John Kerpan wrote:
It takes a bit of math, but you can use perception rules to do this.
I think what ninja in the rye said was even more elegant then the blog/re-write thingiethough.
There are so many of us reading it that way and if you ask any of us you ll hear that it's working just fine.
Why not just give an official stamp of approval via faq and end the table variance at PFS games that way?
I just had a look to find the line I was remembering and I couldn't find it. Not in the PRD at least. Maybe I was remembering an older edition myself. I skipped from 2e to PF.
What I found instead was this
So yeah, what he's doing is a house rule I guess?
I don't have a specific rules citation but what I seem to remember from the core rules is that it had more of a suggestion then a rule. Something about at the next rest?
The way he's doing it might be the way he interpreted a line from the book, or it might just be the the way he thinks it should be.
I also don't make as many checks for players as I should. For some reason I really prefer to let players roll their own dice, I'm not sure why.
I make index cards for each PC at the beginning of sessions and I ask players for their init bonus, will save and perception bonus and I've noticed I hardly ever use them.
I think just about the only thing I ever remember to roll in secret is trap checks for rogues with that talent that gives them an auto check when they come within ten feet of a trap.
I don't know how my players feel about this, I probably put them in situations where it's hard not to metagame. Every one I play with is good about that, but I wonder if it spoils the fun at all. I should ask them.
I guess I've been doing it wrong. I didn't know it worked like that.
For ambushes I think I usually just call for it and let the results determine who acts in a surprise round.
For secret doors I think I just describe the room and if someone says "I look behind the bookcase" or whatever then I have them roll whether or not there's anything to find.
The way we interpret it, the translucent outline left by a disbelieved illusion is just a placeholder. It doesn't impede vision or fool the senses of the character who made his save in any way. It's more for his benefit that he knows where the already disbelieved illusion is located, so he can communicate things about it to others that are still fooled by it and stuff like that.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
I have heard of some GM's using WBL as a guideline for what they've handed out, rather then where the PC's end up. So use of a lot of consumables or selling everything to buy exactly what you want could net you a different wealth at any given level then someone in the same party who made different choices. Kind of appeals to me in theory but also sounds like a lot of book-keeping.
Pax Veritas wrote:
I'm also popping back in hoping the Pax Veritas post has grabbed the attention of SKR. I thought at first it was an unanswerable question, but Pax Veritas surprised me and quantified the seemingly unquantifiable. Is this the game mechanics reason SKR has asked for?
Ok well I respect the opinion and I'm glad to see your consistent about applying it. I was afraid there was some bias against 3pp stuff coming into play.
Pax Veritas wrote:
I'm totally satisfied with this.
I just stumbled on this post from an older thread. He's talking about what it was like "Way Back When" in 1e games. Of course not everyone played the same way back then just like not everyone plays the same way now, but Matt Finch who wrote the Rappan Athuk level we're talking about in this thread definitely goes for that feel. A certain style of player really enjoys this kind of challenge!
I would like to think it's possible to run a game in this style within Pathfinder ruleset. It might not be the norm, but if it's at least possible that only means Pathfinder is more versatile and can accommodate more styles of play, right? If someone attempts that experiment like they did with these Rappan Athuk levels, writing them in Swords & Wizardry and then converting them to Pathfinder, it's not really helpful to evaluate the success of the design without realizing what the design goal was. It's an easy target if you just want to feel superior to someone who has stuff in print but it's just hot air.
Man I know, that used to make me shake my head when I saw threads like these with posters playing armchair designers bashing Slumbering Tsar. But this Rappan Athuk Pathfinder conversion is a different case then that and there are some headaches running it. I would love to talk about how to best tackle it but the criticism I'm hearing in this thread just isn't thoughtful or considerate or insightful at all. It's a shame. It's really a drag.
Well, they could do that, except they're stuck in a room with a bottleneck, and a couple of people capable of fighting in melee can pretty much slaughter the entire lot of them. Especially if they've got magical support, or a second rank with reach weapons.
I am kind of worried about how scenes like these are going to play out. At times I wish I was running the campaign in Swords & Wizardry but hopefully if we just stick to that loose feel the system stuff will fade into the background.
Well hopefully Bill Webb, Matt Finch, Blonde Frog and Skeeter and whoever else worked hard on this and frequents these boards will have a thicker skin then I do when reading criticism like this that doesn't take into account that this adventure was written with different design goals and play style in mind. Maybe I'm being overly sensitive about my play style being denigrated but I'm genuinely getting depressed so I'm just going to try not to check back into this thread which is a shame because when I see a thread about someone running Rappan Athuk in PF I perk up and hope it will contain useful and meaningful discussion by people who are interested in doing that.
@Malachi: I dunno that's kind of a weird question, I guess you're being facetious? If you're serious then it all depends. It seems pretty obvious to me that the effects in this room are a property of the room itself and the rug isn't intended to be a magic item treasure, artifact or otherwise. If your group see's it differently though, it could be worth it assuming it makes sense for you guys to start AP's with non 1st level characters who have already adventured and aquired treasure in 3rd party settings with completely different design goals and expectations then the AP you are starting. The more I think about it though you must just be trying to make fun of Rappan Athuk in a new clever way.
The feedback I'm getting from my players is that it feels deadly but in a very different way then "rocks fall you die". Specifically they said it was difficult in a completely different way then Tomb of Horrors which they can see the appeal of for a one shot but never for a whole campaign. Rappan Athuk makes it very possible to bite off more then you can chew but if you play without assuming that what's around the next corner is going to be fair and level appropriate then you can improve your odds quite a bit. Every PC death I can think of so far involved a meaningful player choice and left the player contemplating where they may have made a mistake. It's not just "you're dead because you went left instead of right". Not for the most part anyway :)
Exactly. All the new areas like the mouth of doom and the demons gullet could have been written with modern design assumptions in place but instead they decided to have Matt Finch write them for 0D&D and then convert from there. This was obviously a conscious design goal. It would have been a very different product otherwise. It might have been equally great in a different way but I doubt my group would be playing it.
That's exactly what we are doing in Rappan Athuk. Keep up to five Hero Points in the bank. New one awarded on level up. Hero Points have definitely saved some PC lives, others could not be saved. We haven't had a TPK yet or even a situation that would have been a TPK without the Hero Points. The thing that has saved more lives has been cautious play style and adjusted expectations.
This room was written for Swords & Wizardry, so OD&D basically. The extent of the conversion was basically to add a stat-block for the trap. It would be pretty easy to just run this room as two checks, perception and disable device if that's the preference of the group.
We started the campaign with 30 characters built ready to go! New toons spawn at Zelkor's Ferry as fast as you can die.
Guys, it's a different play style. That doesnt make it bad design, it's just different then what you see in Paizo AP's. Fast loose and deadly. A lot of people like it. When you go into Rappan Athuk you will get into trouble if you think things will follow all those rules you know by heart. That can be exciting.
I think the idea with this room is that if everyone's asleep and the door is closed, you all die. It's not a standard sleep effect, the non-lethal damage doesn't wake you up, nothing does. Did you say there were guys who made the save and went to sleep of their own accord? Maybe they should have woken up.