Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Nexian Galley

Globetrotter's page

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 282 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 282 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I don't think the spell DC changes at all. An area dispel would probably take it out the invisibility pretty quick.

The vanishing move ability has your caster level as double your tier, so at 3rd tier the caster level is only 6.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

My mythic players have about 9 points to burn. Most fights do not last longer than 10 rounds, unless you are only doing 1-2 per session or you are going really long sessions.

On average, our battles last around 6 rounds. 1 point is nothing to spend to get a huge boost to hit by negating power attack.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

ok... I am glad someone pointed out the AoO... I did miss that.

To be honest, what Chaos is saying I agree with (were you yelling at me, lol?, I didn't even notice until you apologized for yelling).

It would make a lot more sense to have power attack spend a mythic point for one round and mythic furious focus for 10 rounds.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I am not saying that. Furious focus is a great feat.

I am comparing the two mythic feats.

Once feat should not completely eclipse another to the point that you should retrain the original.

A lot of builds have power attack and furious focus. If you ascend to mythic power and take mythic power attack, you might as well retrain furious focus for something else.

And there is no reason... not one that I can think of, that you would want to take mythic furious focus.

Yes, some things are more mechanically better, but do we really need more feats that cancel out others?

I am hoping someone can show me a benefit in mythic furious focus. If not, this is just another feat trap. Why do that?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

There are more..

I just made a post regarding the differences between mythic power attack and mythic furious focus. These two feats are pointless since mythic power attack does what mythic furious focus does but much better.

Too many cooks in the kitchen with this book :)


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

1) Yes... I think they used immediate since that would cover your swift action on your following round and then you can use it on saving throws and whatnot. Saving words...

4)I thought the same thing. Maybe they needed X number of tier one abilities for balance against the others? Kind of silly all in all.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yes... great suggestion!


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Ok, so with more clarification:

Chemlak is right... This is an insanely powerful tool.

See invisibility does not work.
Glitterdust will work
Perception checks, tremor sense, blind sense, etc will not work
Fairy Fire will work... if you can somehow find the people (5ft burst)

Yeah.. pretty much screwed.

Invisibly purge and area dispels work, but looks like purge is the only sure fire way to stop it.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Hold on... I am an idiot.

So, with Vanishing move... if you spend your mythic point, you are greater invisible and can move all over the bloody place without issue. Duration: double your tier.

That's one powerful ability. So my players are honest :) That makes me happy.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Can someone explain this one to me? Why in the world would you ever take mythic furious focus when mythic power attack is far and away better?

With mythic furious focus, you can spend a point to negate power attacks penalties for all attacks for one round. Pretty decent.

With power attack, not only does your bonus damage get doubled on a crit before the multiplier, but you get the furious focus power for an entire minute instead of one round.

Really? Am I reading this wrong?

I am prepared for the developers to chime in and say, "well, it's mythic", but come on. This is just poor design or planning.

Furious Focus (Mythic)

Your attacks create a rhythmic barrage that doesn't sacrifice precision for force.

Prerequisite(s): Furious Focus.

Benefit: When you are using Furious Focus, you don't take Power Attack's penalty on attack rolls that are made as attacks of opportunity. As a free action, you can expend one use of mythic power to negate Power Attack's penalty on all melee attacks you make for 1 round while using this feat.

Power Attack (Mythic)

Your attacks are truly devastating.

Prerequisite(s): Power Attack.

Benefit: When you use Power Attack, you gain a +3 bonus on melee damage rolls instead of +2. When your base attack bonus reaches +4 and every 4 points thereafter, the amount of bonus damage increases by +3 instead of +2.

In addition, the bonus damage from this feat is doubled on a critical hit, before it's multiplied by the weapon's critical multiplier.

You can expend one use of mythic power when you activate Power Attack to ignore the penalties on melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks for 1 minute.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Man, they have so many mythic points. At this level they have 9 mythic points to spend. We average 3-4 battles a day, that means he can do this every battle without fail and then still use points for other things.

Mythic power attack lasts a minute, that is kind of silly, since that is really the realm of furious focus, which only lets you do it for a round. I really do not think they developers spent enough time on this... but again, I could be reading it wrong. I will make a new thread to ask this very question.

Furious Focus (Mythic)

Your attacks create a rhythmic barrage that doesn't sacrifice precision for force.

Prerequisite(s): Furious Focus.

Benefit: When you are using Furious Focus, you don't take Power Attack's penalty on attack rolls that are made as attacks of opportunity. As a free action, you can expend one use of mythic power to negate Power Attack's penalty on all melee attacks you make for 1 round while using this feat.

Power Attack (Mythic)

Your attacks are truly devastating.

Prerequisite(s): Power Attack.

Benefit: When you use Power Attack, you gain a +3 bonus on melee damage rolls instead of +2. When your base attack bonus reaches +4 and every 4 points thereafter, the amount of bonus damage increases by +3 instead of +2.

In addition, the bonus damage from this feat is doubled on a critical hit, before it's multiplied by the weapon's critical multiplier.

You can expend one use of mythic power when you activate Power Attack to ignore the penalties on melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks for 1 minute.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Matrix Dragon, I agree 100%. We are choosing to use option 2 because option 1 just makes it too much to deal with effectively.

Chemlak, I watch the durations closely. We have an app that tracks initiative with the added benefit of tracking spells with round durations. It's handy. The problem is the players with vanishing move can just kick up another 6 rounds of improved as a swift action...

Vanishing Move (Su)

When you wish to not be seen, you aren't. As a swift action, you can make yourself invisible until the end of your turn. This effect ends if you do anything other than move. If you expend one use of mythic power when using this ability, it instead acts as greater invisibility using double your tier as your caster level.

Now wait a minute... hold the bus. I never read the highlighted line. That changes this a bit. He has been moving all over the damn place.

Players...


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

lol, no, I got that.

I have to weight the "dick GM move" vs countering the PC's. I mean, the easiest thing to do is take away the legendary item. I mean through a disarm or a frightened effect, but that really tends to put players in a bad mood.

I took away the weapon of the PC last session to foreshadow that this could happen in the future and it went over ok, but panic was in the eyes. Now they are looking for way to counter it. He already has the ability to recall the weapon anywhere on this plane, and he will augment that once powerful enough.

I don't want to be the guy that just destroyed the weapon or poisoned the PC's, but NPC's will do all the dastardly things PC's can do. However, no one cries foul on PC's actions.

Poison is a create idea at low levels, but my players are on the verge of hitting 10th level. Poisons, disease, all of these things are easily bypassed.

I think I just have to play smarter. Unfortunately, I have little time and the time I have is spent making sure the world is functional and the story is cohesive. I rarely have time to study the monsters to the level I should. My problem, I know.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Ok, now we are making forward progress.

Yes, environmental effects can help offset this ability.

AoE work as well, but not for one player (evasion), but I am not going to touch that. I like him having that.

Swarms... never really played with swarms. I am going to review them and see how they can be effective for me.

Lots of weak creatures... yes, this is a great suggestion, but I am not going to use it :)

Invisibility purge. Ok, this is a pretty great option that others have also suggested. It is cleric/oracle or inquisitor, but a lot of decent amount of baddies have levels in this or can gain access to it. It will not be a common spell for enemies to have, but again, why not? Invisibility is such a commonly used tactic that I can see divine casters memorizing it while wizard use see invisibility, which in this case does not work.

Poisoned food... ok, this is odd and I am not sure how to use it, but I will think more on it. This does makes me think more about AoE spells, that use poison or acid.

Mundane sources... ok, flour, paint, soot, net traps are great.

Chemlak, you are right on. It is not impossibly to counter, but really hard. I think I am going to have to get deeper into the minds of my NPC's. I mean, if players faced this scenario, they would retreat, or do something to eliminate the threat. Then always have this way to counter the ability available. Not every NPC is going to do this, but the ones watching the PC's will.

I think I am just going to have to up my game and find a way to combat this. Your suggestion have helped. I am on the fence whether or not to keep our house rule that "cannot be detected by any means" part is magical in nature and doesn't trump things like tremor sense or blind sight. There are entire mythic path abilities that you have to take to just eliminate one of those, whereas this one ability allows you to negate them all. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

I still believe this ability, mythic or not, is either poorly worded or poorly realized.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yes, maybe I had a situation that went haywire. Tomorrow, I will give greater details ( it's late).

I'm not angry at all, although I can see how my posts look that way. I tend to write aggressive. The rant came more from the boards than the rules.

I think I will lay out the situations and explain in detail and you guys can highlight he errors.

In short, to answer a littl above, I mean ANY because we are running through the mythic adventure path and it's implied to use the mythic rules. Anyone can take the legendary weapons ability at first tier. In my case, 3 of 4 did.

There is another mythic ability called vanishing move that gives you greater invisibility for twice as many rounds as you have tiers. You can do this a lot of times per day. My currency player can do this maybe 8 times a day for 6 rounds a pop.

According to the developer (can't remember the name and I'm writing this on a phone, so can't scroll), once you are invisible you cannot be detected by any means. No detection magic (see invisibility , true seeing) or any abilities like tremor sense, blind sight , etc.

With this power, the enemy must feel around the battle field in hopes to find the player. It's nearly possible. The wizard can caste spells and never be found.

If I put this on an enemy with spring attack I could kill nearly anyone without reprieve.

I added the section about true seeing because many demons have this ability that would normally counter the invisibility issue. In this case, no.

What I would like to know is how to play the game with this power intact. I could remove it from the game, but I want to try to explore every opportunity before removing options. I also do not feel having the enemies always prepped to caste glitterdust just so we can have a challenging encounter. There should be a few options to bypass this.

There is some confusion on what that is. I am hoping that others can see what I'm saying, of just get me on course so I can continue to run challenging encounters. There are other threads on this, I've posted in them all, and there has yet to be any way around it that didn't conflict with what someone else says. Some say see invincible will work because it remove the invisibility. I like that, it's clean and easy. Other say that won't work, including the developer.

What is the way you can counteract a person that is impossible to locate so you can survive? On the enemies side, it's a TPK. On the players side , it becomes boring. I know it's mythic and mythic is crazy powerful. Mythic power attack is crazy and even moreso on a crit. But this is reasonable and still fun. The undetectable ability is fun in concept but less in use.

You said I'm clinging or focusing wrong on the "detect" part. Please then explain it to me so I can understand. I'm truly dumb founded.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yes, indeed.

This seems like a reverse incentive to use. Players will start getting bored, as mine are, with something like this.

Invisibility + mind blank is a high level combination, creatures of that power level will have added methods to deal... at least you would think.

ANY player can get this non-detection ability at low level making it not only a game changer but a head scratcher.

Paizo is constantly reviewing rules to make the game more balance... anyone remember the crane wing nerf or the limit on free actions? But then they throw out another thing that breaks the game even further.

People will have a lot to say, and when someone says this is silly or stupid, the only answer we get is "that is not helpful".

Well.. it's not helpful to place things like this in the game and then sit on their hands. We have to spend time testing and reworking the system to get it to work properly. I really do not like house ruling or testing a system I am suppose to have faith that it works as it.

It doesn't.

So... I supposed I should start a thread in the advice section or the houserule section to deal with another dropped ball. The people that are saying it is great or that it is fine either are playing a different method than I or they are just talking. If they are not having trouble with it then I would love to hear how they are dealing with it at the table. And if they have play tested this on the other side of the screen and see how their players reacted.

I am truly not trying to rant, but I am. No ill intention is meant with this post, but some constructive ways to deal with it and make my players happy is what I am looking for.

Thanks :)


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Well, that's unfortunate.

So, like I said. It's a auto win.

Not every opponent is going to be mythic and have mythic spell casting.
It's too difficult to overcome. This really needs to be reworked.

Am I the only one that thinks this?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

It would be nice if see if spells like true seeing would still work, or see invisibility


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Well, I thought that too., but there is an argument.

Clarification would be nice.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Chemlak wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Chemlak wrote:

There's an FAQ request about this floating around somewhere.

There are three schools of thought:

1) The character is undetectable by any means (including Perception skill checks, blind sight, tremorsense and true seeing).

2) The character is undetectable by magic, but senses work normally.

3) The character is immune to "detect" spells and any effects based on the scry spell.

Pick your preference. I waver between 1 and 2.

Yes, it is 1. Because mythic.
The downside of this is that your friends can't find you either.
Yep. Lots of people don't think about the downsides (which are still outweighed by the upsides, IMO), like being unable to take part in tactical discussions.

Another downside is people don't thing about what if the GM used this against the players.

Everyone would either call foul or the battle would get boring.

You get hit again... Can I find him to fight back?
Nope. He cannot be detected. You're going to get hit again until you die.
Sorry.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Globetrotter wrote:

Really sorry to sound negative... But this is plain stupid.

I'm a little surprised at this.

Well, that was a helpful post...

No, not helpful at all.

There are two other threads with comments about this. I suppose I was venting in an unproductive way.

I'm really trying to wrap my head around the construction of this. I have two players that use this to devastating effect. One is a wizard, the other a multi-classed rogue/alchemist. The latter has vanishing move, giving him greater invisibility for 6 rounds for a mythic point (3rd tier WotR AP). By RAW, he cannot be targeted without considerable effort. The Mage is impossible to locate and therefore invulnerable.

The players are commenting it is too much. If I gave this to a monster, it would be a TPK.

Clarification would help a lot on this. What is impossible to find and the extents of that? One of the designers chimed in (see above ) clarifying it is basically a win button. Why would you put that into the game allowing such a powerful ability without a way to cancel it?

Staying quite on this only brings out the worst in people and I do apologize for the negativity. This power is not balanced unless we or I can get clarification on a proper counter.

Can we get this clarified please?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Really sorry to sound negative... But this is plain stupid.

I'm a little surprised at this.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Ok, so my understanding so far is:
* see invisibility will work
* glitterdust will pin point but not remove the concealment
* perception checks and sent will not work
* fairy fire will remove the concealment

What about true seeing?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Wait... What does that mean?

Glitterdust doesn't remove the benefits of invisibility?

I know the are still invisible, but since the are outlined, you can see them.
Right?

Effectively, shouldn't they no longer have the invisible condition?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I do think invisibility purge should work. So should glitter dust.

Flour...


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

But what about the line, cannot be detected.

See invisibility shouldn't work.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Or better yet, a Mage with imp invisibility.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

This just seems wrong. If a monster had this ability he would be very difficult to kill. Players would cry foul.

Imagine a high level rogue with this and vanishing move. He is unbeatable.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Well... To keep the mythic feel up , you're not supposed to always use mythic against the players.

We ruled the mundane effects could be seen... Which helps.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I have a player that uses that combo... Vanishing move is very potent and with undetectable...multiple times a round he can become greater invisible for 6 rounds.

He also has evasion, so area effect spells do little to nothing. I hate twisting the game , but it's overpowered.

How to deal with it?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I want to bring this back... My players are using this to destructive means.

It's hard to deal with.

How and what are the means of finding an invisible opponent?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Maybe I used "hardcore" inappropriately in that sentence. I meant I was focused on trying to use it.

I have since thrown out a bunch of encounters and used Scorpions guide to beef up certain ones. I have a budget now of just over 70,000 XP to throw at the party for part 2 and still have the end of part 4 end up where it should.

Now, I get to play with the encounter builder from Hero Lab


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yeah, I am in the process of making some pretty serious changes.

Currently, I am removing the hex exploration and many of the sites. Eagle Rock is too easy and doesn't move the story forward. Delamare's Tomb is going to be difficult to explain to my characters (I will have NPC's complete this one). Wintersun Hall is flavorful, but should be a PFS mission instead of in this AP.

The other four I am rewriting to gear closer to my party. That gives me an XP budget I can play with to make it harder without fudging.

Since I am so hardcore to use the XP system, lol...


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Well.. that is frustrating. However, I have listen to countless discussions on how this is not made for the power gamer.

At least you guys are here to help with upping the power curve.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yes, I have heard a lot of the same things. They do not have to be that level, but that is what the AP plans for.

Funny that I am trying to run the AP as designed, yet am also trying to find way to redesign it to make it work properly.

Do you guys have similar problems with other AP's?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Very good points.

Let me delve a little bit into the players histories and see what I can run with. they have all very detailed backstories and I have wanted to use more of them.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

well... I want to track XP.

I did the math for adjusting to the slow track and I think that will cause more complications that just removing some encounters.

Part 2 would need about 170,000 more XP added to make sure the players hit 11th by the end of Part 3. If you wanted them to land at 12 right before Vang's battle, you would have to place a few more encounters into the Ivory Sanctum (about another 76,800 XP) to land them right where they need to be by the book's end.

Now, this would allow the players to hit all of the story points, and give you an opportunity to beef up the weaker encounters to make it not so boring. Take Winterhall for example, are 4th level barbarians really an encounter for the party? The barbarians will have trouble even hitting them, let alone making this world seem dangerous. I would also have the budget to play the all-out-assault section at the beginning of the story.

Another option is making Part 3 a little more robust. There is really very little we can do here. I am not sure how the writers imagined the spacing on these parts. Why is part 1 and 3 so short, part 2 takes forever and part 4 is just an attack on a sanctum? It would be nice if some of part 2 was added to part 3 to even out the spacing and the trials a bit.

All the additional encounters will draw out this AP much longer than necessary. I wonder if I switch to slow and just beef up all the encounters, but then all I am doing it a lot of paperwork to make the XP match the progression.

Not tracking XP is so much easier. I am having a lot of trouble seeing how this even works.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

They have no idea how or what constitutes a mythic trial. To be honest, I am a little unclear myself.

I had thought mythic trials were something of note. The pfsrd says:

Quote:
It usually represents the culmination of part of the heroes' story, marking it as an important point in their legend...

I do not think I am running them correctly. I can see Jerribeth being a pretty grand trial since she was instrumental in the fall of Drezen, but Vang? Yes, he is a tough one, but no one really knows about him.

I cannot even fathom why the Woundworm is a trial, except again, he is a powerful encounter.

I suppose I am saying I am a little disappointed in how mythic trials are portrayed.

Do you guys run the mythic encounters differently? Do you build a bunch of hype around them to make the players tremble, so when they do face the creature, it feels different?

I wonder how to adjust my play style to get this to feel greater than just another tough encounter.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

What about switching the party to a Slow XP track, do you think that would cause problems?

That would allow for more battles but I would have to make some pretty serious adjustments since we are already at 9th level.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I am starting book 3 and I am reviewing the mythic trial schedule.

There are 5 trials scheduled for this book. 2 trials will get them to 4th tier and the other 3 for 5th tier by books end.

There are 4 parts to this book and this is the trial breakdown:
Trial 1: Defeat the woundwyrm.
Trial 2: Rescue and ally with Arueshalae.
Trial 3: Complete personal mystery.
Trial 4: Shut down the Ivory Sanctum.
Trial 5: Defeat Xanthir Vang.

Part 1: No Trials

Part 2: 1 Trial (The Woundwyrm’s Lair)

Part 3: 1 Trial (Arueshalae’s Redoubt)

Part 4: 2 or 3 Trials, two happen when you defeat Xanthir Vang. 1 trial for his defeat and the other for shutting down the Ivory Labyrinth. The third possible trial is if you do not use the personal mystery (campaign traits), then defeating Jerribeth counts.

I am not really using the personal mysteries yet, my players have created characters part way through this and are not feeling the connection yet. Anything pressed now will be a bit forced and I cannot play that off correctly. I am perfectly fine with using Jerribeth as a mythic trial, she did play a pivotal role in the fall of Drezen. Vang is also a perfect trial. But... I am having more difficulty with the "shut down the Ivory Sanctum" trial. That happened when you take out Vang. Two trials completed at the same time?

the AP says this:

Quote:
The final two mythic trials the PCs can complete in “Demon’s Heresy” are closely linked. Defeating Xanthir Vang is one such trial. The second trial requires the PCs to disrupt the Templars of the Ivory Labyrinth—this can be accomplished if the PCs defeat Jerribeth and Xanthir Vang in addition to recovering as much intelligence as possible from the Ivory Sanctum, but other combinations of accomplishments can suffice as you see fit.

This feels forced. How did your players feel when you gave them two trials at once? Did you come up with something better?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Only one of my players has the campaign trait... and as it turns out cares very little for the prospect of finding out about her parents (riftwarden orphan).

Although, that might be how he is playing the character (female character). I will have to make it more interesting to see if I can capture some emotion.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Ah, lol Yes, I forgot about that part. :)


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

So.. I reviewed the entire book today (work was slow today). Part 2 is pretty solid with a lot of encounters with flavor. I am not a fan of the hex exploration, but that is easily changed to quest giving and teleportation to and from.

Part 3 is a simple "bring out your best dice because today is combat all day long". My players like that level of intensity.

Part 4 is a pretty long slog of room after room, similar to when they were taking control of Drezen. My players only cleared about half before attacking Staunton. I had the rest of the army clear the other rooms while the creatures fled.

Are we expecting the players to go through every room, somehow level up before they walk into the BBEG's room and then fight without a break?

If this was my base, I would find a way to destroy these pests with a controlled assault... instead of just watching them (scry) kill one baddie after another before they came to my room. I mean, we are talking about potentially 18 rooms to explore before Mr. Squiggly gets to lay a smack down.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

If I knew how to share a file, I would post what I made so you guys could see it. It might be helpful.. it might not.

:)


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Seannoss, I am very curious to know how you ran this. I am planning on making the encounters harder, but not changing the XP at all. I made my sheet to help plan for this book, and to see where the XP total would fall, but I didn't realize how tight this was.

Did your players go to each of the hexes with encounters? I am thinking about tossing out a few and make up with random encounters to make the worldwound feel more real and dangerous.

If I did this, which one would you recommend tossing? Eagle Rock (area F) seems to be easy to toss as well as Delamere's tomb. Wintersun Hall looks like a cake walk for the players, but it also seems pretty flavorful. I could toss the two and make Wintersun harder. Then allow the PC's the chance to do a little redemption.

Thoughts?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Opps... forgot about one encounter in the Family crypt... so that makes my number even further off... but not my much.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Is everyone running this as is, or are you modifying it heavily? Sorry for this long and possibly very confusing post...

These are the questions I am asking, posted here and at the end (because I feel like being a student today). I am curious to know what you guys are doing and what your players have done.

Have your players wanted to go to each and every location listed?

Have you removed some of the encounters in the sections to allocate for random encounters?

Let me explain:

I am doing my planning for this book and have calculated all the XP needed for my 4 person party. Part 1 is downtime and loot cashing in… no XP here. All the PC’s are at the beginning of 9th level and have just gotten 3rd tier. We had a higher level group start at the end of book 1 and run through a modified book 2. At the end, we made sure everyone was all together equal and ready to run book 3 as is.
So, part one: no XP no encounters: easy.

Part two. This is a sandbox element that allows the PC to choose where they want to go based on news they find interesting. There are 15 hexes on the map that contain points of note. The PC’s can explore any unlabeled hex possibly attracting random encounters, but truth be told, this is not a wise course; you will see why below.

Of the hexes, areas A, B, and C are either where you are or where you were. These are optional revisits depending on if the PC’s skipped something (mine skipped nearly all of it) or you want to pad the adventure with more XP. The story/combat hexes (D, F, G, H, J, K, L, and M) give a total of 212,800 XP (53,200 each 4 players). The other named hexes are fluff/random encounters or foreshadowing for the next two parts.

The experience curve for this book says you should hit 10th level halfway through this part. At 53,200 XP for going to each area, you should hit 10th level pretty easy, only needing 30,000: very good. My issue is how part 2 and part 3 interact.

Part 3 is really just one big encounter. 8 areas with multiple encounters will challenge the party greatly. Finishing this part the PC’s are scheduled to hit their 4th tier and 11th level. The total XP for this section is 91,200, or 22,800 per player (again, 4 person party). With the overflow from part 2, that leaves the party with a deficit of 16,000, or 4,000 each. No problem, this is what random encounters are for. I can add a little to part 2 without complicating part 3 making sure the PC’s land right where they need to at the end of part 4.

But… the beginning of part 2 has an encounter that I didn’t include in my above calculation: the incubus and its mount. That is supposed to start off this entire thing. If we add this, we have our deficit. But…, to push the PC’s into action, we are supposed to run a few encounters that attack the citadel, either inside or outside. These XP points are sure to push us over the top. And then what about the random encounters? Any of those are going to push us way over the top. The worldwound is supposed to be a dangerous place, there are sure to be encounters while moving from hex to hex.

Part four gives us a combined XP total of 375,000 XP (93,750 per player). We are supposed to hit 11th level before we face the big baddie and 5th tier at the conclusion of this story. The XP gap between 10th and 11th is 65,000 and the final battle is worth 76,800: we are good here. That allows the PC’s to start with the appropriate amount of XP that the next writing I am sure allocated for.

If we play this as written there is no space for random encounters. If we remove a few of the locales, we do have some room for random encounters, but the players miss a little flavor. So, as I posted above, I am curious to know what you guys are doing and what your players have done. Have your players wanted to go to each and every location listed? Have you removed some of the encounters in the sections to allocate for these random encounters?

I am sure many of you just throw out the XP system, which really solve this problem. I usually ad hoc my XP anyway, only telling my players when it is time to level, but I want to try and follow it as written. I have run games for years… decades even, but rarely have I run written adventures. I purchased this AP to learn more about how the professionals do it. I am eager to hear your thoughts.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

thanks everyone for their suggestions...

I am going to play around with the stat blocks provided on the other thread... probably find a way to rework the hex searching.. I do not like that.

We only play twice a month and we are all old guys... our memories do not work well with sandbox/hunt and peck gaming. I will reworked section two as a more cohesive rail that gives direction to lead into book 4.

Your suggestions are well received.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I plan on skipping the downtime system stuff and the city building. I have no time to learn the sub systems. I skipped the army battles in the last book as well.

The mystic shadow demon from book two nearly wiped out my party. 32 rounds of combat and being chased nearly out of the citidal. It was a tough fight.

I looked at some of the creatures and their to hit bonuses are shooting much higher. My players all have AC in the high 20's to low 30's.

I'm going to reread the AP to prepare for our next sessions, but I'm wondering if anyone has experienced something that needs to be changed significantly up or down in power.

I will not do the one encounter per day.. That is just plain silly to teach your players to mythic nova each time...


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I'm about to start running book 3. Any pitfalls I should be aware about?

Weak encounters to buff (I have a pretty optimized party)?
Encounters that might trigger a TPK?

Any boring sections I should skip :)

1 to 50 of 282 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.