity?

Seems like combat reflexes would be an amazing feat for this creature with its 15ft reach and high dexterity though maybe it makes the creature too deadly for its CR. Any thoughts?


TLDR - Are there any rules for hirelings? What limits on what types of things hirelings will do for their listed price are there in the game? Are there any fan made or 3P creations that cover this area if the core rules don't?

I was running Kingmaker over the weekend and I had a player that really wanted to develop the nation building side early in the game. I had reset the adventure path into Eberron (located in Q'barra) because I just love that setting. The character was a member of House Lyrandar and wanted to use some connections to rent an airship for a day or so to assault the Stag Lords fort. Another character was from House Deneith (mercenary house) and he wanted to hire some mercenaries to help in the assault. Both of them also wanted to build up Oleg's and reinforce it with some guards and crafters.

The equipment section discusses some services available for purchase. Specifically it says that a "trained hireling" costs 3sp per day. Under the description it says that this is a minimum wage and that others could cost more. It describes trained hireling as warriors, masons, cooks, etc. Are there any rules that cover exactly what service a character can purchase? Is hiring a guard to watch the camp the same service as paying a guard to walk in front of the party when they go into a dungeon? Is 3sp/day so much money to a normal person that they will do or risk anything?

I ask because the PC's felt that they should be able to hire up a bunch of 1st level Warriors for 3sp/day each and then use them to attack the Stag Lord fort. I was okay with using the price listed as base pay, but then said that if the Warriors are going to be used for an "adventure" that they would then want compensation beyond the base pay and would expect some kind of share in the treasure. They may also want more base pay depending on where the PCs where going to have them stationed. It seems like there is a world of difference in hiring a guard in a city and hiring a guard to leave the city travel 100 miles and then guard a trade outpost that until recently was dominated by bandits. This riled up the first PC and he argued that the entry specifically says warriors for 3sp/day and what else would you use warriors for then combat so I was cheating or something.

I had also ruled that any hirelings that where going to be sent out of the main city to Oleg's would want more compensation then the base listed amount because at the start of the adventure path Oleg's is way out in the frontier area and not considered safe at all. The extra cost would be gradually lowered as the PCs made the region safer and word spread that the Stolen Lands where pacified. Again the argument of "taking risk is what the base pay of a warrior is for" came out, but I felt that this argument doesn't really make any financial sense for the hireling. Why would the hireling want a flat rate regardless of risk?

Anyways sorry for the wall of text, any comments, flames, suggestions, or clarifications are welcome. Thanks!


After reading the Pathfinder book and Ultimate Combat I cannot find anywhere that states directly what action type firing a siege engine takes (full, standard, free, etc).

There are rules about aiming, reloading, and such but not about when you actually fire the weapon. The rules seem to suggest that it is a standard action and would probably be under the ranged attack (or now with Ultimate Combat the indirect attack - which seems like it should be under the attack action as well) action. Does anyone have any clarification on this?

I ask because a player has gotten an itch to have his cohort be a siege gunner type and since you can use Vital Strike with ranged attacks he wants to use it with siege engines. Nothing in the rules clearly states that it isn't an attack action and some things seem to indicate that it is. Thanks for any clarification.


I have a PC who wants to use this trait except he believes it is +1 per die of damage but the SRD says it is just +1 damage. To add to the confusion I have seen people refer to this trait on the boards here as +1 per die. Is there errata that changed the trait one way or the other? Seems very powerful for a trait as it is the equivalent of a sorcerer bloodline power. Thanks for any clarification provided.


Hello all and thanks for taking the time to read this. Sorry if this should be in another forum, but I thought I would try here since I am looking for advice.

I am posting because I wanted to get some suggestions for a high powered campaign I have been running for over a year now and it has reached 15th level. Things are going well in the game, but I wanted to see if I could tap the creativity of the boards to get some additional challenges or just cool ideas for the last leg of the game. So if you are interested in providing suggestions or comments I appreciate your time and effort. With that said here is a quick overview of the game.

RULES SET: Pathfinder (all main books) and a select few 3.5 feats/items.

SETTING: Birthright Campaign Setting (1990s TSR)

CHARACTERS: There are 6 characters all of which are 1/2 Gestalts (meaning they have their primary class levels and then they select a gestalt class that is 1/2 their character level). Players all have 50 point stat builds, began the game with Major Bloodlines (Birthright feature), and Heritage magic items that level with them. They also have received 5 bonus feats and traits though out the campaign. I also give a flat 2 skill point/lvl increase to all classes.
* 15th Oracle of Nature/8th Ranger
* 15th Monk Weapon Adept/8th Rogue
* 15th Paladin/8th Fighter
* 15th Barbarian/8th Druid
* 15th Cleric/8th Paladin
* 10th Mystic Theurge/5th Wizard/8th Cleric (15th level Wizard/Cleric for casting purposes)

The characters all grew up together in the land of Roesone where the Oracle was the son of the Baron and the rest of the characters were wards of the Baron. A bunch of stuff has happened as they leveled. They have prevented invasions, fought in wars, traveled to the Shadow World, restored unjustly dethroned regents, uncovered plots and cults, united the disparate lands of Anuire against a coming attack by the Gorgon (one of the BBEG of the setting), slain several Awnsheglien (Monstrosities created from a dead gods bloodline), and saved the Dwarven Kingdom of Baruk-Azhik from an Orog (super underdark Orcs) invasion.

Through all this the characters have obviously shown through brightly and are totally overpowered by all RAW standards. I have thrown crazy challenges at them and they have beaten them all. As an example when they were 10th level I have them fight 6 Shadow Demons, 6 Vrock, 3 Hezrou, Nalfeshnee, Marilith, 12 Babau, and a Balor. The Demons didn't all start in combat but kept adding to the fight every 2 rounds, the party killed them all around round 12 with the Balor dieing the round he added to the fight. The damage the party does is insane with just last night the Barbarian pouncing for close to 600 damage to a target.

Needless to say the Birthright Campaign Setting isn't really set up to deal with baseline Pathfinder let alone these characters so I have changed some of the base assumption about the world through some campaign events. Basically the Shadow World is much closer to the physical world (In Birthright there are only 2 planes, physical and the shadow world - shadow world contains all the other planes as subplanes basicallY) so undead, demons, and devils are coming into the world. There are only 12 Dragons left in the world, all of them Great Wyrms and most of them evil (Dragons are 1 type in Birthright with color not mattering).

I have removed some spells from the game to try to preserve the setting feel some, so there are no spells that directly make you fly like superman (you can transmute into something that can fly however or ride a flying creature). Dimensional Door is the only form of teleportation other then the Travel Blood Ability (Birthright feature) and anything that could teleport instead has D-Door. No spells that create extra dimensional spaces exist, but items like bag of holding still do.

Sorry for the wall of text, but I wanted to get some baseline information out for people to get some idea of the game. If you have any suggestions, ideas, comments, questions or want further clarification about the campaign please post and let me know. If you just want to troll me and ridicule my game please try to be creative and humorous. ;)


The title pretty much sums up my query, can an elemental wield a weapon?

I had a player who wanted to use Elemental Body IV to change into an air elemental, but instead of having his weapon merge he would drop the weapon and then pick it up and use it.

Thanks for your time and consideration.

PS - Can a caster in Elemental body form cast spells?


When using a Golem Manual does the user still need to spend the requisite time listed under the Craft Construct feat (1 day per 1000gp of market value for the Golem) or does the entry under the Golem Manual cover that?

The Golem manual says that it covers the cost of the Golem except for the body which is separate. Does this mean that because the cost is covered that no time needs to be spent?

The passage about burning the book after the Golem is completed and sprinkling the ashes on the Golem to provide sentience seems kind of ambiguous as to whether it is a rule or fluff. Has their been any official clarification on this?

Sorry if there is a thread covering this already but I did a couple searches and couldn't find a direct answer thank you for your input.


My players in an upcoming game are going to use the Control Water spell to overflow a stream that is running through the enemies camp to flood the area. The concept is not what I am struggling with it is simply how big the flood is and how Control Water mechanically works.

The plan is to raise the level of water in the stream which will then spill out into the camp in general. The stream is about 5 feet deep and 10ft wide, while the Control Water will affect a 110 ft area and be 22ft deep and last 110 minutes. It isn't so much this encounter that I am concerned about it is setting a president for the use of this spell in the future.

The lowering portion of the spell isn't a problem really, it is the raising of the water level that has me puzzled to it's mechanics and I wanted to get other GMs and players input on some questions that have come up.

Does the Control Water spell create additional water to provide the spells full effect? Is it using additional ground water or creating it? Or is it simply controlling whatever water is available?

When water is raised in a stream and the total volume of the stream is affected is the water being lifted up and leaving a vacuum behind or is new water brought in to fill the void? Where does this water come from?

What happens to all the water when the spell ends? Does it disappear or does it stay?

Will additional castings allow additional water to be controlled/created to flood more areas? Will additional castings stack allowing 5 castings to create 110ft deep water?

If Control Water creates additional water can a player use a flask of water to start the spell (there is no listed minimum)? Or is the spell only capable of manipulating the water that is there?

If the level of the water in a stream, river or lake is raised will it spill over the banks and move outside the radius of the spell or will it stop at the edge of the area?

Thanks for reading and any replies!


If someone with Hide in Plain Sight also has Spring Attack can they use Spring Attack to move up to someone then attack and following that use their remaining movement to Hide in Plain Sight and disappear (given they succeed on the opposed Stealth/Perception test and they are in dim light conditions)?

Under the Stealth section it says that you cannot use Stealth while attacking, charging or running. However there is a special section for Sniping but that is only for ranged attacks.

Is this possible under the rules? Should I maybe use the sniping rules for the spring attack if it is possible? Or is this RAW and RAI and just let it roll.

For context this is for some assassins I am designing to send against a party of 8th level characters (that are probably more like 10th level in power).