Gold Dragon

Jason S's page

RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter. ** Pathfinder Society GM. 3,112 posts (3,139 including aliases). 210 reviews. 2 lists. No wishlists. 21 Organized Play characters.



1 to 50 of 70 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Given that this is a dangerous AP and you never stay dead long in it, I thought it would be fun to have an obituary page, in the same vein (heh) as Rise of the Rune lords and other APs.

Where and how have my fellow GMs killed PCs?

Please try to include
Name of PC:
Class/Level:
Adventure:
Catalyst:
Story:

2/5 *

I guess everything is virtual for a while and maybe a few more months, I was wondering if anyone had any tips for online play.

I had my first session the other night and I noticed it had some similarities, and some differences.

I noticed that people spontaneously take breaks when I play in person, but when I was online we went 90 minutes with no break. When should you take breaks? Every 45-60 minutes? How long? Maybe I'll set a timer next time.

In person, I can game for hours, maybe all day (if I'm not the GM). Online, at least with a headset, the limit seems lower. At 1.5 hours I think everyone in my group had enough, maybe I could have gone for another 30 minutes before needing a break or calling it a day. Is it better to have micro sessions or just take a 15-30 minute break every few hours? Or have 4-6 hour sessions like in person games?

I was playing with the complex options in Roll20 and tried them out, but it takes so much time to set them up with little benefit, I will use them sparingly. (I guess it demos well). I'll be using my own tokens, no macros for monsters, and normal fog of war (like a normal tabletop where parts of the map are revealed). I think basic is better, at least for me. If I was more invested in online play, I would buy the Bestiary for $50 to have everything done for me, but scenarios have so many custom monsters, it wouldn't cover everything.

Any thoughts, advice, or tips for online play, virtual tabletops, or Roll20?


The link from the home page menu doesn't work.

https://paizo.com/store/pathfinder/society

It hasn't worked for a few days now.


I've been reading product reviews since this website was created and wanted to give some feedback on your product pages.

A sample page is below.
https://paizo.com/products/btq01x4p?Pathfinder-Society-Scenario-1016-What-t he-Helms-Hide

1) The Title of each review should be in bold text with slightly larger font. It should not use a smaller font than the body of the review.

2) The Product Reviews tab should be selected by default, not the Product Discussion tab. I very rarely want to see product discussion, but I almost always want to see fan reviews.

I'm glad you fixed the bug where we couldn't change pages to see other reviews. It made me stop reading (and writing) reviews for a long time.


One of the things I loved about the old website design (besides the easy navigation), was the ability to see all recent product reviews on the first page of paizo.com.

I'd look at it in the morning and night, reading most reviews.

Since you've updated the site (1+ years ago), I stopped doing that. But now that you've fixed a few other bugs with regards to reviews, I don't even know a fast and easy way to do that like we've had before.

Recent reviews are really important.

Yes, showing new product generates some interest from fans.

Yes, your blog posts generate even more interest.

Yes, I think many fans get hyped and interested when they see positive feedback from other fans. I know I do.

And right now your website is missing that.

And although I still read the odd review, I've noticed that there seem to be a lot less reviews than we had previously. Lots of reasons for this, but the website is one of them.

Anyway, I thought I'd give you some feedback instead of just


Hi,

The page for PFS scenarios doesn't load most of the time.
https://paizo.com/store/pathfinder/pathfinderSociety/pfsrpg

It just sits there with the progress spinner. I've left it for more than 5 minutes.


One of the main questions Paizo asked the players was “Can we have the same types of games in PFS with PF2”. The answer with the Disappeared is “kind of”. In Zarta’s study, there are magic items that the party is meant to use to make their escape much easier. Things like Dust of Disappearance, Cloak of Elvenkind, Hat of Disguise. All of that is useless if we’re on a clock, we have 1 hour total to do the job and get out, and it takes an hour FOR A CHANCE to identify each item.

Anyway, to convert, I reduced all of the DCs by 4. My logic was that level 1 PCs in PF1 could have a +9 bonus in a skill, in PF2 that is now +5. The change in DC worked out (most checks were DC 11), but they failed a fair amount and it contributed to them running out of time.

Which brings me to table 10-2. I think it’s completely out of whack. The DCs are too high and “trivial” checks needs to get a lot lower. For example, I set some things as DC 5, and PCs are still failing these rolls (which is possible since some skills checks are at -1 to +2 only). DC 5 is trivial, 10 is not. I hear Paizo is changing it, I hope it improves.

Something good. PF2 was more or less made for these players. These players are low commitment, the type to not even read their class, and just want a beer and pretzels game. So PF2 is good for them. The bad part is that this game appeals to a different player base, I think PF2 is going to earn some of the player base from 5E, but will lose higher commitment players they currently have in PF1. For me, I would have been much happier if they just revised the action economy, skills, and the bestiary for PF1. Anyway...

Party: Rogue (Merisiel, who is not great at CHR), Ranger, Monk, Fighter. Not the greatest group for this scenario. But then again, when I played this scenario our group was even less optimized for this scenario.

Start: They had trouble getting in and this part took a long time. They needed the bribes, they needed the shiver, and they failed against the duty officer, which forced them to get creative, which they succeeded but I had to change the story. Instead of giving information to the ambassador, they were being brought in for questioning. I should have taken their weapons but didn’t, oops.

The skill checks, even reduced, were a little rough, they got 2 strikes getting to Zarta’s and added time.

They split up, Merisiel got there 1st and was the super star in this scenario.

Merisiel was solo and started talking to the imp and she rolled super high on Diplomacy, so instead of being just a guardian, the imp was also a servant and friend to Zarta, and she convinced the imp they were friendly. With the nice new bestiary (best part of PF2), the imp made a deal with Merisiel and improved her luck for 1 hour and if she died, his master Mephistopheles would have her soul! I thought this was awesome.

They were confused on the puzzle and gave them some hints, but they failed their checks to solve it through checks.

I think the identification rules are horrible, so I disregarded them. When the ranger dipped his fingers in the dust, I had his fingers turn invisible. The cloak of elvenkind made him camouflaged (after he invested). He was out of resonance and was afraid to activate it for some reason. No I don’t like resonance and will probably scrap it soon unless it changes.

I used 2 animated desks (CR 1) from the PF2 bestiary. It was a “High” encounter. I thought it could be a tough encounter but the dragon style monk crit one, destroying it instantly and they destroyed the other in the next round (double slice).

Again, I love the PF2 bestiary and the flavor of how animated objects reduce their AC once their hardness is breached.

They found what they were looking for but just as the alarm went off. They tried to escape, didn’t use their consumables and tried to fight their way out. One guard was tripped and grabbed, but the guard still attacked and knocked the monk out in a single round (he crit). For the guards, I used the same stats as the scenario (+6 attack 1d6+2 damage), which I thought was reasonable (they supposed to be CR 1 threats). I didn’t use the death and dying rules, I thought that bleeding out or having a guard performing a coup-de-grace (Administer First Aid) would be a bad way to end things.

I think the DC 5 flat check for grabbed should apply to all attacks, especially since grappling is an attack action, the monk lost an action doing it, and the monk took a risk performing it.

Anyway, crappy way to end the scenario (interrogated by devils and bailed out by Pathfinder Society) but I think they had a good time. The Disappeared is one of the better PFS scenarios.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Unlike Lost Star, too many encounters in Pale Mountain felt like life and death encounters, encounters that lasted 6+ turns (one was 14), where the outcome was uncertain. While I do like *some* long encounters (boss encounters), it felt like every encounter after the first few were too hard. It was a real slog.

The scenario took 10 hours to run, 12-16 hours to prepare (I didn’t track it well and I’m not sure this stat means much when part of preparing is just learning new rules for the game).

The group was 2 elven rangers and 2 elven wizards multi-classed to cleric. All were optimized as much as possible and the wizards each had a staff of healing, which was the only reason they survived. Clerics, even multi-class, are clearly the best class.

The opponents felt… better than us. While I like the new bestiary, they had cooler abilities than the PCs, and it was noticeable. If I (the GM) didn’t play some of the opponents according to their Int stat (stupidly) I could have wiped them easily.

Morale needs to be included in the adventure, in the stat blocks I made all opponent’s fight to the death, but it seems like most of the animals and gnolls would run when getting beaten. And especially the mercenary scout in the Night Heralds. I don’t know why the designers are trying to change so many things compared to PF1, there was a reason Morale was part of every stat block. Why are you guys changing what has worked for 20 years?? I’m giving you feedback but I feel like the game should have been much more polished already and not so much of a work in progress. And the game feels too much like 4E, especially when it comes to spells. Paizo’s quality is usually so much better than this. /endrant. Sorry about that.

Travel: Elves (with Stride, no need for camels) going full speed using wander, combined with no watch because they took a chance and relied on the Alarm spell, made the road travel especially fast.

Hyenas: They ambushed us, but it was an easy combat. This was a good ambush in the sense that we stopped wandering and started seeking after this. I didn’t understand what the map was supposed to be. Automatic knockdowns are a perhaps too powerful. Why do monsters get to do automatic knockdowns, grabs, burn, when PCs cannot do these things? It just makes it feel like the monsters are better than the PCs.

Ankrav: We spotted both the nest and the quick sand because we started seeking. We also Recalled Knowledge when it burrowed, so we spread out and readied attacks. It did some minor damage and died.

Gnolls: We had a ranged party so they fought from range across the river, with obscuring mist, which was an obvious advantage. Scorpion never made it across the river. The party took some minor damage only.

Manticore: This group was ranged and did well against the manticore. They had Obscuring Mist, which helped a little too. I think two characters were taken to half hp, but it was a much better outcome compared to my other group who TPKed. If I had used the manticore’s crazy high level Intimidate skill (his best weapon), the outcome would have been different, but I kept him at range.

Gnoll Leader: This battle was our first epic grinding battle. One character was dropped 6 times (thanks to magic healing and no dying condition at 1+ hp). This fight grinded out all of our healing resources and we needed to rest. It was much harder than I expected and AoO played a huge part. Again, if I had used the leader’s insane Intimidation check, the outcome would have been different.

Electric Latch: We spotted it, but we had to eat it the damage because no one was an expert.

Btw, I expected more checks in both Lost Star and Pale Mountain to say “trained” or “expert” at times, or at least to give additional information for higher levels of knowledge. As it stands, there’s almost no difference between untrained, trained, and expert, just very few points (+3), which can easily be made up with pure luck. I’m kind of disappointed that there’s so little difference between supposed experts and untrained.

Water Elemental: Brutal, simply brutal. I was very nice and attacked when they swam out to only 15’ in the water and 2 of the PCs weren’t even in the water. The elemental kept sucking PCs to him, nullifying swim checks, climb checks (to get out of the water). Luckily the elemental had only one reaction. One PC would have died if I had remembered vortex makes the water difficult terrain.

The earth elemental was much more reasonable, we were prepared, and we baited him out with an illusion. This one room (mostly the water elemental) took 50% of our resources and 75% of our healing. Our party, at nearly full health, decided to continue.

Fire Elemental/Air Elemental: Combined it was nearly a TPK. The automatic burn damage is insane. We won with two PCs down (one at dying 3), another at 50%, one at 100%. The combat must have lasted 13+ rounds. 100% of healing resources drained at the end of the encounter and two PCs were still at 4 and 1 hp. I messed up with the air elemental and didn’t use her ability to hide after being hit, making it easier than intended.

Recovery rolls felt pointless (when we relied on them), they were too insanely high (DC 22-24 when we had only +6 fort?) and PC deaths were only avoided because of magic healing and specifically the two staves of healing, which are almost mandatory.

You can't make the administer first aid DC equal to the recovery rolls. In Lost Star, two PCs died from crit failed recovery rolls. I was assuming this would get better with levels. I had 2 PCs with 16 Wis and trained in medicine (+8), and still they would almost an equal chance to either help (15+ = 30%) or killing their patient (5 or lower = 25%). I don't think is good design. Could you please just change it back to DC 15? I think preventing PCs from dying is one of your goals, otherwise you wouldn't have created the dying rules in the 1st place?

The party rested again, after only 2 encounters. This part of PF2 doesn’t feel good or right, we can’t even make it to 4 encounters, even though the fight was against a level 3 and 5 creature. Sigh.

The elemental lock was not difficult for this group. In terms of scenario design, I thought the lock could have been described and explained better, it was confusing as written.

The mummies were much more difficult than I thought they would be (on paper) and actually dropped 2 PCs despite the wizards having flaming sphere (the mummies had good saving throw rolls and Flaming Sphere does no damage on success).

The scenario assumed that we could communicate with Mabar and gave no direction at all if you couldn’t. Big scenario flaw. With a Diplomacy roll (non-verbal communication), we kept him overnight long enough to cast Comprehend Languages (why isn’t it a 1st level spell???).

They broke into the tomb and took the stuff. One Ant Haul spell and we were good to go. It was only Day 5 and the party left the Night Heralds in the dust.

We had time, so for fun they wanted to fight the Night Heralds. Without Mabar’s help (and him using the +2 scimitar), early crits on Henah (which was also Mabar’s doom), good placement (far away from Henah), we would have wiped. On paper, they were better than us.

Basically, Henah destroyed Mabar in one round, the cleric was effective enough that he was focus fired down, and the mercenary ranger and wizard were fairly ineffective.

Actually, I wanted to bring something up. The Night Herald Cleric had six level 2 spells! Please, for the love of god, could you limit your NPCs with the same limits we have? It was clearly an unfair advantage and luckily it didn’t factor in, because when he moved forward to do Sound Burst (which was effective), the group focus fired him into oblivion.

The most ironic part about this encounter is that it was one of the shortest, thanks to Mabar critting and a failed Flaming Sphere saving throw.

The Night Herald encounter took a long time for me to prepare, because I had to look up all powers and spells, which I was unfamiliar with in PF2. A lot of the powers are really bad and almost not worth having, which is not good.

My thoughts on the NPCs:

- Henah is terrifying. The Anti-Paladin power of retribution is great! Her only weakness is that she had to waste a round running to us and she was super slow, especially compared to elves with a speed of 35’.

Also, I loved Henah's artwork, props to the artist!

- The Cleric of Rovagug was equally terrifying, even though he was only level 3. Clearly clerics are the best class in the game. Luckily, he wasn’t able to implement his Harm spells or it would have been game over for us.

- The wizard was OK, magic missile was effective, but Burning Hands and Web ended up being ineffective. I felt he was fairly weak compared to Henah and the cleric.

The Web spell does Entangle unless you move. So my wizards just stayed in the Web casting, completely unaffected by the Web. I'm not sure this is what was intended.

- Scout: I thought the scout would be effective, but it wasn’t. There were definitely some bad rolls, but over 6+ rounds it just felt ineffective and was the last NPC we took down.

Overall I thought the scenario was OK, but I feel the Doomsday dawn scenarios are written a little bit too mechanically, they don’t have a soul. And the writing is not quite up to par compared to Pathfinder Society scenarios. There were also too many travel encounters. Not having stats like PF1, with blocks like morale or tactics, was annoying. I felt the writing in the scenario didn’t use enough plain English, you realize these descriptions go over people’s heads at conventions right?

I didn’t like that maps were not drawn for all encounters and I found some of the explanations confusing and there was too much table variation for some of them. I felt like it took me longer to prepare because of the way this scenario was written. Looking up rules didn’t help.

It's a good thing cantrips now scale because they were used a lot. They are still not great, but at least the wizards can contribute. In general it felt like the Wizards didn't have enough spells, they always ran out of their level 2 spells.

There was definitely a lot of whack-a-mole with our group, which was made possible with magic, but not moreso than PF1. The difference between this and PF1 is that I’ve never seen PCs go down in PF1 like they go down in PF2. If the PCs kept the Dying condition at 1+ hp or needed Recovery to wake up, they would have died, guaranteed. So if you want to re-implement these things, you need to reduce the power of your monsters dramatically, if you want the game to be playable.

I also liked it that we regained consciousness when healed. The slow condition, picking up weapons, and standing (sometimes we fought prone) was still a major penalty, but it was good.

To be honest, I liked it when the PCs kept the Dying condition when waking. Sure, in this scenario it would have meant a TPK, but it would have stopped whack-a-mole. Really the problem is that most PF2 monsters are too powerful.

I just want to re-iterate that these were veteran players who spent a lot of time optimizing (and reading magic items) and we almost TPKed several times. And that if the rules were in their original playtest format (Recovery to wake, Dying condition on waking), we would have TPKed.

Although the PCs were successful, overall the playtest (and the scenario design) wasn’t a success in my eyes. Sorry.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

In PF2, you get a skill increase at 3rd level and then every 2 levels afterwards. At level 19, you get a total of 6 skill increases, which means you can have 3 legendary skills.

In PF1, at level 1 to level 20, many characters could have between 4-6 skills (or more) at maximum applicable level.

At level 3:
- PF2 you are an expert at 1 skill
- PF1 you were an expert at 6+ skills

At level 7:
- PF2 you are a master at only 1 skill and an expert at 1 skill
- PF1 you were a master at 6+ skills

It just seems to me at level 7 that you should have a larger skill set. This is why characters all feel the same, it’s because we’re all trained (at best) at the same skills.

At level 11, FINALLY you are good at 3 skills.

At level 13:
- PF2 you are a master at 3 skills
- PF1 you were a master at 6+ skills
It’s catching up, but still at 50%, but it’s better than 20%.

At level 19:
- PF2 you are legendary at 3 skills and aren’t especially good at anything else
- PF1 you were legendary at 6+ skills
Again, 50%.

Now that I’m playtesting higher levels (5 and 10), this doesn’t feel especially good or right. It also doesn’t feel right that skills I’m supposed to be good at, that my PC will fail those skill checks and untrained PCs are making them, but that’s a different post.

I’m not sure what solution we have for this, but the solution should be tied to the Int stat, which is clearly recognized as the dump stat of PF2. Below is one possible solution.

Every time you gain a skill increase, you gain a bonus skill increase. You can only gain a maximum number of bonus skill increases equal to your Intelligence modifier.

This way, Intelligence matters a lot more. Boosting intelligence would matter. And in the long run, high Intelligence PCs would be more skilled than low Int PCs. As a stat, this would make intelligence good but not great, but it would be better.


I like the new Death and Dying rules in the errata, but having said that, there are a few problems with them.

Problem #1: In the Recovery Saving Throws section, it never describes what happens when you get to Dying 0. I'm only assuming the Dying condition goes away at Dying 0 and you're not making recovery rolls until you regain consciousness?

I thought I’d mention that I like this change: “When you’re unconscious and at 0 HP but no longer dying, you naturally return to 1 HP and awaken after sufficient time passes. The GM determines how long you remain unconscious, from at least 10 minutes to several hours.”

Besides that looks good and my players will try them out soon.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Alternate Solutions to Resonance

From what I can tell, these are the problems resonance is trying to fix:
1) Body slots.
2) Limit magic items on a PC.
3) Limit the use of consumables.
4) Limit the amount of healing, especially wands of Cure Light Wounds/Heal.

I’ll address each problem and if it fixes it.

1) Body slots.
This problem isn’t really fixed adequately. It’s still ridiculous wearing 2-3 hats or more than one coat or robe. I think I read that some PF2 items also have limits on the body slot?

If we want to relax the rule that multiple items can overlap on a body slot, we should just relax the rules, and have exceptions or limits by body slot or item. It’s a much easier and more intuitive solution.

2) Limit magic items on a PC.
Usually cost and body slots limits the amount of magic items on a PC.

Honestly, if we’re getting 1 resonance per level, I’ve never gone beyond this limit in PF1. Limiting the amount of times we can use these items is lame and has never been a problem in PF1, you’re going to need to make lots of janky and non-intuitive rules around it, it’s going to be a mess. The Bag of holding is an example of this awful gaming mechanic.

I’ve noticed that you don’t have Boots of Speed as an item, this is an example of an item that doesn’t work well with Resonance.

To use our items in the current version of PF2, we’re just going to upgrade the few items we have to the maximum allowable limit, so we can use a few charges. How is this better than PF1? Does it really matter if a PC is wearing lots of low grade magic items or a few powerful magic items? Does this make the game better?

3) Limit the use of consumables.
In years of gaming, I’ve never noticed a high amount of consumable use. It’s often too expensive to do, especially when it comes to potions.

If you want to limit potion use, just say you can only consume 1 potion every minute. Or every 10 minutes. Or have no limit, in 10 years I’ve yet to see a single PC in PF1 consume mass amounts of potions, it’s for rare emergency use only.

Level 1 wand use is no longer a problem in PF2, not only is it expensive, many low-level spells are nerfed so badly (mage armor) or their design has been changed (shield) that they are no longer worth using.

I thought I read that weapons ignore resonance, which isn’t consistent with how everything else works, but I can’t find that rule.

Staves are great in PF2, but they can be controlled by saying you can only be invested in one staff per day. Being invested would have nothing to do with resonance, just a property of staff use.

In conclusion, I think we can limit consumable use in other ways, although I’d be interested in what specific problem you’re trying to solve.

4) Limit the amount of healing
Yes, it certainly does solve this problem, wands of Heal have increased in price dramatically and they are no longer spammable. Unfortunately, it creates a problem where healing is so scarce that you need a dedicated healer in the party, which is a playstyle not everyone wants to adopt again, myself included.

If you want to fix the problem we have with healing, why don’t you use the burn mechanic that kineticists use when healing someone with Kinetic Healer? Instead of calling the mechanic “burn”, you can call it Exhaustion damage, since Exhaustion is no longer a condition used in PF2.

For those of you who don’t know, burn in PF1 did an equivalent amount of unhealable non-lethal damage equal to the number of points of burn times your level.

For example, if you were level 5 and received a healing spell, you’d get 1 point of burn, which means you receive 5 points of non-lethal damage that can only be removed by rest. If you get healed again, you now have 10 cumulative points of non-lethal damage. That’s a huge deterrent to heal spamming! I’ve been playing with this playstyle for months now because my group’s healer is a kineticist and it’s a very balanced and fair mechanic.

”Kinetic Healer” wrote:
With a touch, you can heal a willing living creature ... If you do so, the recipient takes 1 point of nonlethal damage per Hit Die he possesses, as usual for burn; This damage can’t be healed by any means until the recipient takes a full night’s rest.

The main purpose of this post was to show that we can easily do without resonance. There are problems with resonance which I’ve had since doing the level 4-5 playtest which others will experience as well, but I don’t want to get into that now.

In conclusion, I’m proposing that we don’t use resonance. There are other solutions to the problems you’re trying to solve, more elegant solutions. I know this is a big change, but I hope it’s one worth considering.


Silent Tide – The PF2 Conversion

Hi everyone. I converted Silent Tide to PF2 and overall my players were very happy but there were a lot of problems as well. I had to break several rules to prevent PC death. Considering this is a group of players who are new to RPGs in general and this is a playtest, I thought it was the right thing to do.

To convert Silent Tide, I converted the warhounders as level 0 thugs. I converted them with the scenario stats, using PC creation rules, and since they are level 0, with less class options. When I made this, I didn’t know the rules for creating NPCs, but this was my best attempt at merging the NPC HALFLING FOOTPAD found on page 119 of the Bestiary with the stats from the Warhounders in the PFS scenario Silent Tide.

HUMAN THUG LEVEL 0:

HUMAN THUG CREATURE (Level 0)
Perception +1
Languages Common
Skills –1; Athletics +2, Intimidation +1
Str +1, Dex +0, Con +1, Int -1, Wis -1, Cha +0
Items spiked gauntlet, sap, leather armor, light crossbow with 6 bolts
AC 11, TAC 10; Fort +1, Ref +0, Will -1
HP 7
Speed 25 feet
Melee spiked gauntlet +2 (agile, free-hand), Damage 1d4+1 piercing
Melee sap +2 (agile, non-lethal), Damage 1d6+1 bludgeon
Ranged light crossbow +1 (120 feet, reload 1), Damage 1d8 piercing

Rage The thug gains a +2 conditional bonus to melee damage rolls (+1 for agile weapons), a –1 penalty to AC, and number of temporary Hit Points equal to your level plus your Constitution modifier, for 3 rounds followed by 1 round of fatigue.

As you can see, they are quite a bit weaker than any level 0 creature you will find in the bestiary and you know what, it was *fine*. It was more than fine, it allowed them to win a few battles easily and even through attrition the final battle was almost a TPK (I ended up fudging). Silent Tide was super challenging in PF2, even without the warhounders having typical level 0 stats.

I’ll briefly describe what happened in each section.

The Drowning Depths – Group (Ezren, Fumbus, Merisiel, Valeros)
The combat was easy (which was a GREAT way to start PF2). The prisoners fell into the water because Fumbus had two critical failures pulling them up, almost knocking Valeros into the water while trying to help. Merisiel drowned (death #1: 3 failed swim checks at only DC 10) but I let her use her hero point to stabilize and wake up (which is against the rules) and make it to the surface. Fumbus killed 2 warhounders by mistake when he tried to stabilize them and crit failed. They couldn’t save one prisoner and she drowned, the new drowning rules are much more severe (which is good), she even took the draw a breath action. Lots of crit failure rolls.

Fumbus and Ezren felt ineffective here, both in terms of combat and skills (Athletics).

Guardians of the Grain
The 5 skeletons attacked and flanked Merisiel and Fumbus (who were using Stealth to move 2 rounds ahead), taking them to 0 hp before Valeros and Ezren could arrive. Fumbus couldn’t do anything, his acid flasks did no damage and he ended up using all of his actions for monster lore checks, which helped, but it also left him in flanking position (after they finished Merisiel).

The skeletons then made quick work of Ezren and he did no damage with acid orb. Valeros pretty much soloed the skeletons, although Merisiel did wake up late in the fight. A near TPK but I didn't fudge. Fumbus needed to use his hero point to recover. Everyone was at 1 hp except for Valeros at 8 hp.

I had them come back to the lodge to get channel healed by Kyra to full health (if this were an official game it wouldn’t be allowed). At this point they had effectively failed the mission. If they had gone on, they would have died.

The Safes in the Siphons
Everyone got to participate, this part was great.

The Hymns of Oathday
I used 5 skeletons instead of 9.

Merisiel fell down, prone, while climbing a 15’ foot ladder, twice (DC was only 5 but she rolled two “1”s), making it feel like the Three Stooges.

We started the encounter at full hp and ended the encounter with Merisiel, Fumbus and Ezren at half hp, Valeros at full, and used Fumbus’ remaining resonance to heal.

Fumbus was out of bombs and resonance and not feeling very useful again. I can see that happening to alchemists a lot at low levels, using all of their resonance for elixir of life.

The Pyramid of the Dog
They started at close to full hp.

Even with the weak thugs, this was super challenging, and I needed to softball.

The party was spotted out at 100' and chose a slow but defensive approach that took 3 rounds of free crossbow shots. There were two "20s" so they took some damage.

The dog (+6 attack) was unleashed and did some damage as well.

After the thugs and dog were taken down, I had Nessian approach. I used standard level 2 stats with Nessian (+8 attack). I had him as a fighter with a shield, using Raise Shield and Shield Block, nothing special, not even any fighter feats. Even then he almost wiped them out, with Merisiel at 3 hp and Valeros at 7 hp (Fumbus and Ezren unconscious).

General Comments
I think martial characters are in a great place. The 3 action system is great and made combat very tactical in a fun way, with interesting decisions. The simplified combat maneuvers (trip, shove, disarm) have been easy to implement and fun.

At level 1, the wizard and alchemist felt awful to play. Low AC, low hp, low damage output, limited and weak spells, low mobility, low utility, and their spells were extremely limited at level 1. The players who played Fumbus and Ezren were not impressed.

Not a comment on the system, but I’m not very good (yet) at giving out hero points. It’s not that I don’t want to, it’s just that I forget.

Problems
There were two huge problems with this playtest.

The first was that creatures are hitting too often. A single encounter of 5 skeletons almost TPKed the group and basically ended the adventure. The same skeletons later took 3 PCs to 50% health and used all of Fumbus’ resonance just to keep them going.

As I’ve already mentioned, I strongly feel like the baseline for level 0 creatures should be +4 attack. It would have made a huge difference.

Another problem was that there were far too many critical failures and it made the game feel like the Three Stooges.

I really think that critical skill failures on a “1” needs to be taken out of a high fantasy game. I’m OK with crit fails when the roll is 10 less than the DC (at least they are doing something heroic), but removing the “1” would make critical failures a lot less frequent.

I'm not sure what I'm going to convert next.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Physical vs Verbal Intimidation

There is verbal intimidation and physical intimidation.

Someone diplomatic can choose to be diplomatic and use non-threatening words. Diplomats are also able to verbally intimidate someone by using threatening words.

When it comes to using Intimidate in combat, we’re using physical intimidation.

When someone wants to be physically intimidating, it’s their size, STRENGTH, and aggression that is intimidating. Physical intimidation is made to SCARE the opponent.

Intimidation is a barbarian signature skill and you can demoralize or frighten opponents in combat using it. If Shania Twain (high CHR) and the Mountain from Game of Thrones (high STR) were intimidating opponents on the battlefield, who do you think would be more successful at scaring their opponents, would it be the person with the high CHR or the high STR?

Using the Diplomacy skill, you can verbally intimidate opponents (it's actually a part of real world diplomacy or even bargaining), but that’s part of diplomacy sometimes. If you wanted to make a change to Diplomacy, you could say adding threats give you a +2 bonus but carries with it the same penalties as Intimidation.

Intimidate, the skill, should be based on Strength because of the way the Intimidation is used in the game and particularly in combat. The Intimidate skill cannot be used to both verbally and physically intimidate an opponent, they are completely different skill sets based on different attributes (STR and CHR). The Intimidate skill should be for physical intimidation, the way the skill is often used in the game.

In PF, Barbarians and Fighters are supposed to be scary in combat, this is something they are supposed to be good at naturally (hint: using their prime stat), not a secondary or tertiary stat.


Very simple, give barbarians +1 hit or remove the -1 AC penalty.

In PF1, rage gives +2 hit, +2 damage, -2 AC.
In PF2, rage gives +0 hit, +2 damage, -1 AC.

So why are they getting the AC penalty and no buff to hit?

By now many of us know that the -1 AC penalty is significant, significant enough that you might not even want the +2 damage.

Rage is supposed to be good, so either give +1 to hit or remove the AC penalty.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

It would be better if all ancestries had two ability boosts and one flaw. It would make all ancestries consistent with each other and it would remove the need for mandatory stat boost that don’t make sense.

It would eliminate the need for too many mandatory ability boosts
The mandatory ability boost that makes the least sense is Chr being boosted on all goblins. Sure, some goblins are going to be charismatic (I suppose) but not all.

But it's not just goblins, you could make arguments against the secondary stat boost for many of the ancestries (which I won't go into).

I’d like to see less mandatory stat boosts in general, it’s much easier to say ancestry is always good at X and flawed at Y.

Humans should have flaws too
Giving humans a flaw that they can pick not only makes humans consistent with all other ancestries, but it makes humans much more interesting when they can have flaws as well.

Humans can be flawed? I think yes.

It also shows diversity among human half-races, if you pick a half-orc you can choose to give yourself a flaw in Intelligence or Wisdom (which has been the tradition).

With the additional flaw, it also allows humans the possibility of getting more ancestral feats or other advantages.

New Ancestry Table
Dwarf. Ability Boosts: Con, free. Ability Flaw: Chr
Elf. Ability Boosts: Dex, free. Ability Flaw: Con
Gnome. Ability Boosts: Con, free. Ability Flaw: Str
Goblin. Ability Boosts: Dex, free. Ability Flaw: Wis
Halfling. Ability Boosts: Dex, free. Ability Flaw: Str
Human. Ability Boosts: Free, free. Ability Flaw: Free


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Non-Lethal Damage

Page 294 says wrote:

If you’re making a nonlethal attack with a weapon that doesn’t have the nonlethal trait, calculate your attack

roll’s result as if you were untrained with the weapon.

Trying to do non-lethal damage with a weapon changes your proficiency to untrained. Why didn’t you just make it a -2 conditional penalty, similar to PF1? It would be easy to implement, easy to remember.

Making your proficiency untrained makes the penalty fiddly and slower to calculate. Even worse, if someone is untrained, it’s no penalty at all!

I think a -2 conditional penalty for lethal weapons doing non-lethal attacks would be better, easier to remember, and easier to implement.

NPC Death at Zero Hit Points

Page 295 says wrote:
When most creatures reach 0 Hit Points, they die, unless the attack was nonlethal

In PF2, you’re proposing that when NPCs go to 0 hp, they’re instantly dead. I think the rules for all living things dying should be consistent, I think all living things should use the same rules the PCs use, or at least go to Dying 2 before death.

In PF1 PCs and NPCs followed the same rules on death and dying. Is there a really good reason to do it differently?

Dying
Dying. Why does this condition not have any penalties associated with it? When you get back up after Dying, shouldn’t you be at your worst, your weakest? Dying should have the same penalty as either Frightened (or perhaps Fatigued), so that their offensive potential is reduced.

If you're looking for a way to penalize someone who has been taken down without CCing him entirely, adding a penalty to Dying is one good way.

Getting hit when you are down
Maybe further an explanation that dying increases when you get hit when you're down. I was confused by that. Or maybe it's just me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It seems some of my feedback was already implemented with the new pregens, so I'll just say that with speed, it would help new players a lot if you translate feet to the number of squares they can move. Speed: 25 ' (5 squares).

Thanks for adding resonance.

And thanks for changing "stride" to "speed" instead. I hope to see more changes to nomenclature reversed to what they were in PF1.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I just got through two playtests sessions and I find that they attack bonuses on level 0 creatures are too high in general.

Attack bonuses should not be +6. I’m talking about most level 0 creatures, for example Skeleton Guardian. It makes no sense considering:

1) You reduced all armor AC by 50% in PF2, our ACs are not good.

2) There is no UMD wand buffing with Mage Armor or Shield anymore.

3) The crit rules make crits happen a LOT more often, especially with larger attack bonuses.

4) In terms of backward compatibility with PF1, the same creatures in PF1 have attack bonuses in the range of +2 to +3. Example: Skeleton again. If this continues, we won’t be able to use PF1 scenarios, modules, and Aps with PF2. Basically, failed backward compatibility.

5) Healing is now a scarce resource.

6) Even if you don’t kill the party, you’ve injured them enough that they won’t have the resources to continue adventuring without resting 8 hours. Yawn. Sorry, not fun.

With these high attack bonuses you’re making the game too deadly.And it makes the game dreadfully boring when the "heroes" need to rest 8 after fighting only 5 skeletons!

I had a party of Valeros, Fumbus, Ezren, and Merisiel, and we almost TPKed to 5 Skeleton Guardians. Fumbus, Ezren, and Merisiel were all down and Valeros was at 8 hp with a broken shield. Valeros basically soloed the encounter after everyone else got chewed up. I didn't even crit once and got unlucky rolls (no crits on any 2nd or 3rd attacks, and there were many). Yes they survived but they’re at 1 hp now and can’t possible continue.

This was in Silent Tide. So technically, they fail the scenario. A scenario so easy in PF1 that it can literally be soloed. I’m afraid now to convert other scenarios.

This also happened another 2 times with other encounters. This did not happen when the attack bonuses were only +2 to +3.

I wonder if this is a high level problem too?

You asked us if we’re still able to tell the same stories in PF2 that we could in PF1, the answer is currently a resounding “NO”. You need to fix things like this.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Healing spells should wake characters up and make them conscious.

1) If a character gets dropped, the party is probably in trouble. They need that PC back in action or you’re going to get a TPK.

2) Players hate when their PCs are CCed (crowd controlled), whether that’s through fear, charm person, sleep, or other spells. By forcing them to make a Recovery Fortitude save to wake up, even when someone healed them, you are keeping them from playing them game, which is the same reason they hate CC.

3) I hope one of the goals in PF2 is to be backward compatible so that PF1 players can easily adapt to the new game.

4) Even if you wake up from a healing spell, you still have the Dying condition, so there is still plenty of danger. Plus you’ve been knocked prone and lose an action to recovery. It’s already severe enough.

Using a hero point to automatically recover (Heroic Recovery) should also wake the character up. It’s that movie effect where you think the hero is down, they close their eyes, and then they wake up with that big gasp of air, ready to fight again…

You should still need to roll recovery saving throws if waking up naturally or through the Medicine skill of course.

When you are knocked out, you shouldn’t drop what’s in your hands. Mechanically, it’s too severe when waking up to lose 1 action on recovery, 1 action to pickup one weapon, and another action to stand up, your entire turn is gone! Again, you’re CCed and not back in the game, someone spent their turn healing you with no benefit, it’s too severe of a penalty, and you stand a very good chance of going down again, this time for good. Also in real life, it’s been shown before that when you die or get knocked unconscious, very often you have a death grip on your gun or weapon, so why doesn’t it work the same way?

By the way, I’ve had lots of experience with this mechanic since almost every combat knocks at least 1 PC out, sometimes more.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think one of the goals for PF2 was to make it easier for new players to learn the game and to create characters. After hours of reading, I've found this is not the case. I don't think there is any easy answer for this, but one thing I've found is that ancestral feats are an impediment to the character creation process for new players.

I've been going through character creation with two groups of people who are new to RPGs. I am not new to RPGs however and have been playing 40 years and Pathfinder since release.

One of the goals for PF2 was simplification and streamlining for people who were new to the game. I found that there are too many choices to make at 1st level and ancestral feats definitely contribute to that problem. I feel that it would be easier to be more like PF1 and just give default ancestral TRAITS based on the race and not give the player the choice. And for the more advanced player, have Ultimate Race where you can swap things in and out.

I also feel that Ancestral Feats should be much more front loaded.

I find it really strange for an ancestry to become more and more like that race as they level. Why would they get more elven (if anything they should be less)? It’s very strange to be gaining hereditary and biological traits, like dark vision, over time.

Finally, if you take a PF1 Elf and convert it to PF2 with the same traits, the elf would need to be level 13 to get the 4 feats that were given to the PF1 Elf at level 1. Level 13! This is true for all of the races. Why have the races been nerfed?

I guess basically what I’m saying is that I much prefer how races/ancestries were done in PF1. You had the basic options for new players and for advanced players you had Ultimate Race. It worked.

If we keep ancestral feats, can they be an advanced option where we only start getting them at level 5 and beyond?

Also, if you can’t use a General Feat to gain an Ancestral feat, could we called them something other than feats?


My feedback is regarding the knowledge checks that normally occur at the start of PFS scenarios.

First of all, I find them a little odd, you'd think your boss would give you as much information as possible before giving you a mission, instead of relying on your own resources, but that is another story.

Second, we want the introduction to go as fast as possible so we can get into the adventure itself.

For those of you that don't know Rose Street features knowledge checks where you have to check/roll 3 times for each knowledge skill. One time for untrained, one roll for trained, one roll for expert.

I found this to take a long time and was very cumbersome (10-15 minutes with designer Mark S). When we make knowledge checks at the start of scenario, I only want to roll once, and I want the knowledge I can get to be CAPPED by my proficiency. I haven't seen this option yet in your demos, but this is what I would like to see.

I know you guys were looking at various options so I thought I'd tell you my experience with this particular knowledge roll variant.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Now that we have a level 1 ranged healing spell (Heal spell, see the blog), it can be heightened on the fly, and no character can be reduced below zero hit points, we now have the exact mechanics that D&D 5E has. In 5E, many people have complained that it's too hard to die.

How is Pathfinder different? Will PF2 have the same problem, where a PC gets dropped and immediately gets back on their feet by a ranged heal spell? Should there be some ongoing penalty or condition after being dropped? Dropped 1, 2, 3, etc.

Healing Word is Wrecking Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition Games

I guess we won't know until we get the playtest, but I hope it won't be the same, with PCs falling and rising each combat. That's really silly. When you get dropped, it should be SIGNIFICANT, even if you don't die.

2/5 *

I did the playtest demo and scenario (Rose Street) last week at Origins and I have some concerns about Shield Block:
1) It seems too powerful. Blocking 5-10 damage, multiple times, is a big deal. Or if it can block 4 or less damage indefinitely.

2) Shields don’t get damaged and destroyed that easily in real life, and certainly not in 12 seconds.

My concern is that since the ability is powerful, people will find ways to make it work or ways around it:
- Adamantine shields
- Lots of shields in a Handy Haversack or Bag of Holding

I LIKE the idea of shield block, I feel like it would be better if:
1) Shield blocks blocked less damage. If it blocked only it’s AC in damage (1-2 damage per block, more with feats or if the shield was magical), it would be good without being too good.

2) Shields should get damaged at a much slower rate. For example, if a wooden shield has 10 hit points, it takes 1 hit point per hit that does more than 5 damage. A metal shield has 20 hit points and takes 1 point of damage when the blocked attack does more than 10 hit points of damage. Or use dents instead of hp, it doesn't matter. I guess what I’m saying is that the shield should be able to take more than 3 dents before being destroyed.

Thank you.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

One of the biggest problems that Pathfinder has is branding. Everyone knows what Dungeons and Dragons is, nobody knows what Pathfinder is (well, we do, but not the average person).

So when a beginner tries an RPG, they reach for D&D.

Pathfinder needs to make it's way into things like the Amazon lists. Pathfinder can't even be found in the Amazon "Role Playing and Fantasy" list, instead we have old games from 2000 in that list like Vampire, Werewolf, Changeling, and Mage. Surely Pathfinder deserves to be in that list more than any of the games I've mentioned, they aren't even current!

Anyway, Pathfinder needs to find it's way into lists like these if you want to bring awareness to the brand (and get more sales).

2/5 *

Gryphcon, one of the Toronto’s areas best Pathfinder conventions, is only two weeks away, March 3rd - 5th!

We have 4-6 tables of Pathfinder Society running from Friday night to Sunday afternoon. The Pathfinder special (The Cosmic Captive) is running on Saturday afternoon at 2pm.

Guelph is only a 45 minute drive from Toronto, with ample free parking, good places to eat, and cheap hotels. And awesome GMs. :)

And of course Gryphcon also features a board games room, other RPGs and LARPs being run out of the Student Centre at the University of Guelph.

We hope you will come and game with us.

Please go to: http://gryphcon.org for more details, and sign up.


I'd really like to see a "Go Fish" product for Pathfinder. I think it would be really useful for teaching young kids the monsters of Pathfinder and allowing them to visualize them when playing.

It's also a soft gateway into the game.

Seems like Paizo produces a lot of card decks every year and this seems like a really fun and basic one to do. And good for us parents who want our kids to like RPGs.

Just an idea.


Sounds really interesting.

2/5 *

How should we play this in OP? If I attain it, can I permanently raise a mental stat?

Also, if my friends were exclusively playing with the same box, we could remove it from the game box, but we play at a store so that's not an option.

Maybe it doesn't matter since we're almost already maxed out on all of our stats?

I didn't know how to handle it, so I just drew another item from the box. Since we're playing the variation where we removed all boons/banes lower than (tier - 2), would be nice to know since we'll definitely encounter this boon again.

2/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Characters: Agna and CD Kyra.

We completed adventure 3 and have the following feedback.

1) I really liked the story text. Good job! The names were initially a little confusing but it was great writing. More on this later.

2) "Things" are starting to get "real" in AD3. By that I mean that although we were successful, we were *barely* successful (ended with 10 blessings many times with only 2 players!). And we had some close calls with health. I think this AD will challenge a lot of players (including my 4 player group).

3) Although AD2 was punishing to large groups, I still noticed various mechanics that punished big groups in AD 3. Big groups are already punishing enough?

4) The Shadow Demon servitor demon was a complete non-factor in this adventure. There were so few abyssal locations, his main power of cold damage was ignored, so he was basically a combat 20 creature. While that's tough, we found the Blood Demons in the previous AD much more challenging.

5) I really like the cohorts and the story that went with them. Mechanically they were useful as well.

6) I used my Paizo t-shirt reroll for the first time in 25 scenarios and I needed to use it in each and every scenario. The increased difficulty combined with "high stakes" made it necessary. My partner didn't have rerolls, but I was exploring a lot more than she was.

7) Nice custom art (I assume) on the cards.

8) In general we had a lot of fun with this adventure.

Now for a review of the scenario. We finished with 12 blessings but weren't close to dying.

Grimslakes.... ugh. The Grimslake CON check is worse than the combat check! These things were fairly deadly and made me glad I picked Mythic Guardian instead of Marshall (used by D20 when we were out of blessings). I made all the Grimslake checks (thankfully!). I also liked the villain.


Just an informal poll to see if anyone thought they wouldn't like a character, tried it... and actually liked it.

Or vice versa, thought they would like a character then didn't.

I thought I wasn't going to like any wizards but surprisingly... I like Radillo. I like how she can cycle through her spells and allies and how you need to be intelligent

I thought I would like Lem, but surprisingly... I don't. Will try some more, but I'm fairly certain.

2/5 *

”Thoughts on Wrath in General”:

Wrath is different from the other sets, so to be successful you’re going to have to throw out some of your old ways of thinking.

You’ll want to stack skill feats on your primary combat stat as soon as possible. The combat checks are just too high and intense to do anything else. You cannot afford to “spread out your stats”. Combat is prevalent and intense in Wrath.

Spell immunities weren’t really an issue in the games I played. I saw immunity to electricity and poison a little, but even that wasn’t common. If you were careful with your spell selection (and exploration), you should be fine (our sorceress never lost her hand).

You will need armor. Armor is something you didn’t want in your hand in other sets, in Wrath you want it. If your hand size is 6 or more, you need 2+ cards that will absorb a hand wipe for you. The first card feat most of us got was armor. This includes my ranger, bard, cleric, and even a sorceress. Yes, it was surprising. With a hand size of 6, I don’t feel comfortable playing without armor. Without armor, the reality of death becomes very real.

When I say armor, I’m talking about the kind of armor that can reduce all damage to 0, not just a few points. I include Mirror Image in that list as well, which can be your “second armor” card.

Weapons. You’ll be surprised to note that casters who had a decent Str or Dex often got a backup weapon (card feat) or had something traded to them during the game. Just in case. With a few blessings, this actually worked out well for us. Yes it’s non-optimal (and eats a spot in your hand), but it can help prevent hand wipes.

Healers… you need them, or you need some (good) form of healing. You take more “before and after combat” damage in Wrath and you need something to keep pace with that and the cards you burn from fast exploration. To support a party of 4 you need a minimum of 3 cure spells (collectively on characters), more is desirable. Clerics are very good for this since they start with 3. My bard, who started with 1, could barely support himself.

I feel some of the basic monsters (Carrion Golem) and barriers (Demonic Horde, Arboreal Blight), are very tough. Once you add in AD1 and AD2, you will see these cards much less and the monsters might have higher difficulties, but are more reasonable (you need to make an Arcane/Divine check to use spells).

Especially with AD1, the temptation barriers are more like loot piñatas and you actually look forward to “facing” them. :) It’s not until AD2 that you will fear barriers again.

So the sooner you can start playing AD1 the better. Also the rewards in AD1 are substantial and will make things easier. Mythic charges make everything even easier.

”Thoughts on Wrath OP”:

First of all, I really liked it. The forums had me a little scared of Wrath but all in all I found it really balanced, fun, and challenging. I played 13 sessions and was successful in all 13 (although 2-3 matches did come down to the final 1-2 turns, 1 match down to the last die roll). No deaths. My close matches were caused because of extreme bad luck or non-optimal play.

I played 1-1A successfully with Valeros and no healer, and the other player had barely played PFCG before, so it’s not like you need to be expert.

I saw a guy complete Adventure 1 with Wu Shen, one of the last characters I’d expect to see, yet it was possible. He told me it wasn’t too bad at all (when I asked him about poison immunity).

I thought Adventures 1 and 2 were fair, not too hard, and I felt like we had plenty of boons to keep pace with the AP itself.

I know some class decks have lots of items in their deck and the items in general aren’t very good. The loot cards in Wrath will help in that regard and are desirable.

Most of my experience was with a party size of 3, which I believe was optimal. I believe that party sizes of 6 will have a lot of problems, especially with threats that require everyone to make a check (and all checks need to be successful). Part of the fun is that extra challenge, but just be aware of it.

I can see the scenario challenge level beginning to increase in AD2. It was still reasonable.

I’m very interested in continuing play in AD3+.

All in all, Wrath has been a great experience and I’ll be purchasing it in the near future. The concerns about my character dying or it being too hard were greatly exaggerated. Finally we have something that is challenging.

2/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was just curious what people have seen, on average, with convention play for OP. (APCG developers can feel free to post anonymously on their alts :) ) Yes, this is probably colored by the players that attended, but nevertheless I’m just interested in what you’ve seen.

How many players did you have at your table? Did you ever have a solo or 2 player table? How often did you have a 6 player table?

What level was the player skill? Better than expected? Less than you expected?

Did anyone roleplay? :)

Did anyone at the table misunderstand a rule and then have it corrected by playing OP? (I think this is one of the greatest benefits of OP).

Were players teamwork orientated and did players discuss choices (at critical points) or did everyone "do their own thing"? Did players ask for blessings at critical points (or where they were in trouble) or did they just roll and fail without asking for help?

Did players try to work as a group or did some players "go rogue" and start exploring locations that benefitted them in terms of boons (but perhaps they couldn’t close the location)?

Did you ever have time to harvest locations for loot (by not closing a location on purpose)?

Were there any characters archetypes that were played more than others? Were Seoni and Kyra really common? :) Were any class decks more common than others? Were any class decks rarely seen?

Were healers frequent or were people flexible enough someone would play one if no one else was playing support? Were there ever too many support characters at a table? Did you ever play in a group with no support characters (and were you successful)?

I imagine players are very flexible with what characters they play in adventures 1+2, but in adventures 4+ do the trends in the paragraph above still hold true?

I'll be responding with my thoughts after Origins, which will be my first official session with OP with strangers.

Was there anything else you were surprised by?

Just curious. Please don’t take this post too seriously. Thanks.


Although I'm going to Origins soon... I'm jealous! Have fun everyone.


I have a group of friends that just started the RoR campaign.

The general consensus on the forums seems to be:
1) RoR is fairly easy and;
2) There are some overpowered cards in the campaign.

So my question is, do you think it would be more fun to play RoR if we removed these OP cards from the set?

Here's a list of potential cards to remove: Holy Candle, Haste, Restoration. Are there more?

Thanks for your input.


A number of monsters and henchmen do damage to you before and after combat and the damage type isn't specified. Is that damage combat or non-combat damage?

For example:

1) Enchantress (monster): Does 1 damage before the encounter and 1 damage after the encounter.

2) Blackfang (villain): Does damage before the encounter if you fail a check.

3) Poison trap (henchman): Does damage to all characters at the location if undefeated.

Is the damage assumed to be combat damage if it comes from a monster/henchman/villain? Or is the assumption that it's non-combat damage unless you fail the main check to defeat the bane?


Has anyone found a way to incorporate the Church of Asmodeus or the Acadamae into the AP?

To me, it seems really unlikely that either of these organizations would sit on the sidelines during the battle of Korvosa.

I read that some GMs ran "Academy of Secrets", but I find it ... strange that the party would take part in the Breaching Festival, especially since they're wanted by both the ___ and ___ at level 13. Or they're right in the middle of the battle for Korvosa. Doesn't seem the right time to enter a dangerous (and famous) contest.

Is there another use of Academy of Secrets besides running The Breaching? (For example a map of the Academae with major NPCs?).


CotCT is an unusual campaign in the sense that it’s an urban sandbox and there are many ways to approach problems and many decisions to be made.

I think it would be fun if we shared some of the unusual decisions that the PCs made during this campaign.
“Did your PCs do anything unexpected?”
“Did your PCs do anything to drive the campaign slightly off the rails?”

For example:

1) Not returning the broach to the Queen.
2) Attacking the Queen and Sabina in Edge of Anarchy.
3) Making friends with enemies. Ex. I read that some PCs became friends with Vancaskerin.
4) Killing Laori or Shadowcount Sial or rejecting their help
5) Killing an ally (Vencarlo, Neolandus) or an innocent (Trinia, Salvator Scream)
6) Rejecting Blackjack and his help
7) No PCs wanting to take up the Blackjack persona
8) I think someone mentioned their party left Korvosa altogether once they started book #2
9) Make a pact with the Arkonas
10) Become bad guys (join forces with the Queen)
11) Fighting (or using stealth, deception or magic) against the Shoanti in book #4
12) Etc

Let’s hear your stories.


Thought it would be terrible and cheesy (especially after episode 1), but I've grown fond if it. Better than expected.

It's no "Supernatural", "Game of Thrones" or "Walking Dead", but it's decent light entertainment. If you consider people's eyes going white, them dying, and then their eyes exploding in a burst of green gas "light". lol.


I made the following stats for a typical soldier in the Hellknight Order of the Nail.

I made the Hellknight soldier based on the Hellknight prestige class (from The Inner Sea World Guide), the Guide to Korvosa (which has Hellknights listed as level 4 fighters), the elite array, and my rules for prestige classes (basically I allow them much sooner than normal, as long as the prerequisites are fulfilled asap).

So here it is.

Hellknight (Order of the Nail) CR3
Male/female human hellknight 3; fighter 1
LN Medium humanoid
Init +1; Senses Perception -1
DEFENSE
AC 20, touch 11, flat-footed 19
(+9 armor, +1 Dex)
hp 33 (4d10+7) (Max= 47)
Fort +5, Ref +2, Will +0; +2 vs compulsion
OFFENSE
Speed 30 ft.
Melee mwk greatsword +8 (2d6+12/19–20)
Special Attacks smite chaos 1/day (+2 attack and AC, +3 damage)
Hellknight Spell-Like Abilities (CL 3rd; concentration +5)
At will—detect chaos
discern lies (5 times per day)
TACTICS
During Combat The Hellknights focus their melee attacks on one opponent until he is defeated.
STATISTICS
Str 18, Dex 12, Con 13, Int 10, Wis 8, Cha 14
Base Atk +4; CMB +8; CMD 19
Feats Dazzling Display, Gory Finish, Power Attack, Weapon Focus
Skills Intimidate +9, Knowledge (local) +4, Knowledge (planes) +5, Linguistics +1, Perception +3, Ride +5, Sense Motive +3, Survival +3
Languages Common, Infernal
SQ aura of law, hellknight armor, force of will (compulsion), order of the nail
Combat Gear holy water; Other Gear Hellknight armor, masterwork greatsword, 25 gp
SPECIAL ABILITIES
Onslaught: Once per day as a free action, a Hellknight's base speed is increased by +10 feet and gains a +4 bonus to Strength for 1 round per Hellknight level.
Gory Finish: If you use an attack action (standard action) to make an attack and the attack reduces your target to 0 hp or less, make a free intimidate check for everyone in 30' to demoralize.

2/5 *

Does the following sentence apply to only season 0-3 (where the quote was taken), or does it also apply to season 4 and 5?

Quote:
In the fringe case where there are no players that are high enough to have reached the subtier level (such as a party of six 3rd level characters), the group may decide to play down to the lower subtier.

It would seem to me that if you have six PC of 3rd level that you wouldn't want to force them to play up to subtier 4-5, no matter which season it was.

Clarification please.

2/5 *

Hi,

I have a team of 5 players on Thursday night that are going into Bonekeep part 1 subtier 3-4 with the intention of doing freaking awesome!

I'm looking for 1 other player. Your PC can be basically any role (healer, caster, reach weapon, or ranged DPR preferred), as long as your system knowledge and PC are better than average/good, and you're somewhat prepared with consumables.

Send me details of your PC and yourself on this thread or through private message.

About us: We'll be roleplaying a little but not enough to distract from completing the mission.

Thanks, good luck, and hope everyone has fun at Gencon!

Jason
PS. Unfortunately we're full for Saturday night's part 2.

If other groups want to organize premades for Bonekeep on this thread, go ahead.


GMs: How do you handle PCs who break the law and beat guards?

This is a basic but standard question: What do you do when a PC commits crimes and then beats up/kills guards that try to arrest him?

The campaign is Curse of the Crimson Throne and in book #1,

Spoiler:
a crazy prophet starts raving at the PCs. (No, the riots have not started yet and the PCs are level 2 and outside the fishery). Khaine (the PC), beats a crazy dude up and takes his money.

(I don't have my source book here), but in Korvosa, I believe armed robbery comes with a long sentence (5+ years) and they cut your hands off (unless you pay a tax).

Khaine didn't try to cover his tracks or do anything to conceal himself or what he did. And now, at the Fishery, I figure there's enough time for the guard to respond. Typical guard patrol is four (level 2) guards and one (level 4+) captain. There's a good chance that he's just going to beat/kill them as well, and the party is probably going to help.

So what's the recourse at low levels? At this level, I could beat them down with multiple guard patrols, but the campaign effectively ends if that happens. I could punish just the offending PC, if the other PCs don't help. The PC *could* be pardoned at a later date, but he has to survive first (without killing guards).

Just curious as to how you think I should play this out:
1) Should I just beat them up with 2+ groups of guards at level 2? What do I do after they're arrested? It sounds like the end of the campaign. If the campaign ends (because one PC wanted to shut some annoying guy up), dozens of hours of work have been wasted for me.
2) Should I ignore it and let him get away with robbing the crazy dude?
3) Allow him to beat guards with no further recourse?
4) GM fiat Khaine to court (saying that the forces against him are too powerful and he gets captured)?
5) GM lightning bolt to the head? :)
6) Have the "big guns" come out (Sable Company or other well known NPCs)?
7) Talk to the player about being evil.
8) Something else.

And while we're discussing PC and crimes, what happens when the PCs get to a higher level and they commit crimes? When the PCs become level 6+, level 2 guards have no chance against them. Are the PCs just exempt from all laws at level 6+ (because they can't be enforced)? And if not, who is going to stop them? Do I have to bring out the big guys in the city (headmaster of the Academae, head cleric of Abadar, Sabbina, Blackjack)? Something else?

Added spoiler tags --Jessica

2/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scott Young wrote:
The idea of allowing 3 high subtier players force 2 lower subtier players to play up based on "majority rules" is ridiculous.

I thought this idea should be moved to its own thread. It was moved from this thread.

What some GMs are proposing is that it's OK for the GM to bully the table to play down, even if the majority of players want to play up.

My opinion is that persuasion is OK, forcing is not.

The main problem with forcing your players is that without the majority of players, you possibly don't have a table to run. Also, bullying in any format is shitty, even though not everyone has the spine to reject it (and walk from the table in this case).

If you're the minority, whether your table is playing up or down, you always have the choice to walk. No one made the lower subtier players stay there, they chose to stay there (and possible gain greater rewards). And when someone has a high level PC in a lower subtier scenario, nothing is stopping them from walking either, based on the majority decision. I think that's fair.

On playing up:

Not to derail my own thread, but there are a lot of factors that should go into a group's decision to play up or down.

I've played up in a few season 4 scenarios now and we've destroyed the scenario where others have failed. I've also played down. It just depends and shouldn't be left to the GM to decide. The players know what their PCs can do (and if they don't they should play down).

If your proposal were a standardized rule, all it means is that "walking" would be much more common (since most GMs currently let the players resolve it). When the majority of the table walks and ceases to exist, it will then reform with the subtier that the majority desires. Or not. Either way, not good for PFS imo.

I'm thankful that I haven't had to put up with these shenanigans myself. (Although it helps to have PCs in most subtiers).

2/5 *

1) Can we play part 2 without playing part 1?

2) Are "excellent rewards" only available if we complete both parts?

3) Will it be deadlier than the “Temple of EE” at subtier 1-2? Will it be as deadly as last year’s special event part 2?

4) Are the rewards similar to last year's special event part 2?

I noticed that Kyle isn't GMing Bonekeep. Was his blood thirst satiated by last year's special? :)

Thanks ahead of time.

PS. That was a fast response.


In your experience, what has been the most best way to start an AP? What worked? What was awesome? What crashed and burned? What would you avoid?

I'd like to get your input first before looking at my suggestions, but here they are just so we're discussing the same topic.

For example:

I'm about to start the "Curse of the Crimson Throne" AP and I was wondering what the best way to start it was.

I've brainstormed the following options (and drawbacks to them):

1) The GM jumps right into the action of the AP (starting with the opening box text, very similar to how you would start a scenario in PFS).

Drawback: Player's always like to get right into the action, but action without context is boring to me. Still, I think this is how most GMs start APs, and it's how I was going to start (after some brief character and city introductions).

2) Do you let the players talk about their PCs for a few minutes before starting the campaign? If so, are there any methods you can use to make players divulge more information than "elven wizard"?

Drawback: Most players are terrible at describing their PC in any meaningful way, and this can bore players. Also, some players want their PCs to develop organically and have nothing to say at all. Still, at least a brief description seems essential. I feel there should be a better way to describe a character than this.

3) Instead of the players describing the PC, maybe something interactive should happen? For example, the GM could have a decision for the PC to make, inconsequential or not, that would help describe the PC.

Drawback: Could feel contrived and players might not be into it. Could slow down the first session. Could even lead to a TPK or ending the campaign before it starts (with stupid decisions).

4) The GM starts off the campaign with a description of the area/city (Korvosa), and major factions in town.

Drawback: May bore players and slow down session. The city can be described in pieces between the action.

5) Run a mini-adventure (1-2 hours) to prelude the entire campaign. (For example, maybe a converted adventure from Dungeon magazine). This session would basically "set the scene" without starting the campaign.

Drawback: This can only be done is everyone picks the same background and already knows each other. Also, while I love this idea, especially to have one PC introduced to another, it can backfire for a number of reasons.

Opinions from both GMs and players are welcome.

Grand Lodge

I've read some other cheating threads, but I didn't find any answers that I found suitable with this particular problem.

So I have a player that cheats. Currently, he cheats in the following ways:

1) He uses his Ninja Ki power more times per day than he can use.

2) He uses his sneak attack against concealed targets (when I forget), even though he should know the rules (he's been reminded many times before).

3) He even tries to do full attacks each and every round, even when moving more than 5'. I'm not sure if he's being unintentionally dense, but it's strange that someone with a PHD can't understand a basic concept like this after years.

Basically, if I forget some limitation or a rule (and it benefits him), he'll just play with everything to his advantage. He has done this for... 20 years.

In the past, he's also cheated on dice rolls and other things, although he hasn't done that lately (according to the other players).

I think the typical answer would be "kick him out of your game" and I'd do that, but he's one of my best friends (and is otherwise a fun person to be around).

However, it really *&^*(^ annoys me when he cheats on something as obvious as his Ki powers and I hate babysitting him and auditing everything he does. It's distracting.

So I'm asking if anyone else has had this problem and resolved it in a good way? Any advice is appreciated. We started RPGing about 2 years ago after a 10 year hiatus, and this is really bothering me. I hate cheating!

1 to 50 of 70 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>