|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Going from memory, as it's been a while since I last GMed this adventure, but...
I forgot that it was triggered on "approaching" the book shelves. But I always assumed that the bookshelves were one sided, so in order to approach the side that got you attacked, you had to be between the book shelves, near the table and chairs. Standing "behind" those bookshelves, near the vent, shouldn't get you attacked.
DM Beckett wrote:
It sounds like your GM might have messed that encounter up, though it's possible a member of your group got ahead of himself and made it tougher on you even if the GM did handle it right.
If he had the chairs attack the first guy to enter the room before the others got out of the vent, then he probably jumped the gun. The chairs start out resting around the table in the middle of the book shelves, and they don't start moving until someone comes near them (I forget if it's within 5 or 10 feet).
Assuming a normal group will get everyone down out of the vent system before they spread out to start exploring the room, that means everyone should be able to get in on the fight easily enough. It's possible your first guy in the room didn't wait for everyone else, but that means he just messed up by not being careful and triggered the fight early.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Only from conversation with other groups, that played the adventure on a higher level, did we learn about the alternate options… and frankly the group had no way to access that very specific spell.
If by "that very specific spell", you're talking about
The Silver Mount Collection:
Remove Disease, there's actually a wand of it hidden in the adventure. If you searched the statue of Aroden in the entry room, or found the museum workers hidden in a hallway behind a secret door, there's an "emergency kit" left by Nigel Aldain in the base of the statue in case things get out of control, and a wand of Remove Disease with about a dozen charges is part of that.
My group's problem is that we had no way of knowing Remove Disease would get the construct swarm out of a possessed person. And even though an NPC told us electricity damage works on robots, we didn't have any such damage available. I figure only a small percentage of parties will have someone with Shocking Grasp or Lightning Bolt as a spell, or a magic weapon that does shocking damage.
As I said, though, we did have two people with adamantine weapons, and two more who did more than 10 points damage consistently, so they were able to get some of their damage past the hardness anyway. And my controller sorcerer was able to manage the battlefield with stuff like Create Pit, Grease, and Glitterdust (did you know robots can be blinded by Glitterdust?), while the 6th party member was a cleric acting as a healbot.
But again, that's at the higher tier. A group would be lucky to have one PC doing useful damage against them at tier 3-4, let alone the whole group actually contributing and working together as well as ours was.
DM Beckett wrote:
In that particular scenario, the creature in question does not actually have the Robot Subtype, so it's not actually going against the rules to use Know Arcana.
I understand the reason for the ruling, but it still doesn't make much sense. It means knowledge (arcana) is the proper skill for that particular technology based... err... "situation". It might work according to the rules, but it's so counter-intuitive that most people won't even think of it.
DM Beckett wrote:
But it doesn't help against the first encounter just trying to get into the museum which is pretty brutal.
At the higher sub-tier, my group pretty much just assumed they were constructs, so adamantine would work. And we had some other things that would do enough damage to get past DR/hardness the hard way. At the lower sub-tier, most groups won't have any adamantine, and only a small percentage of groups are likely to have the other weakness for those enemies. I can see how that would be really rough.
On our local group's signup web site, we've got this scheduled to run in a few weeks, and I've already posted comments warning people that they should avoid the lower sub-tier. Nobody seems to be taking me seriously, though. It looks like we'll have at least one table at each sub-tier. I'm going to insist on GMing the higher sub-tier, because I don't want to be there for the lower one.
DM Beckett wrote:
But, I've got my Everburning Torch that beats even Deeper Darkness, so I never need to worry about Season 6 again. :P
I think you're confusing season 6 with season 1 or 2.
Do you know about the COWS gaming site? Mostly, it's used to coordinate the Monday night games that you said you can't make, but there are a few other groups that use it, too. Check the events calendar on that site.
There are at least 3 other groups in Chicago and the suburbs that use the COWS site to recruit for events: The group in Schaumburg meets some Saturdays, but not every week any more. There's a game one Thursday per month at Wanderer's Refuge on the north side of Chicago. And there's a group doing Sunday games in Buffalo Grove that's started posting their events on COWS recently.
There's also a group that meets Sundays in Mt Prospect that uses Warhorn to coordinate their events. And a group that meets in the western suburb of Downer's Grove, usually on Sundays, but also occasional Saturday games, which also uses Warhorn.
And our former Chicago Venture-Captain still maintains a web forum, which is frequently used to coordinate online games, and occasional games in person.
I think that's everything in Chicago and the nearby suburbs, unless you want to head south. There's a group in Northern Indiana that's probably only about an hour drive away.
It's too bad you can't make Monday nights, since that's the biggest of all the groups, and you said you live so close. We usually have 4-6 tables every Monday evening. If you're off for Labor Day this coming Monday, we're doing some modules that day, starting at 2 pm, along with the normal 7 pm game.
This thread should really be in the advice subforum, not the PFS discussion area.
That said, your first post stats look exactly like my kitsune ninja, except with con and int reversed. I went 13 con for the HP, and 10 int, figuring 8 skill ranks per level should be just about enough. I wasn't worried about Combat Expertise and other feats that rely on it.
I'm doing three weapon fighting (wakazashi in each hand, plus the bite attack), starting at level 3. I'm only level 2 so far, but here's my plan for feat/trick progression:
1. Weapon Finesse
Probably not the most optimal build, but good enough. Forgotten Trick is there just to be able to pull out an oddball ability once per adventure, since there are a lot of tricks that can be situationally useful, but aren't good enough to take as permanently known. It just seemed like it could be fun and flavorful to do something different every time I play him.
Sammy T wrote:
There are many many other ways mod writers can kill you. Think of all OP or broken builds and combos that existed pre-ACG. Campaign Devs kept those out of scenarios.
Have you never played Dalsine Affair? I'd be happy to GM it for you. Just bring your favorite level 3-4 PC who doesn't have enough prestige for a Raise Dead. *evil grin*
If it was just about identifying the robots and knowing the best way to bash them to pieces, this wouldn't be that big a deal. Trial and error in combat, or just doing your max damage and hoping it's enough to overcome DR/hardness when you don't know it's there, is sometimes all you can do.
My big concern is that in the one season 6 scenario I played already, there was a prestige point tied to discovering a non-combat way to deal with a particular piece of technology. John Compton has since stated on the forums that a regular knowledge (arcana) check will do the trick in that scenario, but that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and it doesn't say that in the scenario, so I can certainly understand most GMs not thinking to let PCs try that knowledge roll.
I think in our case, our GM let us use a completely different skill just out of pity, which isn't correct, but makes a lot more sense. We got the information after it was already too late to salvage the prestige point, but it let us finish the main mission of the scenario and save a PC from death.
I don't mind running them, but somebody needs to run the higher level stuff, too.
And I like skipping low levels with GM credits, just to get my PCs up to the level where the main mechanical concept of the PC kicks in, which is frequently somewhere around level 2-4. But once the PC is up to the level of doing what it was built for, I'd rather play it, and not skip ahead using GM credits.
So yes, I'd like the ability to apply GM credits from higher level scenarios to level 1 PCs, too. For instance, I just GMed a 7-11 last week and don't want to reduce the number of times I can play my characters at that level by applying the GM credit to any of them. But I have a level 1 paladin that I'd really like to get to level 2 before playing him again, just so he'll have Lay on Hands.
The pits made by the spells are dimensional space. You don't make an actual pit in the ground, so you can't use it for excavating or landscape decoration.
No, but with creative placement, you can still use it to bypass doors or walls. Have the pit go under the door, so you can climb down the pit on one side of the door, and climb out of the pit on the other.
Ok, so I guess there is a 3rd Pathfinder thing called Precise Strike. Not owning the ACG, and it not being on the prd yet, I don't know anything about swashbucklers yet. But one or two more "Precise Strikes" and they'll almost catch up to all the uses for the word "level".
But that is why my previous post said "unless the specific source ... says otherwise". Specific always overrides general. What I quoted from the Core Rulebook is the general rule of thumb, which always applies, unless a ability specifically says it doesn't, like you quoted for that swashbuckler ability.
Hasn't anyone told these people that skipping 1st level is what GM credit is for?
Actually, I'm not sure what you're talking about, thorin.
The Precise Strike teamwork feat is an extra 1d6 damage, so it follows the rule of bonus dice not getting multiplied on a crit. If you're talking about the Duelist prestige class's Precise Strike ability, I'm not seeing any reason that it wouldn't get multiplied.
Or is there a third thing in Pathfinder called Precise Strike that I'm not aware of?
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
So do I understand this correctly? You if you play a pregenerated character, you do not have to declare to which character you have to apply the chronicle to, until you actually get it ? So if you manage to kill the pregenerated character and they can’t sell your equipment to get you raised (level 1 and 4 pregen), you just “create” a new character to die? I assume, this is just to have a digital record, that you played the scenario.
Since nobody responded to this part, yes, you can just apply the pregen death to a new character, rather than forcing you to have a character death for the character you were going to apply the credit to if you'd lived. And the new, already dead, character should be named Doorknob McDeadGuy. That post from Mike Brock confirms that it's legal, since he's the top PFS guy at Paizo, so his word is law in PFS.
If anything this makes me want to review more scenarios. I think this may have been Kyle's secret goal...
Kyle Baird wrote:
A big part of why I did this (and have done similar in the past), is to inspire people to post reviews. If you see a scenario that you remember well, whether positively or negatively, write a review! Even just a few constructive sentences can make the difference in future scenario design.
Giving a more general answer that always applies to everything, unless it specifically says otherwise:
Core Rulebook Combat Chapter wrote:
So static bonuses (and penalties!) are always multiplied on a crit, but extra dice never are. Unless the specific source of that bonus, penalty, or extra die says otherwise, of course.
Well, I'm just suggesting the robots will focus on someone until they're knocked down. Once someone's unconscious, they'll have no reason to continue attacking, so hopefully, they won't kill everyone.
But they do have double digit int and wis scores, which means they're smart enough to focus fire. Most intelligent enemies are.
Yeah, it's pretty tough at subtier 6-7. Hardness is tougher than DR to overcome, since energy damage doesn't do the trick (except electricity in this case). When I played it, we had two people with adamantine weapons, Hasted by my sorcerer, and I was also able to use Create Pit to take two of them out of the fight temporarily. So we only had to fight two at a time, and it was still a long fight.
But I disagree with Nils' suggestion of having them not focus on 1 PC. They are intelligent enemies, so they'll use intelligent tactics. I do agree that they won't pursue, though. Not sure what they'll do if PCs try to snipe at them from outside the doors. I think they're smart enough to just walk up and close the doors.
Of course, that's at 6-7. At subtier 3-4, that hardness 10 might just end the session before it starts. PCs at that level can't afford adamantine unless they haven't been spending their cash on anything else, so you're stuck hoping you have 3 or 4 two handed weapon fighter/barbarian types with Power Attack who can do 15-20 points per hit, so that 5-10 of it will get past the hardness. If nobody, or even if it's only 1 or 2 people in the group can do more than 10 damage per hit consistently, then I just don't see most groups getting past that first room.
As someone pointed out already, the robots don't necessarily need to be killed. Grappling them, pinning them down, and tying them up in 50 feet of rope could be a workable plan, though that 20 CMD could be tough at lower levels. Aid Another and grapple could be the winning tactics here.
I agree about not really considering a teenager a "kid" for this. 14 should be plenty old enough, unless he's really immature for his age.
I was 10 when I was first introduced to D&D, and I really didn't have the maturity for it at the time. I got more serious about it when I was 12, and RPGs were my biggest hobby through most of middle and high school.
Just remember to teach him the most important rule in PFS: "Don't be a jerk."
Ok, I just tried to write a review and remembered the real reason why I never write them - I couldn't find the link. Is there some reason that "Write a review" isn't a prominently displayed link so people can actually find it? I did find it eventually, but it took some serious hunting around. This one's really not intuitive.
If I review an adventure, I prefer to have both played it and GMed so that I can see it from both sides of the screen. I absolutely won't review an adventure if I have not GMed it as I don't know whether problems I experienced as a player came from the author or the GM.
I do agree with this. Two of my least fun tables in PFS were because I was playing with a GM running cold who got half the scenario wrong. I won't necessary wait until I run it to review, but if I've had a bad experience playing a scenario, I do make a point of looking up the scenario online to see if my problem is a common complaint, or if my table was just bad because of the GM/players.
That said, I really should review scenarios more often. I almost never do. In fact, I just checked, and I've only written one review - 5 stars for Storming the Diamond Gate (so much for the theory that only people who had a bad time write reviews).
But Kyle's goal in starting these threads has worked on me - I'll try to make a point of writing some reviews. We'll have to go back in a month or two and revisit these stats after everyone who is motivated by these threads writes a bunch of new reviews.
Most items aren't listed individually. There are a lot of books that list things like "All items on pages XX to YY, except ..." as legal. Assuming you own the book that contains this item (the Technology Guide? I don't know this one), look up that book's entry in the Additional Resources and see what it says.
Which pretty much sums up why I asked the question in the first place. But the fact is that SLAs do provoke attacks of opportunity, so I guess it has to be obvious that they're doing something, even without components.
As for getting a paladin to "waste" a smite, I've seen it happen. In fact, the very first time I GMed in Pathfinder Society 2.5 years ago, a friend of mine was playing her new paladin character for the first time. The final boss in that adventure is chaotic neutral, and she didn't take the time to detect evil on him before declaring a smite and going on the offensive.
I wasn't sure then if I should tell her the smite wasn't helping, and I never really followed up until now, which is part of the reason for this thread. In that game, I didn't tell her, and she just didn't do as much damage as she expected. But now I think I would tell someone if their smite failed.
DM Beckett wrote:
Wow. That's pretty shocking to me, for several reasons.
I've played this once and GMed it 4 or 5 times, and I've never had a group fail the mission. I've heard of groups not making the time limit, and the fights in season 4 were harder than most earlier season scenarios, but this was the easiest season 4 scenario, IMHO.
You couldn't overcome hardness 5? Nobody in your group could do 6 HP of damage in a single hit??? Even at level 1, the hardness slows you down, but any group should have at least two or three people with 1d8 or higher weapons. And a front liner or two with a strength bonus should be standard.
As for your motivation to save that NPC, I can see how some players who have been dealing with the Society for a while might not like her. Personally, I think she's an entertaining character, even if she is a one dimensional stereotype, and I'm glad most faction leaders aren't like that.
But the fact is, in the game world, she DID contribute quite a bit to helping the Society for over 3 years prior to that adventure - in the form of the contributions of every single PC in the Cheliax faction who is loyal to her. Sure, out of character, we all know that those players would just have created characters in a different faction if she and her faction weren't around. But in the game world, she was a mentor who encouraged a lot of those PCs from Cheliax to join the Society in the first place, and all of their contributions can be traced back to her. That's a LOT of contributions. So yes, she really is a person of value to the Society, and always has been, even if she didn't provide as much help within Cheliax's borders as the Society would hope.
As for the other 95% of the scenario (since the setup and that one fight are just a very small minority of the scenario), I loved the "Mission Impossible" feel of having to infiltrate an embassy during a fancy party. The sandbox approach of the PCs being able to wander whichever way they want to eventually reach their goal, the puzzles that needed solving along the way, the strict time limit, etc. Those are the reasons that this is my all time favorite scenario.
I have all sorts of fun stories of parties with weird combinations of characters coming up with fun and creative ways to sneak into the party. When I played it, we had 3 barbarians with no social skills (along with 3 of us who were much better suited to the adventure). I once GMed it for a druid who insisted on bringing her medium sized baby elephant companion with her. She decorated it with streamers and pretended it was part of the entertainment. You just don't get moments like that in more "normal" scenarios.
Also, I loved the Silver Crusade and Cheliax faction missions. Two of the most memorable faction missions ever, and probably the only interesting faction mission the Silver Crusade ever had.
I disagree with your out of combat role evaluation.
Oracles get more skill ranks than clerics, and some useful class skills, including perception for a battle oracle. And being charisma based, they make good party faces.
But clerics have domains, as you said, which sometimes offer flexibility. And they tend to be good at stuff like heal, diplomacy, and knowledge (religion).
I'd call that aspect a tie.
You also didn't look at non-spell combat abilities. Compare what clerics can do with their domains, oracles with their revelations, etc. I don't really know warpriests, so I don't know what to say there. But battle oracles get some great revelations, and with clerics, it depends on their domains.
I know I've seen these questions come up before, and I don't think there were definite answers, but I thought I'd ask again in case I missed something.
1. When a paladin detects evil, do outside observers know he's doing something? Are there somatic components that would make it obvious he's casting, or is it something he can do quietly without being seen?
2. If a paladin attempts to smite something that isn't evil, then the smite is wasted, per the Core Rulebook. Does the paladin know that? Or would he believe he's still trying to smite that creature?
Absolutely. That's what the already existing special rules section of the Guide should have been. Unfortunately, they seem to have dropped the ball on this one.
Hopefully, there will be an updated Guide with this info within the next few weeks, even if they weren't already planning to do a new version so soon.
The one problem I see is that these scenarios will continue to be played in the future, so they won't be able to get rid of the season 6 special rules when season 7 rolls around. People will still be playing these scenarios in 2-3 years (hopefully).
LOL Sounds like you're describing the store where I play. But we're a little bigger than that - maybe 15x25 or so. Same number of people, though.
I don't really know all the details for summoners, but tattoo magic is mostly covered in the Inner Sea Magic book.
It almost sounds like you're talking about the Tattooed Sorcerer archetype for the Sorcerer class, where the sorcerer gets a familiar like a wizard, which can attach itself to the sorcerer's skin as a tattoo.
You're definitely not the only one who feels that way. The entire reason I got back into RPGs as a hobby instead of just playing video games on the internet is that I wanted the social interaction of getting together in a room with other gamers.
I'm a little disappointed that The Disappeared didn't crack the top 5. That's my all time favorite.
Night March of Kalkamedes was a lot of fun to play. I still want to GM it.
My least favorite is definitely The Many Fortunes of Grandmaster Torch. None of my characters signed up for the Pathfinders to become common muggers. Well, ok, one of them did, but just that one.
Also, up until now, Knowledge (Arcana) was the skill needed to identify the abilities and weaknesses of Constructs. As per the Technology Guide, Knowledge (Engineering) is now the skill you need to identify Constructs with the Robot subtype (though you do not need the Technologist feat to do so).
Just make sure that the construct in question actually has the robot subtype. Just to confuse things even more, there's one construct in a season 6 adventure that's clearly technological, but it still uses Knowledge (Arcana), because its subtype isn't robot. It makes no sense whatsoever, but that ruling has been confirmed by John Compton.
And once again, the big picture gets lost in a hypothetical example. Ok, so maybe I underestimated how many times one guy who knows the rules showed up to GM tables of those specific adventures.
It doesn't invalidate my point that changes were rolled out without Paizo actually telling us. You can't expect every single player and GM to read every single splat book that comes out. Most people will only read the ones that they know directly affect their PC or the scenario they're prepping to GM.
Chris, I think (as one who doesn't particularly mind the feat) the problem here is that this particular rule change has a serious impact on at least one season 6 scenario (Trial by Machine, the only one I can speak to with any certainty), and almost certainly will in others, yet it isn't really communicated to PFS GMs and players anywhere aside from the Tech Guide and this thread on the forums. It sounds like 6-01 doesn't mention it the scenario text itself, and the Guide to Organized Play didn't include it in the season 6 special rules specifically called out as "essential".
That's really my problem with all this. There are new rules added and nobody at Paizo thought to tell us about them.
I'd be willing to bet that at GenCon, where there were probably more than 500 tables playing the new season 6 scenarios with Numerican technology, there were probably no more than 5-10 tables where anyone had ever even heard of these rules. They're not mentioned in the Guide to Organized Play (despite having a section for "essential" new season 6 technology rules) and they're not mentioned in the scenarios themselves. That's a LOT of tables where nobody used these rules because they simply didn't know about them.
When it comes to identifying robots and knowing how to beat them, not having that information isn't too terrible. Groups can throw everything at them to see what works, or just do enough damage the old fashioned way (power attack, sneak attack) that some of it still gets past hardness. Not having the information from a knowledge check is mildly annoying, but not a show stopper.
My bigger issue is in 6-02 The Silver Mount Collection, where it's not clarified how PCs are supposed to know how to get their second prestige point. How to do it is stated in the scenario for the GM to see, but what skills the PCs can use to find that information isn't mentioned at all. I've played it, and skimmed the scenario since buying it (haven't had time to fully read and prep it yet), and there is no mention of how PCs are supposed to find out at least one key piece of information. If it wasn't for John Compton's post in this thread, I wouldn't know which skill would apply even with the Technologist feat, because the answer's apparently not at all what I thought it might be.
Half Brick In a Sock wrote:
I think the list in Inner Sea Gods is comprehensive.
I don't know about those with unarmed strike, but I just wanted to respond to this statement. There are PFS legal deities that aren't in Inner Sea Gods. Because that book only focuses on the Inner Sea region, the Tien gods aren't included. Look to the Dragon Empires Gazateer or Primer for those.
I'm with NobodysHome on this one. My group had fun "having visions" and getting the history of the house and family, even if there was no negative impact. My cavalier player decided to take the lead in most rooms after the first few, because he felt left out early as the last person I handed a "secret note" to.
Of course, they also never figured out that the paladin is immune or boosts the saves of the others, and I decided not to give them any hints about that. Having them fail a few saves makes things more fun. *evil grin*
Ok, I'll admit to not having looked at the exact definition of DR in over 2 years, so my off the cuff remark was a guideline from memory, not a definitive rules statement. Now that you've got me thinking about it, I can think of a couple of exceptions that would violate my earlier statement - DR doesn't protect from bleed damage or drowning damage, for instance.
That said, you're wrong about those statements not contradicting each other. One says that DR protects from weapons, while the other says that it doesn't protect against spells. Since the Pathfinder definition of a weapon includes many spells, those statements are contradictory.
But back to the original point, I stand by my statement that DR does lessen falling damage. The whole point of DR is that it protects against being hit by physical objects. Whether it's a manufactured weapon, natural attack, improvised weapon, or the ground rushing up to meet you because you missed a reflex save, those are all different ways that you can have an outside, non-magical, non-energy based, physical object slam into you, and DR treats them all the same.
Btw, that's also my reason for saying that DR does NOT protect against bleed or drowning damage, despite neither of those things being mentioned at all in the rule you quoted.
Good luck getting your strength high enough to lift it. Maybe while raging...
Of course, now I'm having flashbacks to some comic books with REALLY strong superheroes, usually back in the Silver Age time period (60s and 70s). I remember one issue of the 90's Supergirl comic where the no-longer-existent pre-Crisis version of Supergirl shows up and tries to "push" the Earth, but discovers she's not as powerful in the post-Crisis DC Universe as she used to be. Heh - found it in a quick Google search.